Robertson is a shill for the administration. He brings in money, allegiance and votes from the extremist Christian Right Wing that Karl Rove has so assiduously courted since 2000.
I say a shill, because I have heard no strong criticism (none at all as yet) from the White house regarding his recent statement promoting assassination of Democratically elected leader Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, A statement which is eaten up with a spoon by the violence prone, fearful, and too often racist followers of Robertson.
When the "Nuke 'em all" crowd hear the term "communist" (as Robertson mentioned in his rant promoting national murder) it's like the bell that started Pavlov's dog salivating.
The administration's silence is tacit agreement. At the very least it implies an undue respect for a dangerously inaccurate nutjobber. And we also know that Bush & Co supported attempts to oust Hugo Chavez, and that Venezuela has *sigh* lots of oil.
Enough about Robertson's alignment with the Bush administration, let's look at his own personal greed. While he wants to kill a Democratically elected leader, he has in the past had no problem cozying up to actual dictators:
"...Mobutu also systematically drained Zaire of its money and natural resources, embezzling up to $6 billion dollars which he transferred to accounts in Switzerland and Belgium. In one year alone according to the World Bank, $400 million-- a quarter of the nation's entire export revenues -- mysteriously vanished off the books of the government run mining conglomerate. Mobutu was even dubbed the "President of Kleptocracy" for his thieving and predatory manners.
That didn't stop Robertson, though, from either defending the dictator or seeking financial gain in Zaire."
http://www.skeptictank.org/robem2.htmAnd this is from an article by Greg Palast outlining more on Robertson's questionable dealings:
"One of Robertson's former business partners recalled that, although he often travelled in the minister's jet, he never saw Robertson crack open a Bible. 'Everywhere we were flying he had the Wall Street Journal and Investors' Daily.'
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=49&row=1I think it's not unfair to note that Robertson is a pharisee, a money-changer in the temple, and a false prophet. Given Jesus' history, he would most likely condemn Pat Robertson in the strongest terms possible.
Why does the press continue to give him the time of day? And what I'd really like to know: just how useful of an idiot is he to Bush & Co.?
Edit: added "Pat" to heading.