Morons on Parade

Morons on Parade

Pat Robertson has apologized for calling for the assassination of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. Earlier, he had said that his comment had been taken out of context, and that “take him out” didn’t necessarily mean “assassinate.” However, he also said

“If he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war.”

I don’t see how that can mean anything other than “assassinate.” I guess his apology means that even he realizes the “out of context” defense won’t work in this case.

(Skip forward to the bit about William Dembski.)
(Skip forward to the bit about Deepak Chopra.)

Brian Maloney writes at,

Who knew Pat Robertson held a key administration post?

Or, that he had significant foreign policy influence?

In what way is Robertson more than an opinionated, somewhat influential television host? He hasn’t claimed to speak on the government’s behalf.

So when he calls for a oppressive tyrant’s head, what in the world is the fuss about?

Little Green Footballs writes

Mainstream media evidently believe that Pat Robertson’s dumb comment about assassinating Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez is gigantic news, and Chavez is exploiting it for all it’s worth.

Casualobservations at has a list of stupid things Robertson has said in the past.

Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit also denounces Robertson, calling him an “idiotarian”.

Captain’s Quarters joins the chorus in no uncertain terms.

I guess it’s good that so many right-wingers are trying to distance themselves from Robertson. The difference between “he’s wrong” and “it’s no big deal” is, I suppose, also the difference between a far-right-wing weblog and a batshit crazy one.

But speaking of batshit crazy, the woman Brian Miller called “the most successful troll in the history of American yellow journalism” is too busy complaining about Cindy Sheehan to have anything to say about Robertson. Of course, maybe she agrees with him. She did seem to think that assassinating Bill Clinton was a reasonable thing to do.

I don’t know what Oxycontin Boy has said, if anything, behind the impenetrable walls of his for-pay site.

Meanwhile, William Dembski appears to have jumped the shark. He used to write original thoughtstext, but now mostly contents himself with reposting newspaper and weblog articles with little or no commentary. Then again, this may be a good thing, as this is the sort of thing that happens when he voices an opinion:

Brian Leiter, for instance, commends a letter by Edouard Machery to the New York Times (unpublished as yet), which remarks, “In no other industrialized country is evolution a controversial fact. ” Let me humbly suggest that Machery is merely underscoring the backwardness of these industrialized countries in unmasking the most oversold and undersupported theory in the history of ideas.

God Bless America!

Nothing I can say will surpass Brian Leitner’s summary of the above:

In brief: scientific illiteracy in the U.S. is a model for the world!

Dembski also appears to be getting increasingly thin-skinned. In that same thread, he banned someone who disagreed with him, even though as far as I can tell he was never impolite or abusive.

A humble suggestion: celebrating America’s potential failure to keep up with other industrialized countries in the scientific arena isn’t all that funny. I want my kids to be able to get good jobs, y’know, not end up working as nannies or maids or chauffeurs for German or Chinese biotech executives.

[Dan, let me suggest that you find other blogs on which to make such “Inherit the Wind” arguments. I regard them, in reference to ID, as utterly bogus. You’re out of here. –WmAD]

Comment by Dan S. — August 24, 2005 @ 3:00 am

With time, Dembski may retreat into a private shell where he’ll never have to hear anyone disagreeing with him.

But in the meantime, Dembski links to and presumably endorses Deepak Chopra, apparently on the sole grounds that the IDiots want to shed the perception that they’re all raving fundies.

Chopra’s not a raving Christian fundie, but that doesn’t mean he knows jack shit. I’ll let Pee-Zed give that article the butt-reaming it deserves. I’ll just note that my only other previous experience with Chopra was some years ago, when my mom, who’s into all sorts of Eastern Newage stuff, asked for one of his books for Christmas. Out of curiosity, I leafed through it, and found the assertion that mind over matter is more important than we think, because there’s no such thing as objective reality. I’d like to consider it proof of filial love that I didn’t throw the book across the room that moment and burn it. Or maybe it’s because I was out $20 (hardback) and didn’t have a backup gift.

If it weren’t for those pesky morals, I could make a killing fleecing the credulous, the superstitious, the naive. Yeah, I realize atheists aren’t supposed to have morals, since they come from God (you know, the one who told Abraham to kill his son, among other atrocities). Then again, according to Genesis 2, this same god didn’t want humans to know the difference between good and evil, so go figure.