NewsMax response re: Robertson.... "but but but Clinton (Stephanopoulos)"

[sabra]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/24/122804.shtml

Stephanopoulos Urged Foreign Assassination

Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson prompted a firestorm of media outrage on Tuesday after he suggested that the Bush administration should assassinate a foreign leader who posed a threat to the U.S. - in this case, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

But when senior Clinton advisor George Stephanopoulos publicly argued for the same kind of assassination policy in 1997, the press voiced no objection at all.

Fresh from his influential White House post, Stephanopoulos devoted an entire column in Newsweek to the topic of whether the U.S. should take out Saddam Hussein.
His headlined? "Why We Should Kill Saddam."

"Assassination may be Clinton's best option," the future "This Week" host urged. "If we can kill Saddam, we should."

Though Iraq war critics now argue that by 1997, the Iraqi dictator was "in a box" and posed no threat whatsoever to the U.S., Stephanopoulos contended that Saddam deserved swift and lethal justice.

[elehhhhna]

1. but but but john wilkes booth christ on a crackpipe

[walldude]

2. LMAO... these assholes can't make up their minds

"The World Is Better Off Without Saddam In Power" as long as it wasn't Clinton who got him.

Comparing Chavez and Saddam is about the stupidest thing I've seen all day... That said... Stephanopoulos is an ass-hat.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

3. Gee, didn't realize Stephanopoulos had a tax-exempt TV show too

with millions of viewers under the cloak of Xtianity. Guees it's exactly the same thing then.:sarcasm:

[0007]

4. News Max is full of shit........

Hugo Chavez is an elected Democratic president. That is very popular. Saddam was a created United States dictator and when Saddam wouldn't submit to our wishes any longer we decided he was wasn't worth keeping.
A vast difference.

Robertson is supposedly a follower of Jesus Christ, Stephanopoulos is just another politician another big difference.

[tanyev]

5. George Stephanopolous has never claimed to be a

RELIGIOUS leader. I personally would be just as horrified if some prominent Republican had made the assassination remarks, but it would not have the resonance that it does when they are spoken by a man who is famous because of his "Christianity."

[KharmaTrain]

6. Uh Wasn't Stephanopolous Long Gone By '97?

I still never got a clear picture what set little Georgie off on the Clintons, but I'm all but certain he was gone from the Clinton Administration by '97 and surely had little, if any, influence (no where near what Robertson and his votes and $$$ do for the Repugnicans) on Clinton or any government policy.

BTW...wasn't the PNAC manifesto in '98 also calling for "regime change". As usual pot calls kettle black, kettle goes on Faux News and says it's being racially profiled. Sheesh...

[jobycom]

7. FORMER White House advisor Stephanopoulos

was condemned for that remark, and the president rejected his proposal forcefully. William Cohen's statement: "I think we have had our own experiences with assassination which reinforces our position that's not the way in which civilized nations behave. It contravenes international standards and norms and we will not pursue it."

Show me a liberal who likes Stephanopoulis. Pat Robertson owns his own "news" network, has run for president, and has a long list of supporters. Stephanopoulis is a low intellect journalist that no one on either side likes or listens to. There's a big difference. No liberal would have been sad to see Stephanopoulos kicked out of the media. The only two reasons he stayed was one, because no one cared enough about him to get mad, and two, he had insights into the White House so the MSM kept him around hoping one day he'd give them so juicy gossip.

Nice comparison. Next they'll say Henry II was a liberal and no one condemned him when he called for Becket's assassination.

[berni_mccoy]

8. It wasn't Against the Law in 1997

It is NOW. That's ONE BIG Difference.

The other big difference is that Saddam was NOT DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED and Iraq was already considered an enemy STATE.

BIG DIFFERENCES.

To find out why it's against the law, go here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4436022

This law was created in 1998.