I wasn’t planning on returning to this topic, but a few fresh details came to my attention.
Last week, TV preacher and GOP activist Pat Robertson got into some hot water for suggesting that the U.S. State Department deserves to be hit with a nuclear bomb.
Robertson was speaking with Joel Mowbray, author of a new anti-State Department book, on the televangelist’s 700 Club program
“I read your book,” Robertson said. “When you get through, you say (to yourself): ‘If I could just get a nuclear device inside Foggy Bottom (the State Department’s main building), I think that’s the answer’ and you say: ‘We’ve got to blow that thing up.'”
This led State Department spokesman Richard Boucher to tell reporters, “I lack sufficient capabilities to express my disdain…. I think the very idea is despicable.”
I’m following up on this for two reasons. First, the AP discovered that this wasn’t the first instance in which Robertson expressed hope for a nuclear attack on the State Department.
In June, Robertson told his television audience, “Well, it looks like Congress had better do something, and maybe we need a very small nuke thrown off on Foggy Bottom to shake things up.”
Does Robertson deserve credit for saying he wanted State to get hit by “a very small nuke”? Afraid not.
Second, I noticed yesterday that Joel Mowbray, the writer whose book apparently inspired terrorist fantasies in Robertson, wrote an op-ed on the controversy. I half-expected Mowbray to begin distancing himself from Robertson, so as to avoid any association with the TV preacher’s lunacy. Alas, he did not.
In fact, Mowbray said the State Department “threw a tantrum” in response to Robertson’s “flippant suggestion” about blowing up the building with a nuclear device.
“Robertson’s remark hardly should have caused a fuss,” Mowbray wrote. “It was clear to all watching that Robertson was not advocating the mass murder of thousands of innocents.”
Frankly, it doesn’t really matter if Robertson was directly “advocating” domestic terrorism. Robertson said “the answer” to the State Department’s problems is to “blow that thing up.” Was this supposed to be funny? Does Robertson frequently crack jokes about hitting federal buildings with nuclear bombs? If you or I were to make similar jokes at an airport security check, I suspect it might “cause a fuss.”
Mowbray wasn’t done. He went to say that the State Department’s reaction to Robertson’s comments “owed less to Robertson’s possibly poor taste and more to State’s inability to handle any criticism.”
Handle criticism?? Was Robertson being constructive when he said he’d like to see State hit by a nuclear bomb? Does Mowbray expect department representatives to say, “We appreciate Robertson’s helpful suggestions and we’ll certainly take them under advisement”?
This should be really simple. A crazed televangelist has told a national television audience — twice — that he’d like to see the State Department struck with a nuclear bomb. There’s no way to spin this or explain it away. Two things should happen in response:
1. Sane people should condemn Robertson’s comments as the outbursts of a madman.
2. The federal government should send some secret service agents down to Robertson’s office to chat with him about the seriousness of making threats against the government.