Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, July 13, 2007
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Novak Recounts 50 Years of Political Mischief
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Veteran Washington reporter Robert Novak doesn’t regret publishing the name of an alleged covert CIA agent that led to the imprisonment of Lewis “Scooter” Libby.

“Judging it on the merits, I would still write the story,” Novak writes matter-of-factly in his newly-released memoir, The Prince of Darkness. “There never was a question about its news value or its accuracy.”

Novak has spent his 50 year career as a hard-charging political reporter making trouble and honing a journalistic philosophy based on, as he writes, telling “the world things people do not want me to reveal.”

The first and last chapters of the book, titled after a nickname given to Novak in 1964 by the Washington Post’s John J. Lindsay, are devoted to explaining Novak’s decision to publish former CIA agent Valerie Plame’s name in a July 2003 column. The piece questioned why the CIA sent her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, on a fact-finding mission Niger to find information about an Iraqi uranium purchase. Novak explained the decision to send Wilson, a former Clinton White House aide with “no track record in intelligence and with no experience in Niger since being posted there as a very junior Foreign Service officer in 1976-78” to the region demonstrated “at least incompetence within the CIA and at most a poisonous hostility there to George W. Bush.”

Sandwiched between the two Valerie Plame chapters is a rollicking history of Novak’s life as a reporter in which many sources are revealed for the first time. Among them is Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove. Novak wrote Rove “was a grade A-plus source.”

In a phone interview, Novak said Rove readily gave him information. “He thought I was a conservative and I was sympathetic to many of the things, not all the things though, that the president was doing.” Novak noted his access to Rove was cut off once the administration was charged with outing a covert CIA agent.

“I was sympathetic certainly to the tax cuts and the economic policy, the administration’s policies on a lot of other issues,” Novak said. “I admired the President’s pro-life position and his position on stem cell research. Rove knew that I disapproved of a lot of other things, notably the intervention in Iraq, but he thought that I would give a fair shake to handling this.”

Novak’s long-standing stance against the war in Iraq was a cause of a bitter rift between him and the National Review that caused him to quit writing for the magazine after producing articles, book reviews and cover stories for 30 years.

In a March 2003 National Review cover story, “Unpatriotic Conservatives,” Canadian journalist and former Bush speechwriter David Frum identified Novak as a member of anti-war “paleoconservatives” that Frum concluded “are thinking about defeat, and wishing for it, and they will take pleasure when it happens.” The piece stated, “[Paleoconservatives] began by hating the neo-conservatives. They came to hate their party and this President. They have finished by hating their country.”

“That was an attack that really shocked me because I had a very warm relationship with National Review,” Novak said. “I had written for them for many years, and just without warning to be attacked and put in company as so-called paleoconservatives was just not only shocking but absurd. How I could be called a paleoconservative when I’m free-trade, I’m pro-immigration, I’m a globalist, I am all those things, and internationalist - how that fit into the paleoconservative thing just because I was not for using America military power to spread democracy around the world?”

Novak said there might have been a “personal aspect” to the former speechwriter’s attack, originating from a column Novak wrote in February 2002. Novak reported that although “self identification of language by a presidential ghost is strictly forbidden,” Frum’s wife had been bragging that her husband had coined the phrase “Axis of Evil” in the President’s 2002 State of the Union Address.” Novak investigated her claim and found out that Frum had instead wanted to use the phrase “Axis of Hate.” That phrase was then revised by Chief speechwriter Michael Gerson to become “Axis of Evil.” Two weeks after publication of Novak’s column, Frum resigned from the White House and later accused Novak of libel.

Of his anti-war position and Frum’s attack, Novak said “I think the broader question was the neo-conservatives, some of whom were very close to me at one time, finally decided after 9/11 that my criticism and the long-time criticism of a lot of Israeli policies was too much to bear, and of course the opposition to the intervention in Iraq was part of that pattern.”

In the tell-all book, Novak takes great delight in recounting some tales embarrassing to higher ranking politicos than Frum. “One of my favorites is when I guided [former President] Lyndon Johnson, when he was Majority Leader, into a taxi to take him home,” Novak said. “He got drunk at the Press Club. That’s one of my favorite stories I enjoy. Another story I enjoy was when Jimmy Carter lied. I thought Jimmy Carter was the biggest liar we had as president. And a guy who says he’ll never tell a lie to you – you had to be pretty careful about anyway.”

Novak doesn’t limit himself to just telling the stories that reflect well on his career, though. “I pat myself on the back on a lot of columns I thought were good,” he said. “But, I talk about columns that were really bad.”

“One time I was suckered by Chuck Colson, the Nixon aide, into saying he was going to sue Time for libel, which was a stupid thing to write because you should never write a story about someone threatening to sue for libel,” Novak said. “You should only write it when they do sue for libel.”

Novak continued, “And I say that my failure – my greatest failure as a reporter and columnist is sometimes I was so eager for an exclusive story that I sometimes made some bad judgments and that was one of them.”

He no longer does business over long, drunken meals at the San Souci where he had a standing lunch invitation for many years, or keeps up his old $1,000 a day gambling habit, but has maintained a steady pace of producing hard-hitting columns with the same fervor as he has since 1954.

“There’s just an awful-lot of things happening on Capitol Hill that nobody writes about,” he said. “And it gives me something to put in my column.”

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
....no fool like an old fool.
While it is an observable fact that democracies are less likely than dictatorships to attack their neighbors and it is,further, a neo-con notion that spreading democracy is, therefore, spreading "Peace". I believe this was rather far down the list of objectives given in support of our military incursion into Babylon. Seems I remember a repeated chant from the left side of the isle to the effect of:"You broke it, now you fix it". Mssr.Bush's folly was in sending the boy scouts and missing an opportunity to rotate our stock of aging nuclear weapons. Asymetric warfare requires that we play to our advantage. Hence: Nuke 'em. It's still not too late.

Novak is awesome
That is all.

Novak a conservative?
Let's see;

Pro-immigration (pro-amnesty); check.

Internationalist; check.

Globalist; check.

Long-time critic of Israel; check.


And this all equals "conservative".


If that's truie, then the only guy in Wonderland On The Potomac who is a bigger "conservative" than Robert Novak is.......


Ted Kennedy.


One more reason to be suspicious of anyone in the MSM who claims that either (a) the MSM has, not a liberal, but a conservative bias, and/or (b) claims to be "conservative" themselves.


cheers

eon

Blue-Z-Anna
Protecting America is Bush's objective and spreading democracy is one of the tools to achieve that objective. Get you head out of the sand.

Since you seem to think spreading democracy is a "neo-con notion" please tell us what a commie lib's notion is. When a dem attacks a country to "protect america", I would assume from your post spreading communism would be the way to achieve peace, right?



Novak Rocks
He is the epitamy of what a journalist should be -- someone willing to report the facts and let the chips fall where they may.

Too many "journalists" pick a political philosophy and only report news favorable to their view.

novak
reeks. He is second only to chavez as the worse writer at TH.

Incognito
I met an Iranian from Canada recently. He had been a college professor and political reformer under the Shah's reign. While not democratic, by ME standards, the Shah was very tolerant of dissent. Because it wasn't enough, the intellectuals like this guy supported the coup. They felt their error within a few months. The religious rulers had lied about wanting freedom for the people. They quickly moved to purge gov't and education of dissenters and potential trouble makers.

This particular man was fired along with many others from the University. Later police showed up at his home, locked his family in the bathroom, and plundered his home. They took what they wanted (almost everything) and destroyed the rest. They bounced around hiding with relatives for several months before selling his wife's jewelry that had been hidden to bribe an official. They escaped to Spain by air. He said that they expected the plane to be turned around at any time to take them back.

Bottom line- even dictators under our influence are many times a step toward a more liberal and free society. Jimmy Carter's abandonment of the Shah led to the oppression of the Iranian people and a direct threat to US security... and Carter is probably the "gold standard" idealist for liberal foreign policy.

We could only hope for a benign dictatorship in Iraq at this point. We may not be able to skip that step.

Incognito
You're right, those were complex matters, in complex times.

Iranians as a whole didn't particularly dislike the Shah; though many were afraid of his father, the Shah himself wasn't much like his father and was nothing at all like Hussein next door. Savak wasn't lovely, but we've found out since then what ugly really is.

Iranians as a society didn't bring in Khomeini, a huge, badly understood groundswell of multinational islamicisim brought in Khomeini. The entire Iranian middle class has wished for a generation now that it had paid more attention to what was going on. But what caught the CIA by surprise caught more than the CIA by surprise. We were over-focused on the cold war, and everyone else was too. As it turns out, almost everyone else.

However...

Do you think that we shouldn't have fiddled around in the middle east while the Soviets were deparately trying to own it? Are you convinced they wouldn't own it now if we weren't there? I'm not. And they would have brought their distinct economic genius to the whole region, had they owned it. If you think things are bad with our interference, you don't have a lot of imagination.

I can't defend Anna's position, and even she should not try, but if we're going to get simple-minded here, then you've got simple-minded self-righteousness locked up.

Gee Bob,
How noble you are!

You stood silent, refusing to reveal your high ranking administration source while Judith Miller spent 50+ days in jail and key Presidential aides and staff were subjected to repeated grillings before a grand jury during time of war.

It doesn't bother your conscience one bit that a woman went to jail because of you, and a man is now a felon spared jail only by a Presidential commutation.

And the real reason it doesn't bother you is summed up in this sentence from the article.

"Novak’s long-standing stance against the war in Iraq was a cause of a bitter rift between him and the National Review that caused him to quit writing for the magazine after producing articles, book reviews and cover stories for 30 years."

So the entire Plame 'outing' was nothing more than Novak using his unique, privileged access to the administration to stab them in the back to promote his own political agenda. Obviously Novak is more qualified to make defense and foreign policy decisions than the Constitutionally elected and authorized leaders of the government.

Congratulations on your principles and your success Bob, you petty, backstabbing, selfish pr*ck. At least we now know why YOU never had to testify before the grand jury even though YOU wrote the article that outed Plame.

Now get your backstabbing butt off TH. Go join the Democrat Party and the lib media. It's where you belong.


Incognito
Perhaps we could have done a better job, but there was plenty of effort being expended on the "other side" to ensure that that would be as impossible as they could make it. The people on the "other side" were the Soviets, who played a much more vicious game than we did, having learned a great deal about how destabilization worked during the 30s and again after WWI.

It's different people now, but I still take sides. "My" side, as flawed as it is, is just a whole lot less flawed. It's goals aren't imperial, as are the goals of those who call us imperial. It's goals aren't cultural, social, or political domination, as are the goals of those who accuse us of the same.

It's too easy to look at the mistakes we've made and say that we either should have done "it", whatever it is, perfectly or not done it at all - and perfectly is the only way it could be done to stop someone from saying we shouldn't have done it at all.

No, incognito, I live in the real world, where giving South America to the Soviets would have been bad for us, for the South Americans, and ultimately, to the Russians and other Eastern Bloc states.

And I live in the same world, where giving the middle east to Islamofascism is an equally bad idea. Bush didn't do it the way I would have, but I'm much more willing to approve his methods than no methods at all. While not "perfect", they are a lot less vicious than doing nothing at all, and then having to do a whole lot in order to survive.

Saying that the world is complex is not the same thing as actually understanding that the world is complex.

Also, I don't actually care whether you have loved ones in the military in Iraq, other than to hope they are well and to wish them success. Their presense there has nothing at all to do with your arguments.

Incognito
Wait a sec - it just occurred to me that you wrote that you regularly get censored on this site. I assume you mean criticized. It's too bad that you feel attacked, though that's your problem, not mine, but you haven't been censored.

Incognito
Strongly doubt it, unless it was obscene, which doesn't seem likely given what you've written so far. Try posting again.

What paper? This column came out today.

Incognito
You're right, those were complex matters, in complex times.

Iranians as a whole didn't particularly dislike the Shah; though many were afraid of his father, the Shah himself wasn't much like his father and was nothing at all like Hussein next door. Savak wasn't lovely, but we've found out since then what ugly really is.

Iranians as a society didn't bring in Khomeini, a huge, badly understood groundswell of multinational islamicisim brought in Khomeini. The entire Iranian middle class has wished for a generation now that it had paid more attention to what was going on. But what caught the CIA by surprise caught more than the CIA by surprise. We were over-focused on the cold war, and everyone else was too. As it turns out, almost everyone else.

However...

Do you think that we shouldn't have fiddled around in the middle east while the Soviets were deparately trying to own it? Are you convinced they wouldn't own it now if we weren't there? I'm not. And they would have brought their distinct economic genius to the whole region, had they owned it. If you think things are bad with our interference, you don't have a lot of imagination.

I can't defend Anna's position, and even she should not try, but if we're going to get simple-minded here, then you've got simple-minded self-righteousness locked up.





Ah, you're a jackass.

Incognito is your chosen moniker. I don't care what you call yourself. I don't care how anonymous you are. I don't care who you are.

I do care about the troops over there. However, you are apparently stupid.

I won't "pee my pants".

I've also been tracking this war since before it started. I've also been thinking about it.

You do have a simplistic view of the world. You don't have any arguments. Just insults. I'm not stirring up hate. You generate that inside yourself.

You certainly are rude; haven't seen you snide yet, but the phrase "nasty little creeps" gives something away. Being banned would only help civilized people forget what damage cowardly philosopies can do, so, no, you shouldn't be banned.

As far as being "nasty little creeps" is concerned, yeah there are those on both sides. It's what generally happens on these blogs when you actually don't have an arguement but can't stand to lose.

You lose a lot, I expect.

Anyway, these aren't private little worlds where people come to circle-jerk their hatreds. This is where people come to trade ideas. We take our thoughts back into our real lives and address real concerns there in real communities. If you come to dabble here with the riffraff and then get offended when you can't defend yourself, you came for the wrong reason in the first place. You aren't censored, just a liar. But I do recommend you go away if all this does is raise your blood pressure.

Incognito
What I was going to respond with was

"If the link you posted here is what you've posted before, I'm not surprised it was removed. You posted an entire other column, complete with comments. Don't do that.

I see I'm just in a tar pit here. Good luck, Incognito."

But then you came back with your last post, with a fair number of good points.

Some advice.

Stop insulting people. Most of the people on the townhall blogs are not cretins, nor holier than thou. Many are, however, fed up with crap instead of arguments, and lumping the ones with arguments in with the ones without will not help you convince anyone, especially when you neglect to make a case yourself.

Your last post had a lot of good stuff. Some is irrelevant. Watching statecraft being made is a lot like watching sausage beeing made. If you want to enjoy the product, don't watch the process.

Some I agree with. So there's not a lot of point in responding.

Some is intelligently made argument that I disagree quite strongly with.

If you're about to have to go, I am too. With your permission, I'll save this down and respond to some of your points when I actually have time. If I can't convince you, you may convince me. And, as I said before, I take these ideas out into the real world.

Novak's Lack of Character
Novak lacks character. He sold out his 'confidential journalistic sources' for book revenues. Whether one agrees with the policy or not, isn't that what bona fide reporters go to jail over NOT doing??

He's hateful. The below quote fits. May he'll fade out of the public's sight.

"Novak iPaleoconservatives] began by hating the neo-conservatives. They came to hate their party and this President. They have finished by hating their country.”

The Rest of the story
The story and debate is of the outing of Plame etc. On another day, it might well have been that of a CIA person(s) sending a person of questionable qualifications and is anti- adminstration on a mission of importance to this country. An anti-Bush democrat who is the husband of a CIA person goes on a mission and then lies (if the NY Times published his column correctly) about his findings. Obviously a plot witin the administration to undermine it. But of course, the MSM and the dems would not want to take that course would they. That plus the outing of the socalled "domestic spying" and the overseas detention camps which constituted the leaking of classifed information that did hurt this country should make us wonder what kind of people are in government service. But then that's not a story either.

Incognito----

Incognito,

I know exactly how you feel, its just that theres not many of us...I mean libertarian Conservatives who are so well versed and when the populace of elitist Rockefeller Republicans or Neocons come stumble upon us...they dont know how else to handle us except to destroy us or black you out like they have done to Dr Ron Paul.

I really wouldnt even waste my time...its like throwing pearls to swine. As children of Christ we have royal blood flowing through our veins that some will never understand. I noticed that you mentioned something about Anna...she is one of my favorite posters on this site....she is articulate and intelligent...and there are others...anyhow...maybe this link will cheer you up.... "No Worries"....

if you would like to email me you can: Sir_Aslan@yahoo.com


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6ixCtNmqL4

Incognito.......Regarding
the Iranian Oil fields........it was Rockefeller who got bent out of shape because the newly elected President of Iran decided to take back the oil fields for the Iranian people so Rockefeller asked for assistance in overthrowing the democratically elected government and placing the son of the then shah...Reza Pahlavi on the Peacock Throne. Anna is aware of this too because she is well versed in this subject.

This is what Ron Paul was alluding to ...

Anyhow, hang in there Incognito...it just gets better! :O)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqGJ7_T9SI4

Incognito
I just got finished reading your last post and I must say...I agree with most everything you have written.

The problem if there really is one is that you...yes, you make people THINK! Some folks don't like to do this. You are intelligent and articulate and the likes of folks here on Townhall.com probably have never encountered anyone like you and Anna and Gabby and Liberty...etc....You guys are like Diamonds, Rubies and Pearls along the gravel roads.

Whatever you do, hold your head high...but not too high...LOL...I dont want you to get too big headed..cause I have to handle my pride many times and believe you me...pride is ..well...sometimes it can get in the way..of course if you believe there is power in the blood...this will make bring you back to reality real fast!

Please...whatever you do...we really need people like you on Townhall.com...dont get discouraged..think of everything that we little people have already been a part of and helped to happen with Gods help of course...because without his help and him we are really nothing..of course evolutionists believe we are really nothing anyhow...at least with God we have our free will and we are...in the sense...I am, that I am! if that makes any sense!

I think you are right for the most part unless I misssed something...you know I do that a lot too! ? Miss stuff...anyhow...please, please...we really need you!

Incognito.....Please read this post
I was doing some internet surfing and came across this guy by the name of Gold....which is interesting because I was thinking...what is the problem with the Republican Party?

The problem is this: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY GOT OFF THE GOLD STANDARD....i.e. the Barry Goldwater..Gold Standard. It has turned its back on Reagan/Goldwater conservative ideologies.

Anyhow, wouldnt you know this guy pops up with the last name of Gold..and probably Jewish too.LOL.....Anyhow, he has written a good book titled: Invasion of the Party Snatchers...by Victor Gold. Check this out if you get a chance...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYQDwHPSF5A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXS4dXbICEg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI1fiqrIUQA



Novak, Buchanan, etc.
I have been shocked by my revised opinion of Buchanan, Novak, etc. They were never favorites of mine. But their opposition to the foolish invasion of Iraq has raised them several notches on my list of worth-reading columnists. They still spiel some nonsense here and there, but their hostility toward this war driven by neocons, greedy corporations and chickenhawks has rescued them from my trash can.

INCOGNITO-----THE BIG SURPRISE!
Contrary to public opinion, a couple of us believe that Bush is actually gearing up for an attack on Iran.

While all eyes are on Iraq, little Shrub has appeared to bet on the high stakes!

I posted on Diana West the other day regarding this. Apparently, intelligence sources or satellite have detected an underground city of some sort which they believe will be used to hide and protect nuclear weapons.

It appears that military exercises are taking place off the coast of Iran as I post this. In fact, here is the link which talks about an aircraft carrier that should arrive as an addition to the naval fleet that is already there.

So, all eyes may be on Iraq, but Iran is where Bush is gonna play his high stakes poker game. It looks like its not a matter of will he, but rather when will he? SURPRISE! SURPRISE!


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070710/tpl-uk-usnavy-carrier-9562ed3.html

50 years of Bashing Israel
Three cheers for Bob Novak and his 50 years of relentless, heartless and completely biased non stop bashing of Israel! What an achievement! Bravo! Bravo! Speech! Speech!

no bs artist.....Novak is Jewish!
I am not aware that he has bashed Israel? If so, could you please enlighten us.

If Novak has bashed Israel, then maybe he knows something we don't, don't cha thank?

You and your Neocon friends always try to paint someone in a corner just because they might criticize some policies the Israeli government has. I guess its just like race baiting...which you folks are good at too!

I dont believe there is a collective jewish mind, or is there?

Stop bssssssinggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg!

Novak's religion
I'm under the impression that Novak converted from Judaism to Roman Catholicism. I also have a hazy recollection that this may have been done under the 'spiritual guidance' of a priest related to Opus Dei. Opus Dei, of course, is an ultra-Catholic, cultic sort of group that was featured in the Da Vinci Code. It represents the dogmatic, authoritarian and we-are-the-one-true-church strain that sadly persists within Catholicism.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.