I disagree more often than not with Robert Novak. But who cares, I like the guy. Maybe I just have a thing for curmudgeons, or possibly I just appreciate and respect not only his talent, but his depth of experience. One thing I know for a fact, the man is deserving of respect. After all, he has been a Washington insider since the 1950's, and the man knows his way around the place. He knows the major players and shakers, inside and out, on both sides of the political spectrum. He had this reputation from the early days when he was a part of the team of Evans and Novak, up until the time his old partner, Roland Evans, who joined him, up until his recent death, on CNN's Evans, Novak, Hunt, and Shields.
Since joining CNN, practically from the inception of the network, Novak has quickly earned the title and appelation, "The Prince Of Darkness". It seems to fit. But a lot of his fellow analysts at CNN know better than to take such appellations with more than a few grains of salt. Still, Novak is a man who should be taken seriously, and I think therein lies the problem. A good lot of the time it seemed that few did, from his liberal antagonists on the old Capital Gang, (another CNN staple which was recently defunct), Mark Shields, Margaret Carlson, and Ed Hunt (who of all people should have an appreciation for Novaks position at CNN, himself being the token liberal at the Wall Street Journal) to his co-hosts on the old Crossfire program, including James Carville, seemed at first glance to go out of their way to belittle Novak, chiding him for everything from his selfish interests in tax cuts, to his suppossed extravagant wealth, to his greatly exagerrated number of years in Washington.
Novak always took these chidings, for the most part, in more or less good humor, but here and there one could see flashes of impatience, and agitation. Sometimes, he would lash out at his tormenters, but more with the attitude of a wise old man scolding the impertinence of the young whippersnappers he was being forced to endure. Not with any actual ill will, it seemed.
But things finally came to a head when, on a recent airing of Inside Politics, Novak took exception to Carvilles seemingly playful jaunt that Novak just "had to look tough for the right wing". "That's bullshit", Novak snapped. "I don't like that".
Novak seemed to become even more irritated when the moderator seemed to ignore the outburst and continue on with his questioning of Carville as though nothing had occurred untoward. Looking at the moderator in an attitude of disgust, he rose, and walked off, throwing his microphone to the ground as he did so. CNN, for it's part, later issued a statement to the effect that Novak was suspended, indefinitely. I doubt seriously the Prince of Darkness is overly concerned.
Novak seemed compelled to issue a statement to the effect that he was agitated at Carville for questioning his motives. I take him at his word, unlike the myriad of others who seem determined to ascribe motives where none exist. Some for example postulate that Novak feared the potential of a coming query on the program as to his role in the Valerie Plame affair, and took this opportunity to avoid this questioning.
Ridiculous, in my opinion. For one thing, Novak has all ready addressed that issue, long ago, and if questioned again, he would doubtless give the same vapid answers he gave before. More than likely, he would utter that old canard about not being allowed to speak directly in the middle of an on-going investigation. Which would certainly be his right. And frankly, there probably is nothing to tell. He probably merely used Karl Rove as a verifying source on the Plame story, the same as did Matthew Cooper, without being aware really as to the covert status of Plame. The whole point to the stories as published, remember, wasn't to reveal Plames covert status. It was to point out her connection to her husband Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger and her importance in recommending and helping to set up that trip as a means of counteracting and contradicting Bush foreign policy. In other words, it was a way of saying that Wilson was lying when he said the trip had been arranged by Vice-President Cheney, and conducted with his knowledge, and that the Vice-President then dissavowed the trip when it didn't turn up the hoped for results.
Complicated? Yes,and that's the whole problem, the whole story has turned into such a labrythine maze of lies and deceit that there are times you need Ariadnes golden cord to trace back to the original sources. But Bob Novak isn't the Minotaur of this story. He's just an old man, who reacted to yet another perceived affront to his honor and dignity. In other words, he just lost his cool. And conservatives like Michelle Malkin should take a deep breathe and get a grip. But then most conservatives are fucking morality hypocrits anyway, so no surprise that yet another should be so aghast at such a display of profanity. When Ms. Malkin reaches Robert Novaks age and depth of experience, in the unlikley event she ever does, then she will have possibly earned the right to criticize another persons manners or lack thereof. More than likely, she will have earned the right to utter a few well-chosen profanities herself, only more than likely she will still be too much of a hypocrit to say them openly and honestly. After all, she might give all the other fucking hypocrits the wrong idea.
As for CNN, they really need to rethink their position on this really trivial matter. They have all ready earned a reputation, undeserved or not, as a stellar member of the "liberal elite press", and of being suppossedly so unfair to the conservative side. In reality, not only do they give the conservative side a fair amount of air time in the couse of interviews, at least, but they have a number of conservative analysts as well. Robert Novak is not the only one they have, this is true. On the other hand, none of them come close to matching Robert Novaks status and standing in the field of journalism as a conservative columnist and commentator. They should not only reinstate him, but in my view they should issue an apology for any misunderstandings over this really unimportant bit of nonsense, and show the man the respect he deserves.
