Robert Novak (archive) November 4, 2004
WASHINGTON — No wonder that John Kerry, after conferring at his Boston mansion with Ted Kennedy in the wee hours Wednesday morning, did not immediately concede the election to George W. Bush before giving up nine hours later. Remote though his chance was of turning around the crucial outcome in Ohio, it seemed to provide a frail final chance of averting total disaster for the Democratic Party.
The devastation of Tuesday’s returns cannot be minimized. The transformation of the “Solid South” from Democrat to Republican was completed. Not only were all 11 states of the old Confederacy carried by President Bush, but the pickup of all five Senate seats left vacant by retiring Democrats means 18 of the region’s 22 senators are Republican. Domination of Congress by the GOP now enters its second decade with Democrats largely restricted to enclaves on both coasts and some Midwestern industrial areas.
Democrats confront a grim future. Bush’s 3.5-million-vote edge in the popular vote reflects a party out of touch with the country on social issues, the role of government and the war against terrorism. Democrats face the bitter reality of minority party status and what to do about it.
Read the entire article on the Town Hall website.
Why isn’t Novak in jail yet for his role in exposing the identity of an undercover CIA agent? I recall George HW Bush stating that endangering our nation’s intellegence agents that was “was the most insidious form of treason.”
Because the “agent”, being a Washington socialite, already told everyone he worked for the CIA. It added to his social cachet.
In Dean’s comment, “Why isn?t Novak in jail yet …” I hear echos of Stalin’s show trials. Novak did nothing wrong except expose someone on the Left. The Left’s solution? Throw the bastard in jail. Evidence be damned. Truth be damned. On the Left the only crime is dissent from the Party line.
This is becoming more clear to me everyday, especially as I work my way through _Hollywood Party : How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930s and 1940s_, by Kenneth Lloyd Billingsly. Big Labor, CPUSA, Liberal causes, media manipulation, thuggish behavior in the face of independent thinking, propaganda in films, … yup, not much has changed in 60 years. Except that instead of bowing down before the CPUSA Hollywood today genuflects before groups like Moveon.org & CAIR.
The Democrats would have been better served by Howard Dean, who is more centrist than Kerry was and I think better represented the “general” American population. How Kerry ended up getting nominated in the first place seems more than a bit odd to me when for so long he was just a blip on the radar. (A Log Cabin Republican suggested to me last night that he thought the Clintons made it happen so Hillary could run in ’08. An interesting premise but not too sure on that.)
To regard anyone who has criticized the war as being “out of the mainstream” is clearly erroneous. Over 55 million people felt that the handling of the Iraq conflict was sufficiently poor enough to change leaders. That is not a fringe group.
The Democrats need to realize that:
a) you can use the language of faith while not terrifying agnostics, atheists and Jews and those of other faiths into thinking they’ll be victims of a new Christian “Reich” (like the one desired by Pat Robertson).
b) there can be someone who believes in using the military capabilities of the US with restraint and caution but without hubris and the moral grandstanding that we have done. Much of the dislike for Bush is based purely on his “cowboy” persona.
c) you don’t need to have an opposing view just to have an opposing view. Kerry’s spokesman criticized Bush for not getting his flu shot and “putting himself at risk”. We know they would have called him a hypocrite had he gotten one.
d) many people wish to protect the environment and restrict damage to our planet (more so than many Republicans who seem to disbelieve in even the possibility of this happening) without placing the domain of caribou above the safety and security of the nation.
The Democrats would have been better served if they had nominated Howard Dean? You’re joking, right? One theory I’ve heard as to why Kerry took such a strong anti-war posture (while at the same time holding a pro-war posture) was because Howard Dean was drawing so much attention with his anti-war rhetoric. BTW, Howard Dean was also a hawk with regards to Iraq before he wanted to attract the Michael Moore Left (nothing like standing up for your principles).
Republicans would have loved it if Howard Dean was nominated. It would have made the differences in leadership even that much more stark. I daresay that you would have seen an even more overwhelming Bush victory if Dean was the Democrat’s frontman.
But I’m curious: Who would have been Dean’s VP candidate? Wesley Clark? Now that would have been a Republican dream ticket.
I don’t know if you noticed this, James, but the only people who were big on Dean were the Democrat’s so-called Youth Vote, an angry gagle of college students running around in orange knit caps; a voting block which didn’t exactly turn out for Dean or for Kerry. So how exactly would Howard Dean have energized the Democrats to take the White House?
Daniel writes: “Novak did nothing wrong except expose someone on the Left.”
You’re kidding, right? I mean, I was going to comment on this, but I can’t believe that you’re serious.
Look, I may have engaged in artistic license by describing what Novak did as “exposing someone on the Left”, but he certainly did not do anything which deserves a jail sentence. It was well known that Wilson’s wife worked in the CIA. She was certainly NOT an “undercover agent”, as so many on the Left like to claim. It’s kind of hard to maintain secrecy with regards to who one works for, when one is crowing about working for the CIA every chance one gets.
Here’s what Dean thinks Robert Novak should go to jail for: “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson’s wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. “I will not answer any question about my wife,” Wilson told me.” I strongly suggest that you read orginal commentary and his response to the media fire storm it created. In the October 1st response Novak write, “During a long conversation with a senior administration official, I asked why Wilson was assigned the mission to Niger. He said Wilson had been sent by the CIA’s counterproliferation section at the suggestion of one of its employees, his wife.”
What this comes down to is that the Left did not like that Novak stated known facts that, when put together with other information, cast serious doubt on Wilson’s reports regarding what happened in Niger. In effect, what Dean is calling for is the jailing of anyone who dissents from the Leftist party line. In other words, “If you contradict what we are saying, you will go to jail.” That is exactly what Stalin did, and what every totalitarian has done throughout history.
Daniel writes: “Look, I may have engaged in artistic license by describing what Novak did as “exposing someone on the Left”, but he certainly did not do anything which deserves a jail sentence.”
I don’t think Novak would be sent to prison, but any administration official who leaked that information to Novak could be.
Daniel: “It was well known that Wilson’s wife worked in the CIA. She was certainly NOT an “undercover agent”, as so many on the Left like to claim. It’s kind of hard to maintain secrecy with regards to who one works for, when one is crowing about working for the CIA every chance one gets.”
Subsequent to her “outing” by Novak, she did grant interviews, but not before. Question: if Plame was merely a CIA analyst and not an undercover operator, why then was a special counsel appointed? Why a grand jury?
Daniel: “What this comes down to is that the Left did not like that Novak stated known facts that, when put together with other information, cast serious doubt on Wilson’s reports regarding what happened in Niger.”
How in the world does that cast doubt on Wilson’s report?? You may recall that he cited specific evidence in support of his conclusion. I mean, what does his wife have to do with anything? So what if she did or did not recommend him for the job?
Daniel: “In effect, what Dean is calling for is the jailing of anyone who dissents from the Leftist party line.”
I think what Dean is calling for is Novak to be jailed on contempt of court in the event that he refused to name his source. You may recall that a law passed under Bush Sr.’s administration makes what happened to Ms. Plame a federal crime.
If you want to read Wilson’s personal account of what happened in Niger, actually unfiltered and unspun by right-wing propaganda, I suggest the following interview with Wilson:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/interviews/wilson.html