The brouhaha surrounding John Stewart’s appearance on Crossfire reminded me to ask - can anyone give a specific incident that led to Stewart’s…umm…uhh…let’s say, distaste for Robert Novak (if there is a specific incident)? After all, Douchebag of Liberty, which he’s used to refer to Novak on at least three separate occasions, is awfully harsh as a general putdown.
I believe his main reason for not liking the guy is that he (Novak) revealed the name of an undercover CIA agent and refuses to say where he got that info. I can’t believe he’s still got a job. 30 years ago he probably would have been tried for treason. Douchebag of Liberty is putting it mildly.
I think it’s based on Novak’s exposing Valerie Plame, Joe Wilson’s wife, as CIA, and keeping quiest about his source while the Bush Admin was being investigated for the leak.
Yeah, I saw that episode of TDS. I was wondering if there was anything preceding the Valerie Plame outing.
As you point out, that’s reason enough. (If true - I don’t know enough about the Plame affair to make any claims whatsoever).
I’m pretty sure it’s actually “a Douchebag for Liberty.”
Most sources have “of”. Like this one:
I still like John McLaughlin’s old nickname for Novak: The Prince Of Darkness.
Quite.
Since you seem to be familiar with Novak’s past, permit me to ask another question: is he going senile? Or is he just blinded by partisanship?
Watching Crossfire, which is the only place I’m exposed to him, he really does seem incoherent at times (IMHO, of course). I can’t give any particular cites (mostly 'cuz it’d take too much time to go through all the transcripts), but as evidence I’d cite his report card from the first debate. Giving Kerry a “D” on content, while giving Bush a “B”? And giving Bush a “B-” on style? What was he watching? (Disclaimer - it’s not that I’m making a judgement on what the deserved grades were, just that the discrepancy between the two he gave is absurd.) Then, after the second debate, he goes so far as to say:
Which seems to me to indicate that he’s acknowledging that his judgement about the first debate was a tad off. I just find his behavior and arguments to be a bit bizarre at times and was wondering if he’s always been that way…
Novak has just plain lost it mentally. I don’t watch “Crossfire” but one of my kids had it on one afternoon last month. The show started with Novak ranting and raving about a (turns out imaginary) major anti-terrorist coup in Iraq and then proceeded to detail how horrifying this achievement is to the terrorist-supporting Democrats. (I then left the room.)
Calling all the members of one political party terrorist supporters indicates that he is “not credible” to say the least.
Real journalists would of course have nothing to do with Novak and denounce him. But since there are no journalists in America anymore, that leaves guys like Stewart to call a spade a spade.
Check out Comedy Central’s website for the zing on Novak:
http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.jhtml?reposid=/multimedia/tds/stewart/jon_9017.html
No more so than let’s say Helen Thomas…the only difference being I’ve never heard Novak ever claimed to be non-partisan. But who knows. Daminit Jim…I’m a poster to a Cafe Society thread, not a geriatric psychologist.
Well he balances out James Carvile(sp?). When did Carvile become Eustace from Courage the Cowardly Dog ? On crossfire, depending on the day, you either have two incoherent idiots yelling at each other or two coherent hacks spouting partisan drivel at each other. A pox on both their houses.