According to the New York Times’ Douglas Martin and Jacques Steinberg, the "often churlish," "pugnacious" Robert Novak "could not always document" his scoops. Littered in the August 19 obituary of the conservative journalist are other snide remarks and asides.
Discussing the political column that Novak co-wrote for 30 years with Rowland Evans, the reporters worried, "For all its influence, though, the column could not always document its scoops. In April 1972, Mr. Evans and Mr. Novak reported that Senator George S. McGovern, the Democratic presidential candidate, favored abortion rights, legalization of marijuana and amnesty for draft dodgers — positions that crippled his standing with most conservative voters."
Martin and Steinberg did note that in 2007 Novak identified his source as "Senator Thomas F. Eagleton, who had briefly been Mr. McGovern’s running mate before being forced off the ticket by disclosures about electric shock treatments in his past."
In regards to documentation, this is the same New York Times that published an obituary of Walter Cronkite on July 18 that was riddled with seven errors, prompting a lengthy correction.
Martin and Steinberg also complained, "On cable television, Mr. Novak was the often churlish commentator in the three-piece suit, his eyebrows, it seemed, permanently arched." Churlish? As in boorish or rude? That sounds like an oddly aggressive description for an obituary. The piece began by labeling Novak "the pugnacious political columnist."
Other asides included insisting, "Mr. Novak relished making outrageous comments. He once complained that his Thanksgiving dinner had been ruined by seeing so many homeless people on television."
At times, the two reporters seemed unable to refrain from editorializing:
In interviews, Mr. Novak seemed to rub salt into the wounds of the other journalists. "I don’t know why they’re upset with me," he told Brian Lamb of C-Span in 2004. "They ought to worry about themselves. I worry about myself."
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Libs
August 19, 2009 - 15:40 ET by JDWRegan presented Shriver with Presidential Medal of Freedom: Libs scorn her for pro-life beliefs.
Why would one expect anything different from their reviews of Mr Novak?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Jobs, jobs, jobs ... Spending, spending, spending
And when Dan Rather dies,
August 19, 2009 - 15:47 ET by FranksamAnd when Dan Rather dies, don't expect the Times to remember his hit on George Bush. I think that everyone deserves a little respect at the time of his death. When the Times goes out of business, I won't cry.
When the NYT dies:
August 19, 2009 - 16:18 ET by mattmThe New York Times, the often deceitful, shifty, underhanded, amoral, dishonest, prejudiced, insincere, counterfeit, partial, duplicitous, false, phony, unethical, mendacious, cynical, fraudulent, hypocritical, lying, pretentious, misleading, slick, disingenuous, hateful, two-faced, self-important, shameless pretend newspaper of record-breaking left-wing bias....
NYT criticizing Novak's ethics?
August 19, 2009 - 16:39 ET by kiwikitSimply amazing that the gang that can't shoot straight isn't capable of recognizing someone who does. In his book, the McGovern is pro-abortion story was sourced to Eagleton. He should know. How much research (reporting?) did the NYT do on their story about McCain involvment with some lady that they later had to take back. I've not heard of Novak's having to do that. One more impossibly unprofessions act of the self-appointed elites!
Is there anyone
August 19, 2009 - 16:46 ET by boomerconIs there anyone at the NYT who isn't a pissy little girl? (apologies to girls everywhere, including "real" pissy ones)
Their reporters don't report, they "opine" as if it's gospel. Editors don't edit, they pontificate from on high. And all of them are incredulous that we who actually have a functioning, reasoning brain don't believe them...so they piss even more, as if to overwhelm us with the shear volume of it all.
Shameful.
New edit: Dwight Garner's sick promotion of the "new" book about Marxism is another prime example of idiocy blooming.
Watergate Anyone?
August 19, 2009 - 16:54 ET by UtherpendThese are the same ilk who never once pressured the two reporters in the white house Watergate scandel to show proof of where their information was coming from to slur Nixon. I am sure that if Novak stated he was talking with someone named Deep Throat they would take that as face value.
"For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security."
Presstitutes
August 19, 2009 - 20:29 ET by nadadhimmiThe Old York Times is a well know leftist propaganda organ for socialists and communists. That's why they are rapidly going out of business. Pinch Sulzberger is a spoiled, rich kid, mental midget that destroyed a generations old family holding in a decade.
nad... Couldn't agree
August 19, 2009 - 20:48 ET by bigtimernad...
Couldn't agree more.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
"Other asides included
August 20, 2009 - 01:32 ET by Indiana Joe"Other asides included insisting, 'Mr. Novak relished making outrageous comments. He once complained that his Thanksgiving dinner had been ruined by seeing so many homeless people on television.'"
An odd example of an "outrageous comment." If this was Walter Kronkite's statement, I'm sure it would be presented as a feeling of sorrow that "ruined" that Thanksgiving dinner. With Novak, it's assumed to be a hard-hearted remark.
Of course, a truly "hard-hearted" individual would either be unaffected by television portraying homeless folks, or he would relish his own meal all the more. At least, IMHO.
"Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants." - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 1
Homeless for the holidays
August 20, 2009 - 05:07 ET by AgnosticOne thing for sure though is that if they were showing homeless people on television then there was most likely a Republican in the Whitehouse. There are no homeless when Democrats run government.
A person may be won over with logic and reason but the masses must be bought with spectacle and platitudes. - 2008 Elections
Outrageous comments?
August 20, 2009 - 17:03 ET by pbanks7I'm sure that Walter Chronic's statements that we lost the war in Vietnam after we annihilated the NVA Tet Offensive were not outrageous.
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe, then confirming it with a poll.