Reading and writing obituary
tributes to the
great journalist Robert Novak will, no doubt, provide
most of the day's work for myself and others who admired Novak
and his work. My
young friend Richard Spencer recalls the
famous question asked by Pat Moynihan, after Novak
-- of Jewish ancestry and a
secular upbringing -- had converted to Catholicism:
"Now that we have made Novak a Catholic, do you think we can
make him a Christian?"
Novak made many friends during the course of his long career
because he was never afraid to make enemies. When I heard the
news of his death today, I remembered the first time I met Novak,
at a May 2002 foreign policy forum sponsored by Pat Buchanan's
American Cause organization. And when I Googled Novak's name
along with the name of Georgie Ann Geyer, the Washington
Times columnist whom I recalled as one of his co-panelists
that day, I found
this report of the event:
Not surprisingly, the public debate won little press attention,
probably because it actually applied reason to matters much of
the press doesn't want reasoned out.
Mr. Buchanan. . . sided with columnist Robert Novak against
Richard Perle of the American Enterprise Institute and Middle
East expert Reuel Gerecht, formerly with the CIA, at a debate
sponsored by Mr. Buchanan's think tank, the American Cause. The
first topic debated was "Should the U.S. invade Iraq?"
The case for invasion was made by Mr. Perle and Mr. Gerecht,
who argued that Iraq is seeking or already has weapons of mass
destruction, that it may give these weapons to terrorist
groups, and that terrorists armed with them might then launch
massive attacks on the United States or other American targets
that would make Sept. 11 look like a fender bender on the
Beltway. Mr. Perle was also emphatic that Iraq already supports
terrorism and may have had a role in the Sept. 11 attacks
themselves.
Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Novak questioned all of the above. The two
journalists demanded to know what Saddam Hussein had done to
threaten the United States or its extensions abroad and what
evidence there is for Iraqi support for terrorism today. . .
.
Mr. Buchanan's point was that by the logic of his opponents, we
should invade anywhere and everywhere a foreign government is
doing something we don't like or something that might someday
somehow threaten us. That's a formula for perpetual war -- and
his opponents said little to distance themselves from it.
It was Novak's criticism of the Bush administration's Iraq
policy, and especially his agreement with Buchanan on that
subject, that earned him inclusion in David Frum's
notorious 2003 catalog of "Unpatriotic Conservatives."
Since then, Frum has gone on to attack others,
including Mark Levin. This seems to demonstrate
a lamentable habit on the part of Frum, whom I wish to
regard as a friend. As a result of the Bush policy -- and
the rhetoric that attended the political defense of that policy
-- every consideration of the U.S. position in the Middle
East became a crude referendum on anti-Semitism, so that all
dissenters were suspected of being closet Jew-haters in
"unpatriotic" allegiance with terrorists.
This Manichean rhetorical escalation was both unfortunate
and unjust, even if some of the dissenters (including Buchanan)
had unwisely given their critics ammunition with which
to arm accusations of mala fides. When
discussions of policy become clouded by such damaging
insinuations, when disagreement is cited as evidence of moral
inferiority -- can anyone but a child molester
be worse than an anti-Semite? -- then honest
discussion becomes impossible. We see much the same problem at
work today, when every critic of the Obama administration risks
the charge of "racism," which is often implied even when it is
not made openly.
My own feelings of friendship toward Frum, considering that he
once did me a favor when I badly needed it, have caused me
tremendous angst, given his repeated attacks on others whom
I also consider friends.
Today, of course, Novak can no longer be harmed by accusations
that he, born a Jew, was guilty of aiding and abetting
anti-Semites. Whatever his faults and errors, Bob
Novak now awaits the judgment of a higher
authority than David Frum. Let us pray that Frum will
now pause to consider that he, too, shall one day be judged
by the same authority.
