America Right Coming Apart At The Seams

Mutt · 03-24-2003

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 24, 2003

The conservative movement is in shock and awe over a truly nasty brawl about Iraq.

They're playing for keeps: A former Bush speechwriter is accusing such commentators as Pat Buchanan and Robert Novak of hating America, while Buchanan is complaining of a pro-war "cabal" that is "colluding with Israel."

David Frum, a National Review writer who left the White House last year, lobs the latest grenade in the magazine, saying that those he calls paleoconservatives "deny and excuse terror" and "espouse a potentially self-fulfilling defeatism. . . . They began by hating the neoconservatives. They came to hate their party and this president. They have finished by hating their country."

Says Novak: "It is absolutely outrageous to say that anyone who has criticized the wisdom of this attack on Iraq hates their party and the president, and hates their country. It really poisons the political discourse to say that if you feel this hasn't been a wise decision on the part of the United States, you're criticizing your country and hoping for defeat."

The fault lines have been there all along, but the impassioned arguments over Iraq are ripping apart the right. Gentlemanly discourse about America's role in the world has been replaced by vitriol about ugly motives.

Frum and Novak, a syndicated columnist and "Crossfire" co-host, have tangled before, most notably about Frum's best-selling book "The Right Man."

When Frum announced that he was leaving the White House, Novak took to the CNN airwaves to report "suspicion that he's been kicked out." The reason, Novak said, was administration unhappiness with a widely circulated e-mail from Frum's wife, Danielle Crittenden, crediting him with the "axis of evil" phrase in President Bush's State of the Union address.

In his book, Frum says he considered suing Novak over the report that he was canned. Novak, in turn, panned the book in Buchanan's new magazine, American Conservative, under the headline "Axis of Ego."

The book is written with a "tone of condescension," Novak wrote, and Frum "repeatedly refers to his own Jewishness. It is hard to recall any previous presidential aide so engrossed with his own ethnic roots. Frum is more uncompromising in support of Israel than any other issue, raising the inescapable question of whether this was the real reason he entered the White House."

Novak, who's sometimes been accused of being unsympathetic to Israel, had just poured gasoline on the fire.

After being faxed Frum's National Review piece, Novak says: "I consider this mean-spirited payback for my critical review of his book and other criticism. I've been called a lot of things, but this is the first time I've been called a paleoconservative. He links me with a lot of people I certainly disagree with on a vast number of issues."

"Total delusions of grandeur on his part," says Frum, noting that he began working on the piece two months ago. "I do not take seriously Bob Novak's review of my book. I do take seriously the columns and articles he's done about the war."

But Novak calls the assault "really unacceptable. . . . I have said many times on television that once the shooting starts, all Americans should hope for a decisive and clean victory."

Buchanan, the three-time presidential candidate and MSNBC commentator, is getting his licks in as well. In the American Conservative cover story, he denounces a number of neoconservatives who are Jewish:

"We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars."

Buchanan declares "false" the "toxic" charge that he is anti-Semitic even as he hurls the charge of dual loyalty, saying his critics believe that "what's good for Israel is good for America."

And Buchanan, a onetime Nixon and Reagan aide who abandoned the Republican Party in 2000, casts a wide net: "Their publications include the Weekly Standard, Commentary, the New Republic, National Review, and the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. Though few in number, they wield disproportionate power through control of the conservative foundations and magazines, through their syndicated columns and by attaching themselves to men of power." A veritable vast right-wing conspiracy.

Frum peppers his piece with quotations from the antiwar conservatives. In December, he noted, Novak criticized national security adviser Condoleezza Rice for citing Hezbollah, not al Qaeda, as the world's most dangerous terrorist organization. Hezbollah, said Novak, is focused only "on the destruction of Israel," not America.

Buchanan, who did not return calls, declared on MSNBC's "Hardball" last fall: "9/11 was a direct consequence of the United States meddling in an area of the world where we do not belong and where we are not wanted."

Also in the Frum spotlight is Justin Raimondo, who runs an antiwar Web site and who delivered Buchanan's nominating speech at the last Reform Party convention. Raimondo writes that it "seems beyond dispute" that Israel had some prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Frum says his criticism of Novak, Buchanan and other conservatives "is in no way personal. All I talk about is what people have said and what people have written."

Almighty Colin · 03-24-2003

Why would anyone be in shock?

That Buchanan and Bush would be "at odds" is not surprising -- especially given they are in different parties and Buchanan is a long-time isolationist.

RawAlex · 03-24-2003

Colin, how come when two democrats disagree, it is signs that they are weak and unfit to rule the country, and when it is a republican, it is just "an extremist"?

Not trying to start a political discussion, I just find it funny to watch the reactions based on where ya sit...

Alex

Almighty Colin · 03-25-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by RawAlex@Mar 24 2003, 08:43 PM
Colin, how come when two democrats disagree, it is signs that they are weak and unfit to rule the country, and when it is a republican, it is just "an extremist"?

Not trying to start a political discussion, I just find it funny to watch the reactions based on where ya sit...

Alex

Alex,

As usual, you're very confused.

1. If you look at back at the political test results many of us took, you'll see I scored 33% dem, 33% rep. I am neither and very strongly neither in a direct comparison. "Where I sit" is not where you think I sit. I don't view myself as anti-either party though. I view myself as pro the American system. [That does not mean I am "Anti" any other country though.]

I think both parties have a lot of good ideas. I think the political process and the political system are both much bigger and more important than the views of any one party. I supported Clinton. I support Bush. I'll support the next president - Democrat or Republican, and think everything will be just fine. The funny thing about the strong two-party system is that the party that is on the sidelines always thinks it's the end of the world. It never is.

The entire system is very fluid and I think each party adapts its platform in such a way as to appeal to as many voters as possible. Therefore, the parties seem to maintain a balance as far as party members. I think this is good. I don't think either party is "falling apart".

2. I have no idea what you are talking about. When did I ever say two Democrats disagreeing is a sign of weakness?

3. Buchanan is NOT a Republican which was my point. He left the Republican party years ago.

4. I didn't say the events that transpired were a sign of "party weakness". That wouldn't make sense in light of the fact that Bush is a Republican and Buchanan is in the Reform party.

5. If you take the time to read the article you'll notice that it refers to "conservatives", not "republicans". It's not about parties. It's about ideologies.

Last edited by Colin at Mar 25 2003, 04:22 AM

03-24-2003	#2
Almighty Colin Members Want to see your own Advertising Here! Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,059	Why would anyone be in shock? That Buchanan and Bush would be "at odds" is not surprising -- especially given they are in different parties and Buchanan is a long-time isolationist. __________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content. Secret Friends, LATINA Secret Friends , My Cam Friends

03-24-2003	#3
RawAlex Members $100 for every ImLive sign-up Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 4,036	Colin, how come when two democrats disagree, it is signs that they are weak and unfit to rule the country, and when it is a republican, it is just "an extremist"? Not trying to start a political discussion, I just find it funny to watch the reactions based on where ya sit... Alex __________________ Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds

03-24-2003	#1
Mutt Members Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 1,087	By Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, March 24, 2003 The conservative movement is in shock and awe over a truly nasty brawl about Iraq. They're playing for keeps: A former Bush speechwriter is accusing such commentators as Pat Buchanan and Robert Novak of hating America, while Buchanan is complaining of a pro-war "cabal" that is "colluding with Israel." David Frum, a National Review writer who left the White House last year, lobs the latest grenade in the magazine, saying that those he calls paleoconservatives "deny and excuse terror" and "espouse a potentially self-fulfilling defeatism. . . . They began by hating the neoconservatives. They came to hate their party and this president. They have finished by hating their country." Says Novak: "It is absolutely outrageous to say that anyone who has criticized the wisdom of this attack on Iraq hates their party and the president, and hates their country. It really poisons the political discourse to say that if you feel this hasn't been a wise decision on the part of the United States, you're criticizing your country and hoping for defeat." The fault lines have been there all along, but the impassioned arguments over Iraq are ripping apart the right. Gentlemanly discourse about America's role in the world has been replaced by vitriol about ugly motives. Frum and Novak, a syndicated columnist and "Crossfire" co-host, have tangled before, most notably about Frum's best-selling book "The Right Man." When Frum announced that he was leaving the White House, Novak took to the CNN airwaves to report "suspicion that he's been kicked out." The reason, Novak said, was administration unhappiness with a widely circulated e-mail from Frum's wife, Danielle Crittenden, crediting him with the "axis of evil" phrase in President Bush's State of the Union address. In his book, Frum says he considered suing Novak over the report that he was canned. Novak, in turn, panned the book in Buchanan's new magazine, American Conservative, under the headline "Axis of Ego." The book is written with a "tone of condescension," Novak wrote, and Frum "repeatedly refers to his own Jewishness. It is hard to recall any previous presidential aide so engrossed with his own ethnic roots. Frum is more uncompromising in support of Israel than any other issue, raising the inescapable question of whether this was the real reason he entered the White House." Novak, who's sometimes been accused of being unsympathetic to Israel, had just poured gasoline on the fire. After being faxed Frum's National Review piece, Novak says: "I consider this mean-spirited payback for my critical review of his book and other criticism. I've been called a lot of things, but this is the first time I've been called a paleoconservative. He links me with a lot of people I certainly disagree with on a vast number of issues." "Total delusions of grandeur on his part," says Frum, noting that he began working on the piece two months ago. "I do not take seriously Bob Novak's review of my book. I do take seriously the columns and articles he's done about the war." But Novak calls the assault "really unacceptable. . . . I have said many times on television that once the shooting starts, all Americans should hope for a decisive and clean victory." Buchanan, the three-time presidential candidate and MSNBC commentator, is getting his licks in as well. In the American Conservative cover story, he denounces a number of neoconservatives who are Jewish: "We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars." Buchanan declares "false" the "toxic" charge that he is anti-Semitic even as he hurls the charge of dual loyalty, saying his critics believe that "what's good for Israel is good for America." And Buchanan, a onetime Nixon and Reagan aide who abandoned the Republican Party in 2000, casts a wide net: "Their publications include the Weekly Standard, Commentary, the New Republic, National Review, and the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. Though few in number, they wield disproportionate power through control of the conservative foundations and magazines, through their syndicated columns and by attaching themselves to men of power." A veritable vast right-wing conspiracy. Frum peppers his piece with quotations from the antiwar conservatives. In December, he noted, Novak criticized national security adviser Condoleezza Rice for citing Hezbollah, not al Qaeda, as the world's most dangerous terrorist organization. Hezbollah, said Novak, is focused only "on the destruction of Israel," not America. Buchanan, who did not return calls, declared on MSNBC's "Hardball" last fall: "9/11 was a direct consequence of the United States meddling in an area of the world where we do not belong and where we are not wanted." Also in the Frum spotlight is Justin Raimondo, who runs an antiwar Web site and who delivered Buchanan's nominating speech at the last Reform Party convention. Raimondo writes that it "seems beyond dispute" that Israel had some prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks. Frum says his criticism of Novak, Buchanan and other conservatives "is in no way personal. All I talk about is what people have said and what people have written."