When the shooting starts (Novak responds to Frum)

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | 3/24/03 | Robert Novak

[jordan8]

Here is the article - Unpatriotic Conservatives.
Bit of a laugh to take a lecture on loyalty from a man who just sh*t-canned his own country to pursue better opportunities in the U.S.

[Burkeman1]

Frum can not be taken seriously. He is a journalistic hit man. Given the right party invite he would sell out and do a hit job against Bush (as his book demonstrates and threatens).

[sheltonmac]

"It is the failure of the pro war right to respond to the actual arguments of the anti war right that troubles me."

The neocons have used similar tactics for decades against anyone who would dare to question their vision of what "conservatism" should be.

[Registered]

Flag.

[GOPcapitalist]

Sorry, buddy, but David Frum has plenty of experience too. Most recently he worked for the current president as a speechwriter.

That hardly qualifies him as a leading conservative thinker or writer. At best, Frum's claim to fame is not a powerful and moving message, but a three word sound byte that any one of us could have thought up on any given day - "axis of evil." Now that's a good soundbyte and all, and it summarizes a point fairly adequitely, but it's no eulogy to Caesar, nor even one of the better addresses given by some of the more capable members of Congress. As his guilt-by-association smear piece on Novak and others amply demonstrates, the guy is an intellectual lightweight. He essentially shot his mouth off without thinking it through and now he's having it piled back on him by conservatives who dwarf his rational abilities.

He has also begun whining now that his words are returning to haunt him, but that was to be expected. Frum is the epitome of what Ann Coulter once described as the "girlie-boys" of the conservative movement.

[Wavyhill]

David Frum Exclusively Represented by Keppler Associates The author of the New York Times bestseller The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush, Frum served as special assistant to President Bush for economic speechwriting from January 2001 to February 2002. He is currently a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a contributing editor to National Review, a columnist for Canada's National Post newspaper, and a regular contributor to the Daily Telegraph in Great Britain and to National Public Radio. Biography Dubbed "one of the leading political commentators of his generation" by the Wall Street Journal, David Frum is considered one of America's top political and social observers. The author of the New York Times bestseller The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush, Frum served as special assistant to President Bush for economic speechwriting from January 2001 to February 2002. He is currently a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a contributing editor to National Review, a columnist for Canada's National Post newspaper, and a regular contributor to the Daily Telegraph in Great Britain and to National Public Radio. Frum's first book, Dead Right (1994), was described by William F. Buckley as "the most refreshing ideological experience in a generation," and by Frank Rich of the New York Times as "the smartest book written from the inside about the American conservative movement." Frum's history of the 1970s, How We Got Here, was published in January 2000. "More than any other book I know," said Michael Barone, editor of The Almanac of American Politics, "it shows how we came to be the way we are." In 2001, Judge Richard Posner's study of public intellectuals listed Frum as one of the 100 most influential minds in the United States. Born in Toronto, Canada in 1960, he received a simultaneous BA and MA in history from Yale in 1982. He was appointed a visiting lecturer in history at Yale in 1986; in 1987, he graduated cum laude from the Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Federalist Society. Frum was an editor on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal from 1989 until 1992. In 1992-1994, he wrote the law column at Forbes magazine. Between 1994 and 2001, Frum was a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Public Policy Research. Frum is a compelling speaker and delivers entertaining behind-the-scenes commentary on national and international affairs in a time of crisis and opportunity. {www.kepplerassociates.com/speakers/frumdavid.asp } Whether or not you agree with him, he's not an intellectual lightweight. And the girly boy slur is just that--he's an intellectual, not a heavyweight boxer. Most of the paleocon intellectuals aren't Arnold Schwarzenegger either.

[Wavyhill]

P.S. Sorry about the lousy formatting on the last post. It's the computer's fault.

[Cacique]

bump for later

[GOPcapitalist]

Whether or not you agree with him, he's not an intellectual lightweight.

Having an ivy league affiliation or a law degree doesn't make one an intellectualy astute individual. Neither does writing for a magazine or newspaper. If you doubt me, just look at all the leftist buffoons who lined up to write defenses of Clinton during impeachment. They were a virtual Harvard/Yale/Princeton law school faculty list, yet their arguments were among the most intellectually dishonest propaganda tripe to appear on the pages of American newspapers in decades.

If Frum desires the credential of intellectual depth, he must demonstrate it in his writings. Penning a soundbyte and launching a guilt-by-association smear on conservatives he disagrees with demonstrates the exact opposite.

And the girly boy slur is just that

To the contrary. It's an accurate description of an individual's childish and whiny behavior carried out in the form of that article. If an individual lies, it is not a slur to call him a liar. If an individual whines when people criticize him, it is not a slur to call him a whiner. If an individual behaves like an adolescent in his editorials, it is not a slur to call him an adolescent. And if he does all of these things, as Frum has indisputably done, it is not a slur, but rather an accurate characterization, to call him a "girly boy."

[Wavyhill]

Fine, if you want to argue the points of the article, it was literally stuffed with quotes from the paleocons. And the quotes were not even particularly extreme by paleocon standards. The usual definition of "intellectual lightweight" is one who can't back up his statements with facts, and Frum took care to do just that. As for whether Novak is a paleocon, the original dispute--obviously his roots are not as a paleocon, but as a mainstream, even liberal Republican. However, in the last decade or so, he has become consistently anti-Israel to the point of opposing any government action, warlike or peaceful, that might help Israel in any way. So, even if he may not be a paleocon in some ways, his attitude on the Middle East is that of a paleocon--and he shares their worst traits.

[GOPcapitalist]

Fine, if you want to argue the points of the article, it was literally stuffed with quotes from the paleocons.

No. It was stuffed with carefully selected quotes expressing fringe anti-semitism from a select few people who Frum identifies as paleo-cons (i.e. the Francis types from "American Renaissance"). Based upon those quotes, Frum extended the attribute of anti-semitism to all the people he identified as "paleo-cons" - a list that included mainstream conservatives such as Novak, factional conservatives, and libertarians, as well as the Sam Francis types. It was an exercise in guilt-by-association tactics, only even the association Frum made was largely fabricated.

The usual definition of "intellectual lightweight" is one who can't back up his statements with facts, and Frum took care to do just that.

No he didn't. Go re-read the thing and see who those blocked quotes are all from. They're practically all Sam Francis, Fleming, and other American Rennaissancer types. The main exception is Lew Rockwell, and he is not a paleo-con but a libertarian who heads up a think tank that advocates the theories of a Jewish economist.

However, in the last decade or so, he has become consistently anti-Israel to the point of opposing any government action, warlike or peaceful, that might help Israel in any way.

So what's your point? As a conservative who fully supports Israel, I have no problem agreeing to disagree with Novak and neither should Frum. That was the point of David Keene's article.

his attitude on the Middle East is that of a paleocon--and he shares their worst traits.

So he's an anti-semite just because he believes in non-intervention on Israel, and even though he is ethnically Jewish himself? The broad leaps of logic you and Frum engage in by making such implications are bizarre at best.

[GOPcapitalist]

Calling pretzel boy...bump!

[#3Fan]

Show.

[GOPcapitalist]

Show.

Show you what?

[#3Fan]

Showing for the argument. No matter. Your posts aren't extensive.

[GOPcapitalist]

So in other words, it's all just as I suspected you would respond. Rather than admitting that you were WRONG in your fraudulent, abusive, and dishonest lobbing of allegations against myself and others, you simply come up with an "excuse" as to why every single post that proves you wrong "doesn't count." Needless to say, I'll happily keep you notified of my posting activities.

[#3Fan]

So in other words, it's all just as I suspected you would respond.

Wrong again. I said that one last year was legitimate. You had one other thread with another topic where you posted extensively in the course of the last several months and you're an everyday poster. I'd still consider you one-issue.

Rather than admitting that you were WRONG in your fraudulent, abusive, and dishonest lobbing of allegations against myself and others, you simply come up with an "excuse" as to why every single post that proves you wrong "doesn't count."

No, you had one thread where you posted extensively and I said so. I guess you're ignoring that.

Needless to say, I'll happily keep you notified of my posting activities.

If you consider me a sixth grader, why are you going to do that? Do you often report to sixth-graders? I guess I really mean a lot to you for you to go through so much trouble. My opinion must really be "significant" in your life.

[GOPcapitalist]

Wrong again. I said that one last year was legitimate.

And excuse-making on all the others.

[#3Fan]

Nope, explaining the word "extensive" on the others.

[Middle Man]

"If Frum desires the credential of intellectual depth, he must demonstrate it in his writings."

I tried reading two of his books, "Dead Right" and "How We Got Here", and couldn't finish them. "How We Got Here" especially read like a cut-and-paste job.

All in all, Frum strikes me as an opportunist a la David Brock who senses that his moment has arrived and now's the time to make a big "splash".