Today I invite you to link my new freelance commentary piece, assessing the stormy career of the newly-deceased Robert Novak. I want to add several observations:
Midway through the piece, I mention that a lot of top Washingtonians leaked information to Novak just to stay on his good side. That was a nice way to put it. He actually thrived, during his print column heyday, by practicing a semi-benign form of extortion. He made it clear to people that if they didn't cooperate with him as sources, he would be apt to treat them as targets. Karl Rove once showed up at a party for Novak wearing a button that said, "I'm a source, not a target."
And in addition to my discussion of how Novak thrived as an increasingly conservative commentator in the early days of cable TV (the early '80s), I could easily have mentioned how he also served during that period as a willful transmission belt for the Reagan devotees of supply-side economics. Actually, that's an understatement; he was a virtual gatekeeper and ideological cop. As Republican strategist Roger Stone tells the story, some party leaders wanted Ronald Reagan to dump some of his supply-side tax-cut proposals prior to his autumn 1980 faceoff with President Jimmy Carter. A Reagan aide called Novak to find out how the columnist might react to such a decision, and how he might treat it in his column. Let's just say that Novak's response inspired the Reagan team to stick with the game plan. In Stone's emailed words, "Bob Novak didn't just report the news, he shaped it."
-------
And speaking of deceased media bigwigs, most of the commentary about Don Hewitt, the CBS legend who died yesterday at 86, has focused on his four decades as the impresario on 60 Minutes, TV's longest running show. But I'll offer something else, about his presence at a key historical moment:
Don Hewitt produced the first Kennedy-Nixon debate in 1960, a television milestone. Shortly before the two candidates took the stage, Hewitt checked them out in person. He judged that Kennedy would look great on camera, having been made up with something called Max Factor Creme Puff. Then he went to see Nixon. Nixon looked terrible - wan, pasty, gray. Hewitt went to Nixon's people, and asked whether perhaps it would be wise to put some makeup on the guy. They said no. The show went on, Nixon looked terrible, and Kennedy was judged the clear winner by Americans who watched.
If only the Nixon people had listened to Hewitt, who knows, maybe history would have been different. In any case, they sought instead to make Hewitt the scapegoat, and demanded that he be removed from the future debates. CBS refused.
Years later, as David Halberstam tells the story in his book The Powers That Be, Nixon appeared on a CBS show produced by Hewitt. Nixon asked him all kinds of questions about makeup, and Hewitt told him that the best kind of makeup was a deep natural tan. "In years to come," wrote Halberstam, "Hewitt often wondered whether he was responsible for Nixon's houses in San Clemente and Key Biscayne."
By now you all know that CD75 is spending some time at the Shady Acres Rest Home. I have some exciting news. It turns out that CD is a birther. He revealed it at a group therapy meeting. The thing is though that he doesn’t believe the story about Kenya. According to CD, Obama was really born on the planet Zarcon. We’ve all been hypnotized to see him as a human, but he’s actually got 3 eyes and 2 tongues, both of them forked. Everybody told CD he’d been watching too many reruns of the X Files, but he swears it’s true. The way he sees it, the government on Zarcon is crazy for socialized medicine, and they’ve decided to spread it throughout the galaxy. That’s why they sent #3T78 (Obamas’s actual name) down here. In fact, Obama wasn’t even born; he was hatched. So when you think of it, CD’s not a birther, he’s a hatcher. He says that by next week, he’s going to produce a 100% genuine copy of Obama’s Zarconian hatching certificate. We all thought that meant Biden would become President, but it turns he’s from another planet too. So are Nancy Pelosi and a whole parcel of Democrats, which means that pretty soon Mitch McConnell is going to be President; he really was born in Kentucky.— fed up- From the last blog; RIP Robert Novak, Godspeed! ***fernando, agreed that the insurance companies make too much money, but they are the ones taking the risk, like any insurance company! What do life insurance or car insurance comapnies produce? Nothing! I am for lower costs in healthcare as are most reasonable people. Portability, sign me up! Better access, yes again. A better way to provide poor people medical care other than emergency rooms, yes! Now the problem is getting there from here. 1) Lower costs-throwing a $1 Tril over 10 years at a problem is not my idea of lower costs. Mandating a $500 Bil cut in Medicare will result in lower services and less doctor's that take Medicare and will hurt seniors. The way to lower costs are free market, cross-state competition, tort reform & free market choices (buying the coverage you want, instead of a 1 size fits all plan)! 2) Portability-pass in the new law mandating the shifting of insurance responsibility away from companies and more to individuals. Companies will increase pay of people commensurate with their private coverage. Insurance companies will be mandated to let people buy insurance directly at the group price, with the choice of coverages, high deductibles, like car insurance. 3) Doctors-there are not enough primary care doc's to treat all these newly insured people. We need to waive student loans of doctors who promise to be primary physicians for at least 10 years & we need to cap lawsuit payouts at a fair and reasonable number! To think the govt. can do this is just silly in my opinion after it has proved so inept at so many things:)— NEPhilly
- SHOCKING: Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge says in his upcoming book that President Bush manipulated the terror-threat alert system for political gain. Ridge says that he was pressured to raise the alert level on the eve of President Bush’s reelection in 2004.— the stupid does burn
- Since the media rage this summer is to celebrate 40th anniversaries (Woodstock, etc.), least we forget that July 18 was the 40th anniversary of Teddy Kennedy's Chappaquiddick incident. How ironic it is that a "man" who now pushes for universal healthcare left a woman to drown for nearly 12 hours before contacting the police, and the media celebrates him as a "Liberal Lion".— CD75
- NEPhilly: first of all there is no " Mandating a $500 Bil cut in Medicare". Yet another "fact" continually propagated by the right. I have no ideas how it will be paid for, which is one of my problems with it. That being said, how can you provide coverage to 40-50 million more people and not have it cost more? BTW, $1T of 10 years is not actually very much (in gov't terms). That's LESS than the costs of Bush's two tax cuts (and even the heritage foundation agrees with that one). And yes, that's including the 'increased revenues' from those tax cuts.— still_independent
- NEPhilly: what's a "fair and reasonable" cap in the case of the very preventable death of a child?— still_independent
- still_independent....according to cnn.com, Obama is proposing paying for half of the healthcare overhaul with $500 Billion cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. These cuts will come from reduced payments to providers, improved pricing of medicare prescription drugs, among other things. I know none of this is actually in the bill (House 3200), but it is how Obama has proposed paying for his reforms.— tom - wilmington, de
- In 2004, with the possible election of John Kerry and a Republican governor in Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy asked the state legislature to change the way a successor was chosen from appointment by the governor to special election. This was of course done. Now, in 2009, with a Democrat governor in place and a super majority in all levels of the federal government, Kennedy is once again asking the state legislature to change the way a successor is chosen from a special election (which could take up to 5 months) to appointment by the governor. Now that is chutzpah.— tom - wilmington, de
- still, exactly. You can't extend coverage and cut the cost, but that is the President's stated plan! We can negotiate a reasonable cap, can't we? I went to a liberal site this time and the (...) are mine :) ***That leaves us with Obama's claim that, under the health care reform proposal, Medicare benefits will not be cut. He's right that the bill does not directly (key word) trim Medicare benefits; instead, the government is proposing ways to slow or eliminate some Medicare spending (this is the stealth cut & is what dems have been killing repubs for proposing for years) to beef up (pay for) other aspects of the plan. But experts told us it's conceivable or even likely that those financial changes could lead to reduced benefits (how can it not), particularly for people in the (Medicare) Advantage program. From that perspective, it's a stretch for Obama say that Medicare patients won't see changes in their plans as a result. We give Obama a Half True.*** http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/14/barack-obama/obama-claims-medicare-benefits-will-not-be-cut-und/— NEPhilly
- NEPhilly: want your article weas leaving out were RAISING Medicare payements to doctors. It's the old cut and add but only mention the cut. In any case, there's a big difference between trying to slow growth and "cutting". The Medicare budget will still be higher than it is now. Tell you what. Generally, healthcare costs have been rising at twice the rate of inflation. If next year, they "only" go up the rate of inflation, please comt back and tell me you "cut" your healthcare costs. Finally, to summarize your position: we need to enroll tens of million of people into health coverage, which will cost money, but you oppose any means of raising the money or lowering costs to offset the increase.— still_independent
- tom: true - I was only commenting on proposed pieces of legislation, not what Obama says. I tend to stick with this, because legislation may be passed into law, whereas his rhetoric is not binding. The $500B is a little misleading, though. For example, $110B is by cutting payments to hospitals to treat uninsured patients, the logic being that those ranks would decline as health care reforms are phased in (i.e. more people had health coverage). Another $75 billion would come from "better pricing of Medicare drugs", which could be achieved by undoing some of the non-negotiating caveats pushed through with the prescription drug legislation a few years ago. I am concerned about his proposed 110 billion in reducing scheduled increases in Medicare payments, depending upon what areas they are in.— still_independent
- still, you would agree that when repubs tried to 'slow the growth' of SS or Medicare it was called a cut, now that a dem proposes it, it is something different:) I never agreed we need to enroll tens of millions of people in govt. mandated health insurance! I agreed we need to cut health insurance rate growth, improve portability, increase competition, reform tort laws, increase regulations (govt. should regulate, not compete with), increase # of primary care doctors, offer less expensive care options (other than ER) to the poor, offer more insurance plan options such as higher deductibles, etc. I assume more people who actually want and can't afford health insurance would get it if this were enacted, but I would not mandate it! And Pres. Obama skewered Hillary and Edwards in the primary for mandating the same thing, at least they were true to themselves:)— NEPhilly
- SHOCKING: Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge says in his upcoming book that President Bush manipulated the terror-threat alert system for political gain. Ridge says that he was pressured to raise the alert level on the eve of President Bush’s reelection in 2004............ and to think that those vile liberals have had the audacity to accuse the previous administration of lying about terrorism for political purposes!!!— the stupid does burn
- I must admit I was listening to Hannity and heard this tidbit! ***Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices." Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing. "Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living." The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug'?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family." When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?... If President Obama is sincere in stating that he is not trying to cut costs by pressuring the disabled to forgo critical care, one good way to show that commitment is to walk two blocks from the Oval Office and pull the plug on "Your Life, Your Choices." He should make sure in the future that VA decisions are guided by values that treat the lives of our veterans as gifts, not burdens.*** http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358590107981718.html— NEPhilly
- NEPhilly : instead of reading his "interpretation" (and he's a pro-lifer, he has an obvious agenda - in his equivalent document, the default position is ALWAYS "I want lifesaving treatment", "I want nutrition",etc.), why not read the actual document? I read it, and found that Mr. Towey characterized it completely differently than I would have. ... http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf— still_independent
59 comments | View All Comments | View All By Latest
About Dick Polman
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
Blog Roll
Get it now
- December 2011
- August 2010
- August
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
Archives
Philly.com Promotions
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
Site Services:
Classifieds:
Partners:
Local Services:
