By Brian Carnell

Wednesday, October 30, 2002

Michael Massing has what seems to be the easiest job in the world -- he's doing media criticism for The Nation without actually reading the people that he's criticizing. Complaining that the Washington Post op-ed page is tilted toward pundits who favor war with Iraq, Massing writes,

There's also George Will, who weekly toasts the Republicans for their fortitude and taunts the Democrats for their vacillation. "All military disasters" can be summed up in two words--"too late," Will wrote in mid-September, summing up his own position on Iraq. Also contributing regularly are Charles Krauthammer, Robert Novak and Michael Kelly, all staunch supporters of the Administration's position.

Unless he's reading some other Robert Novak (or just making this stuff up as he goes along), that doesn't make a lot of sense since Novak is opposed to war with Iraq. In fact, Novak was an opponent of George H. Bush's war against Iraq.

Novak has, in fact, devoted several columns so far this year to giving anti-war politicians a platform to voice their views. In March he wrote an op-ed outlining Sen. Pat Roberts concerns about the Bush administration's war talk. In August, Novak wrote another column presenting the White House dove's cases against war with Iraq. In September, he highlighted business concerns that a war with Iraq might drive up oil prices as well as a piece pointing out U.S. hypocrisy about Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons.

Apparently that's The Nation's idea of a "staunch supporter" of Bush's position on Iraq. Sure, whatever.

Source:

Hawks at the Washington Post. Michael Massing, The Nation, November 11, 2002.

Discuss (0 Replies) | Printer Friendly