Novak explains why Gonzales is ‘terrible’ — but why it doesn’t matter

May 14, 2007

Bob Novak tried to explain the broader dynamic of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales staying on in his job over the weekend, but I’m at a loss to understand what Novak was trying to say.

ThinkProgress has the whole, fascinating video, but here’s Novak’s argument:

“Margaret, the president can get rid of him any time he wants to. There’s no political setback. It would be a benefit. The president is stuck with these subpar people he brought up from Texas. That’s a failing on President Bush’s part. Now, this hearing produced no new evidence, no new questions, no new answers. It is the Democrats that are having trouble with serious questions like funding the Iraq war, deciding what to do on it, passing legislation. And so pounding on this poor Gonzalez who never should have been in a high government post in the first place is all they can do. And the Republicans, they decided there’s enough of it, but let me tell you, they think he ought to go, too. […]

“He’s terrible. He shouldn’t be there. But there’s a lot of bad people in this administration. But I think if you weren’t so hooked to the Democratic talking points, Margaret, you would know that they’re in trouble on substantive issues and they have to pound on poor Gonzalez to get anything in the press.”

After after reading it a few times, I’m hard pressed to understand what kind of “defense” this is of Gonzales.

To hear Novak tell it, Bush is “stuck” with a subpar team. So Dems should focus on this? No, Novak says, it’s not as important as a legislative agenda.

To hear Novak tell it, Gonzales is “terrible,” and everyone knows it. Should Dems try and force his ouster? No, Novak says, we should instead feel sorry for “poor Gonzales.”

To hear Novak tell it, Gonzales is but one of many “bad people in this administration.” Should Dems exercise more aggressive oversight on these incompetents? No, Novak says, it’s not “substantive” enough.

So, in summary, Bush has surrounded himself with an awful team who can’t do their jobs, but the real problem, according to Bob Novak, is the Dems’ media strategy. Or something.

I guess this is what passes for a defense of Gonzales nowadays?

It is probably because Novak knows that everyhting this admin does is follow what Cheney and Rove decide. There are no other players becides Cheney/Rove. So, of course the Democrats are wasting their time on Gonzales or anyone else because they are just puppets.

  • NOW they decide to tell the truth?

    “But there’s a lot of bad people in this administration.”

    Better late then never I suppose. This also goes to show how much more difficult it is to get fired than hired. God Bless America.

  • The only way Novak’s comments could make any sense (and the were so close yet so very far away) is had Novak concluded:

    “. . .these subpar people he brought up from Texas. That’s a failing on President Bush’s part. And so Bush is the one the Democrats really should be holding accountable for this mess. I think they ought to impeach him.”

    At least that would have made Novak’s rambling have some internal consistency.

  • “To hear Novak tell it, Gonzales is “terrible,” and everyone knows it. Should Dems try and force his ouster? No, Novak says, we should instead feel sorry for “poor Gonzales.””

    This is just a sad and crap example of political framing. Novak wants to steer the debate away from the criminal acts of Gonzales and his gang, and make it a question of incompetence. I for one refuse to play along, but it certainly says a lot about the R’s desperation when utter incompetence throughout the administration is their best talking point.

  • This is merely more of the Great GOP Rehabilitation Project. Folks like Novakula are simply continuing to try and distance Bush and everything/everyone he touched from ‘conservatism’ even though Bush et al ARE conservatism. All this is for the 2008 election. Period. They now do not want Bushco hung around their necks.

  • Novak may be suffering from trying to merge too many talking points into one. Talking Point 1: the Democrats don’t know what to do about the war, and are having trouble passing legislation. Not true, but so what. Talking Point 2: the Dems are just beating up on Gonzo to distract from their own failings. Not true, but so what. So far, so good. Both of these fantasies can coexist in a Republican brain. But then there’s the fact that Gonzo is pathetic. Hmm. Yeah, well, he’s pathetic, but it’s still the Democrats fault. Somehow.

  • bubba wrote: “This is merely more of the Great GOP Rehabilitation Project.”

    They’re starting to sound like Scooby Doo villains:

    “It would have worked, too, if not for you meddling kids!” becomes “Conservatism would have worked, too, if not for those incompetent Bushies!”

  • The only way Novak’s comments could make any sense (and the were so close yet so very far away) is had Novak concluded:

    “. . .these subpar people he brought up from Texas. That’s a failing on President Bush’s part. And so Bush is the one the Democrats really should be holding accountable for this mess. I think they ought to impeach him.”

    At least that would have made Novak’s rambling have some internal consistency.

    Comment by zeitgeist — 5/14/2007 @ 1:30 pm

    Zeitgeist, I think to make it the perfect Novakula column your added line should be:

    And so Bush is the one the Democrats really should be holding accountable for this mess. I think they ought to impeach Clinton.

  • All Novak is doing is trying to belittle Dems oversight of DoJ corruption as if it’s the only thing they can do to get press time and look like they are doing ‘something’. It’s Dem bashing pure and simple. He is such a petty person who has nothing important to say but still continues to blab along. Somewhere in life someone neglected to tell him how insignificant his insights are and that he should just STFU.

  • Lest we forget, incompetence in carrying out one’s duties and illegal/criminal acts that politicize the DOJ are hardly mutually exclusive. But a more important point, is that these firings were the latter, not the former, which is what I think they want to spin here. If you just say they screwed up the process because of incompetence, it tries to steer you away from the fact that henchman Gonzalez was carrying water for a clear and malevolent motive of higher ups in the executive branch.

  • Shorter Novak: Dems need to leave Gonzo alone and do something spectacularly stupid so I can blast them for it. But they won’t and that pisses me off.

  • Novak accuses someone of being “hooked on talking points”, and then rattles off a series of Republican talking points that make no sense when compared to one another (or to reality).

    Project much, Bob?

    Novak is still one of the Right’s leading talking heads, and he’s out of ammo. Looks like 2008 is going to be very, very fun.

  • I’ve decided the best response to anything Bob Novak says is, “I’m sorry, but I can’t think of any reason I should give a shit what Bob Novak thinks.”

  • Day-um, I gotta scoot over to ThinkP and watch the tape for the whirly-gigs in his eyes as he talks. Got me dizzy already, though.

  • Well, this does indicate a change in Republican strategy. Instead of blaming Bill Clinton, they are now just blaming Democrats as a whole. Guess they got the memo that everyone now loves Bill. After 2008, they’ll get around to reading the memo that everyone now hates the Republican party.

    • Comments are closed.