In David Carr’s “The Media Equation” piece from today’s NYT, he brings scrutiny to bear on Michael Bob Novak, whose blithe article on Niger triggered the Plame debacle.  Carr rightly observes that Washington insiders and journalists are agog at the fact that Novak seems to be waltzing through the fallout unscathed:

“He is like Typhoid Mary,” Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington and Lee University, said of Mr. Novak. “Everybody is keeling over around him and he just keeps skipping along.”

That’s true.  And it’s also true when Carr opines:

Mr. Novak spoke publicly only when Mr. Armitage’s role as a source was about to be revealed last fall in the book, “Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War” by David Corn and Michael Isikoff and was publicly acknowledged by Mr. Armitage himself. And this is what Mr. Novak said:

“Armitage’s silence the next 21/2 years caused intense pain for his colleagues in government and enabled partisan Democrats in Congress to falsely accuse Rove of being my primary source,” adding, “Armitage’s tardy self-disclosure is tainted because it is deceptive.”

Substitute a couple of proper nouns and the paragraph neatly summarizes Mr. Novak’s behavior as well

But Mr. Carr clearly would like to keep the focus of his amazement firmly fixed on Novak himself, who, as he points out, is still employed at Fox News.

Surely there are other members of the cast whose apparently immunity to inspection ought to raise eyebrows, eh?  Mr. Carr?