David Frum refutes Rove's suggestion that Harriet Miers was finished off by her pro-life commitment

[sabra]

http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/31/david-frum-karl-rove-s-faulty-memory.aspx

David Frum: Karl Rove's faulty memory

Has there ever been anyone as intimate with a president and as historically knowledgeable as Karl Rove? By all rights, he should have produced one of the outstanding White House memoirs of all time, to stand on the shelf alongside William Safire’s, Peggy Noonan’s and Robert Sherwood’s.

Perhaps someday he yet will. In Courage and Consequence, he has a lot to get off his chest, many scores to settle, and who can blame him? But these very understandable feelings have led the book into a series of strange omissions and memory lapses. I’ll be blogging about these, but here’s one to open with:

Rove’s two-page discussion of the Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme Court ends thus:

Democrats then piled on a questionnaire she filled out for her 1989 Dallas City Council race that demonstrated she was pro-life. Apparently, Democrats think some litmus tests are appropriate.

Harriet could see she would get approved only with a tremendous expenditure of the president’s political capital – and even then confirmation was unlikely. A nomination that started with such high hopes for those of us who knew Harriet was turning into a disaster. On October 27, she withdrew her name, acting with enormous grace.


That account leaves the impression that Miers was finished off by her pro-life commitment. This is the exact opposite of the case.

...

The nomination was finished by the revelation that Miers in fact was probably not pro-life – and that the president’s “trust me” assurances were likely to end in disappointment.

Memory is fallible always, and Rove’s may very pardonably have failed him in this instance. But it’s not the only such instance.

More to come.

[librechik]

1. Thank you David Frum

methinks we will receive many valuable fact-checks from his new Pukkke-free pen.

[sabra]

2. Frum: "More to come"

:popcorn:

[malaise]

3. Butter please

:evilgrin:

[BunkerHill24]

5. Yup, and I'm looking forward to it.

[gratuitous]

Yes, Miers' total unsuitability for the Court had nothing to do with it

Anti-woman issues had nothing to do with Harriet Miers' sterling non-qualifications for the Supreme Court. About the only thing she had to recommend her was a law degree and a bar card. Other than that, she had a singularly undistinguished career built mostly on a toadying sycophancy to the Dim Son that left a bad taste even in the mouths of her putative allies.

Karl Rove is not a trustworthy reporter of his own experiences.

[StatGirl]

8. Bush never had any intention of having her confirmed

He wanted Alito, but was expected to nominate a woman. The obvious thing to do was to nominate a spectacularly unqualified woman who would go down in flames. Harriet took the hit for the team.

Hmmm, I wonder if his dad expected Clarence Thomas to be rejected?

[Quantess]

4. Is this a sign that David Frum is disgruntled at being fired?

[GoCubsGo]

7. Hell hath no fury like a republican scorned.

Just ask Scott McClellan, among others.

[Submariner]

6. Miers on Bush: 'Smartest Man I Ever Met'

That statement is why she lost.

[bleever]

9. Are we supposed to have forgotten the GOP backlash against the nomination?

Karl depends on people being stupid. Look where it got him.

[spanone]

10. mr frum probably knows where a lot of bodies are buried