NRO and A Question of Objectivity

Beldar the Great performs a masterful fisking of the NRO'’s anti-Miers column, Start Over. He, very effectively, blows away the half-truths and "“straw-man" reasoning of the NRO'’ers. I love this part: (Beldar'’s fisking is in blue)

When President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, we called it a missed opportunity. The ensuing debate has confirmed that judgment. One would, of course, have to venture outside the confines of NRO to find both sides of such a debate, and neither can one find much inside NRO to suggest that its editors' and most of its contributors' minds were ever receptive to contrary evidence or argument. For all its fury, a consensus was reached early on that point. Indeed, inside NRO, a furious consensus was reached within approximately thirty minutes after the pick was announced, by which time NRO had already begun spreading vicious misinformation about Ms. Miers' law school and career records and her law firm's reputation (for which they've since properly apologized; but first impressions are what they are.) Leaving aside the president and his employees, even Miers’s fiercest defenders allow that she was not their top pick — or even their tenth. Leave aside too that the Constitution gives the privilege and duty of the pick to the President, and that not even Ms. Miers' fiercest defenders have his decade-long first-hand experience as her client.

In the comments section to Beldar'’s post, I found a link to an interesting post at The Strata-Sphere. The post discusses an editorial by Matthew Cully who worked with David Frum at the White House. It appears to me that Frum is leading the NRO charge against Miers. It also appears that he may have left the White House for reasons other than a planned career move. Considering appearances, how can we not question Frum'’s motives in leading this charge against Harriet Miers? It certainly raises questions in my mind.

Further, looking at Frum's bio raises my suspicions that he may not have given Harriet Miers a chance when he was working with her in the White House. His background is extremely different from the Texas background of Harriet Miers.

I am, in part, projecting. I have personally experienced condescension from those who believe that being raised in Texas makes one some sort of cultural barbarian.

Frum is a Canadian by birth and it doesn't appear that he's lived south of Washington D.C.. I'm guessing that Frum didn'’t know what to make of this woman who speaks with a distinct drawl; and who sported at the time, a good old Texas poodle cut and too much eyeliner. (Dallas women do like their makeup)

Was it distressing to Frum that this unfashionable woman, fifteen years his senior, had final say over whether his writing made it into the President's speech? Was he appalled that a graduate of SMU was judging his work? The work of a graduate from Yale and Harvard Law School? After all, had she taken the slings and arrows aimed at the heart of Conservative Intellectual thought? How could she? Before 2001, she had not resided in the epicenter of the great battle. She was not part of the "in-crowd".

As noted by AJ at the Strata-Sphere, Frum, according to his own book, didn't think much of the White House staffers.

"One seldom heard an unexpected thought in the Bush White House or met someone who possessed unusual knowledge. Aside from the witty and ingenious Mitch Daniels at the Office of Management and Budget and, of course, Karl Rove, who played the unusual dual role of political guru and leading intellectual, conspicuous intelligence seemed actively unwelcome in the Bush White House," he writes.

As a workplace, the Bush White House is formal--strictly blue and gray suits for men, few bright colors for women. Language is clean--even a mild "damn" is frowned on.

Frum, a self-described "not especially observant Jew," found himself working in "the culture of modern Evangelicalism" that prevails.

Is that condescending enough for you? Sounds like the sort of person I'd like to have working for me. Hah!

I evaluate Frum's protestations that Miers is a mediocrity as I would similar claims made by any employee who was apparently hustled out the door by his employer. That is, with a huge grain of salt and the realization that any competent non-Harvard-degree-holding lawyer, given the opportunity to cross-examine Frum, could tear his credibility on this issue into microscopic shreds.