The guessing game is in full swing now. Who will Mitt Romney choose to be his vice-presidential candidate?
Among the names that are being seriously floated is that of Condoleezza Rice. Polls suggest that Republicans actually prefer her to other contenders like Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Marco Rubio, and Sen. Rob Portman.
This morning Bret Stephens renders us all an excellent service. He takes a cold, hard look at Rice’s record as head of the National Security Council and as Secretary State.
He concludes that it would be a serious mistake to nominate her for vice president. If he is right, and I believe he is, Stephens is doing his part to put an end to the Condoleezza Rice boomlet before it gains any more traction.
In his words:
Ms. Rice was a bad national security adviser and a bad secretary of state. She was on the wrong side of some of the administration's biggest internal policy fights. She had a tendency to flip-flop when it came to the president's core priorities and her political misjudgment more than once cost Mr. Bush dearly. She was a muddler of differences at the national security council. Her tenure at State was notable mainly for the degree to which the bureaucracy ran her, not the other way around.
In a way she reminds me of Hillary Clinton, another largely overrated Secretary of State whose faults are ignored as her successes are exaggerated.
About Rice Stephens concludes:
It's probably a testament to Ms. Rice's inspiring story and winning persona that this blemished record has largely gone down the memory hole.
I have tried to on this blog to ensure that Hillary Clinton’s record does not disappear behind her “inspiring story.” Come to think of it, there’s very little that’s really inspiring about Hillary Clinton.
To be fair and balanced I am happy to offer Bret Stephens’ reasoned critique of Condoleezza Rice’s “blemished record.”