BUSH WAS RIGHT:

INTERVIEW: The Architect Is an Open Book: A revelatory Karl Rove. (National Review, 3/09/10)

Karl Rove — the George W. Bush confidante who needs no introduction — has written a memoir of his life in politics, Courage and Consequence: My Life as a Conservative in the Fight, which is released today. It includes an intimate look at Rove, his family — which has come under attacks from his political opponents — and his formation as a conservative. Rove took questions from National Review Online’s Kathryn Jean Lopez about the book — including on the roots of Rove’s William F. Buckley– and Barry Goldwater–influenced conservatism, and Rove’s regrets on weapons of mass destruction and Trent Lott. And read on to learn the topic on which Rove feels the need to expose the “sorry excuse[s]” of Pres. George W. Bush. [...]

LOPEZ: You have a chapter titled, “Bush Was Right on Iraq.” Did Newsweek vindicate you last week?

ROVE: What Newsweek did was report on the almost miraculous progress that’s been made in Iraq since the surge went into effect in 2007. I certainly think that the emergence in the heart of the Middle East of an Iraqi democracy — and it needs to be said that we’re still not home free yet — strengthens the case that Bush was right on Iraq. It opens important possibilities.

The world is a better place now that Saddam is gone: He was a brutal dictator who started wars and destabilized the Middle East. He led a rogue regime that constantly thumbed its nose at the demands of the world. And Iraq was a home to terrorists.

LOPEZ: In the book you ask: “So why did President Bush choose to go after Saddam Hussein in the first place? Wasn’t it a diversion from what should have been the real goal, which was to defeat al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan?” Is that your greatest regret, that the Bush administration didn’t answer that question compellingly long ago?

ROVE: No, it is that we didn’t tackle a more damaging narrative, namely that Bush lied about the presence of WMD. This was a cynically political attack unleashed by unprincipled leaders of the Democratic party, who knew better but were willing to unleash it because it would corrode President Bush’s credibility if it was not refuted.