 | Rising Wage Gap, But No Squeeze | |
| Health Care, Not Social Security, the Third Rail of 2008 | |
| Will Democrats Keep the Faith? | |
| Turning Toward Iran | |
| Can Republicans Count on a House Snapback? |
May 01, 2006
Special Report Roundtable - May 1
FOX News Special Report With Brit Hume
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think these laws have to change. I think the laws are unjust. They are completely out of sync with reality. The labor needs here are such that these people are filling a real -- a real need.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUME: That -- that guy speaking, well, he's a -- he's an employer of aliens and he says -- or immigrants. He says, by the way, he's not going to comment on whether his workers are illegal immigrants or not. That's -- that's up for the Department of Homeland Security or somebody to figure out.
Some analytical observations on the day's events from Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard, Mort Kondracke, executive editor of Roll Call, and Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, FOX News contributors all.
Well, there were a lot people in the streets in a lot of cities today. There were a lot of plants that closed down, farms that were not being -- were not working today, stores closed, restaurants closed. This was different from the earlier protests, in that this was accompanied by this boycott.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: And, so, what is the message and what is the effect of this?
MORT KONDRACKE, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, ROLL CALL: Well, look, I -- I could not be more for comprehensive immigration reform and -- and earned legalization, but this is totally counterproductive.
I mean, this plays right into the hands of Tom Tancredo and the -- the nativist son in the House of Representatives, who are -- who want to do nothing, but a -- but a restrictionist border control bill, security bill. There should be a border security bill, but it should be combined with other things. And -- and this -- in fact, a lot of moderate...
HUME: And this is counterproductive, because?
KONDRACKE: Because these people ostensibly are here in the United States to work. So, what are they doing to demonstrate? Not work.
They should be -- you know, they're -- they are boycotting schools and stuff like that. They are -- they're waving around Mexican flags. You know, it -- it -- it only serves to -- I mean, these people are -- illegal immigrants are here at America's sufferance, for heaven's sake. I mean, legally speaking, we could kick them -- kick them all out. So...
MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: Well, not practically, but legally, yes.
KONDRACKE: Not practically, but legally. And, so, they're -- what they're doing is sticking it in the eyes of ordinary people.
HUME: Mara, go ahead.
LIASSON: Yes.
First of all, I think the -- the movement, if you want to call it, the immigrant rights movement is split. There was a lot of debate inside the movement about whether this was a good idea. In some places, where the leadership was against this, like the Washington, D.C., area, they weren't as big rallies as -- as in other places, like Los Angeles.
But I think -- and that is true of any political movement in its infancy. You have to kind of figure out what is the best thing to do. But I think that it's very possible that this could end up hardening attitudes on both sides. In other words, the people who are against some kind of path to legalization are going to be even more adamantly so.
And others are staying where they are. It doesn't look like, even after the two-week break, that the House of Representatives, Republicans in the House, are feeling any more warmly towards what the Senate is working on. So, I think you have still got a stalemate.
In the short term, maybe this helps the anti-immigration forces, just like Prop 187 helped Pete Wilson get reelected. But, in the long run, I think the trend is in the other direction.
FRED BARNES, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: I -- I think I disagree with everything I have heard so far on the panel.
One, I don't think it is going to have any influence at all, this thing. You know, I thought last time -- remember when they had that big demonstration in -- in L.A., and they were flying Mexican flags all over the place and -- I really thought that was -- was going to be counterproductive. And what has happened? We have moved toward a bill. I think -- I don't think there's a stalemate.
HUME: A bill -- a bill more satisfactory to the...
BARNES: Yes.
HUME: ... to the -- to these immigration protesters than otherwise, right?
BARNES: Oh, yes. Yes. Yes. Sure, we have moved in their direction.
And I don't think there is a stalemate. I mean, we are going to get a bill. A bill is going to come out of the Senate. It will probably -- it will have border enforcement. It will have earned citizenship, probably have some kind of a guest-worker program. And we will go to a conference. And I think we're going to wind up with a bill this year.
HUME: Mort, let me ask you this question, in terms of the politics of this.
First of all, two questions -- one, how many of these -- these people protesting out there today who were illegal will ever be deported? And how many of them will end up voting?
KONDRACKE: Well, if...
HUME: And I don't ask for -- just most, many, what?
KONDRACKE: No. Well, I don't -- if they are illegal, it's going to be very hard for them to vote, unless they are cheating. You know, so, some -- somebody has got to facilitate...
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: I'm talking about ending up, in the long run?
KONDRACKE: Well, how many of them are going to...
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: End up voting.
KONDRACKE: ... get kicked out?
I don't think a lot of them are going to end up voting. You know, I don't -- I don't see that there's...
HUME: What do you think, Mara?
LIASSON: Well, if they are illegal, they can't vote.
HUME: I understand that.
(CROSSTALK)
LIASSON: You're talking about the immigrants...
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: In the long run, how many of these are going to end up as voters in America?
LIASSON: In the long run, they will -- you mean how many of them will become citizens and end up voting?
HUME: Yes.
LIASSON: I think, in the long run, plenty of them, in the very long run, yes.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: Now, so, if you're -- if she is right -- and I think that's a long-term calculation. Not tomorrow, not next week...
LIASSON: Long term.
HUME: ... not next year, maybe, in the long term, if you're a politician, which side of this tide do you want to be on? That's the question I...
KONDRACKE: Well, look, I think -- I -- President Bush, I think, is on the right side politically and morally, you know, and -- and administratively or effectively, to -- to make this a regular process, so you don't have people being rousted from their jobs or their homes and kicked out of the country or denied employment...
HUME: Or not.
KONDRACKE: ... or -- or not, what -- whatever it is that the restrictionists want to do.
What they want to do is -- is so chill the employment situation, that these people will somehow go back home. That -- that's just not going to happen. They are not going to -- they are not going to do that. It will probably just depress wages all the more.
HUME: Their message, Fred, is -- their message, Fred, is -- and they sought to show it today, not by the boycott, not just of the work, but of also establishments that they patronize -- was...
BARNES: Yes.
HUME: ... you need us.
BARNES: Yes.
HUME: Are they right?
BARNES: Well, we certainly need their employment.
And, yes. No, I think they are basically right. In L.A., some of the left-wing groups have taken over the -- that -- that immigrant movement. But, you know, I talked to a couple of lobbyists in favor of a very liberal immigration reform bill. And they -- they were not at all concerned about any of these demonstrations. They figure, one-day affair, go away. It's the -- the dynamics on politics...
LIASSON: Yes.
BARNES: ... on the floor of the House and the Senate that will...
LIASSON: Well...
(CROSSTALK)
BARNES: ... determine what kind of a bill is passed.
(CROSSTALK)
LIASSON: And, look, you know, just in the short term...
HUME: Quickly.
LIASSON: ... politics are different. You know, I -- I will say this again. Prop 187 helped reelect Pete Wilson. And, in the long run, it cost him -- cost Republicans the state of California.
HUME: That was a restrictive immigration measure...
LIASSON: Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: ... in California.
All right.
When we come back with our panel, Secretary of State Powell says he tried to warn the president he was not sending enough troops. The president got a progress report on Iraq today. We will talk about both next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The president's military advisers felt that the size of the force was adequate. And they may still feel that, years later. Some of us don't. I don't. And I have said that.
But, at the time, the president was listening to those who were supposed to be providing him military advice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUME: Well, a couple of things. ITV1, that's a British network. He was being interviewed by a British journalist.
And he says: I have said that.
Well, I guess we all just heard him say it, so it's true now.
(LAUGHTER)
HUME: But it was -- and it was widely thought at the time that he -- that Colin Powell had thought there ought to be more troops, but he didn't say it publicly until now that I know of.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: What about all this?
LIASSON: Well, you can -- you can -- look, you can -- if you are a conservative who thinks Colin Powell has been disloyal, you could say, here is a prime example of it.
Or, if you think that he actually was a loyal soldier, and didn't speak out publicly at the time, because he thought his -- his job was not to do that, certainly, he -- there is historic evidence for him feeling that way. He does believe in the Powell doctrine.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: Yes, it's his doctrine.
LIASSON: Well, it was his doctrine.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: Overwhelming...
LIASSON: Yes, overwhelming force, right.
HUME: ... boots-on-the-ground force.
LIASSON: Right, which -- which -- and he says -- he does not say, oh, the president was given all sorts of contrary advice, and Rumsfeld didn't take it.
He actually confirms what the administration has been saying, which is, we took the advice of the military commanders, which is -- that's the level of troops that they felt they needed.
But he does paint himself as a dissenting -- as a dissenter.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: And the headlines, of course, are, Powell says...
LIASSON: Yes.
HUME: ... he was for more troops.
LIASSON: Right.
BARNES: Right.
KONDRACKE: Well, I talked to somebody close to Powell today, who said that Powell did not think that he was going to make news today, that this was not, you know, some -- some grand revelation.
He -- they claim that -- that he has said this before, although I don't know where. But it is -- it is true that, in Tommy Franks' book, there is an extensive description of how he went to -- to Franks and talked to him about how: I don't think you have got enough troops.
And then Franks went to Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld called a meeting in front of the president. And they went through the -- the -- the argument.
And Powell said: I think you -- you need more troops -- and, obviously was overruled.
I mean, on the merits, I think, in hindsight, he is absolutely right. I mean, you know, we didn't have enough troops to capture the -- the munitions of the -- of the Iraqi army, to secure the -- the various ministries, and stuff like that.
So, and I -- you know, he wasn't exactly out there, the way his former chief of staff has been, Larry Wilkerson, who has been, you know, blasting the administration. He didn't call for Rumsfeld's resignation or anything like that. I think this was a -- kind of a historical footnote.
BARNES: I don't know what -- I don't know what you're talking about: We didn't have enough troops to take over the ministries.
They took over all the -- all the ministries. I don't know. It's never...
KONDRACKE: They were -- they were ransacked.
BARNES: Yes. Yes, nobody is -- what, because of looting?
KONDRACKE: They were ransacked.
(CROSSTALK)
BARNES: No, no.
The problem there with the looting was that they hadn't expected it at all. It wasn't the number of troops...
KONDRACKE: Well...
BARNES: ... in town. They all stood back.
They were never going to -- they weren't going to stop it. It came as a complete shock to them. You know, they had -- it was just a miscalculation. They didn't believe that was going to happen. It -- it really never occurred to them.
What the -- it has never been proved to me what these troops would do. Mort thinks they would have stopped the looting. I don't. So, I -- I -- you know, I think we have to go along with General Franks and General Abizaid, who still thinks that -- I mean, General Abizaid, the CENTCOM commander, who is the guy in charge, after all, wants the light footprint. He wants American troops not to be all -- all that heavy in occupation.
One more thing: General -- not -- Secretary of State Colin Powell's advice in other areas wasn't all that great. He is the guy that got the president to go to the U.N. That turned out to be a disaster, going there. And what I have always thought is, I never understood why General Powell didn't go to Turkey and convince the Turks that the 4th Infantry Division had to -- should go...
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: You mean physically go to Turkey?
BARNES: Yes. Yes. He never went there. Physically go to Turkey.
And, I mean, here he was, this -- this esteemed figure in the American administration, probably the most popular figure outside of the United States in -- in the Bush administration, to convince the Turks to let the 4th Infantry Division go through Turkey, come down from the north, and go right into the Sunni Triangle. Now, that, I think, would have a lot -- it would have done something.
HUME: Been more troops.
BARNES: Huh?
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: Would have been more troops.
(CROSSTALK)
LIASSON: Well, more troops ultimately came in. They had to come back around and go up through Kuwait and so on. But they would have been there early on.
And I think it would have -- have helped stop the insurgency from really getting organized.
LIASSON: So, you are saying we probably needed more troops at that time.
(CROSSTALK)
KONDRACKE: Yes. Exactly. I mean, that sounds like your argument.
BARNES: Those troops came in anyway. Those weren't additional troops.
KONDRACKE: But they weren't...
(CROSSTALK)
KONDRACKE: Look, this, the issue of how many troops we needed, has been a continuing theme here.
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: It's the only -- it seems to be the only issue.
(CROSSTALK)
BARNES: Yes.
HUME: Paul Bremer has argued -- argued during -- when he was there, that we needed -- that we shouldn't withdraw troops as fast as the Pentagon wanted.
John McCain has been saying, we need more troops.
BARNES: Yes.
KONDRACKE: And I think they are right.
| Sponsored Links |