---

May 10, 2006

Special Report Roundtable - May 10

FOX News Special Report With Brit Hume

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONDOLEEZZA RICE, SECRETARY OF STATE: There will be action in the Security Council, but we're going to take action in the Security Council and while we're pursuing the course in the Security Council and there will be action in the Security Council. I'm optimistic we're going to have action in the Security Council.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: That was Condoleezza Rice and that was all of one interview this morning. So if anybody doubted the secretary of state is quite optimistic about getting action in the Security Council on Iran, well, there it was for you and in several different versions. In addition to her optimism, we have an assertion by one of her predecessors, Madeleine Albright which is worth a look today.

She says with regard to the Ahmadinejad letter, "The United States would be wise to counter the Iranian nuclear threat with direct talks." Quote, "'It's not appeasement, you have got to deliver a tough message,'" she says, " with the U.S. military already `overstretched,' she said `the last thing we need is to invade another country.'"

And she also went on to say, that was from the "Seattle Post Intelligencer," "Though difficult to hear, the story says, the issues raised by Ahmadinejad are `not irrelevant. Rather than thinking it's a clash of civilizations, I think we are in a battle of ideas.'"

So we have a tale of two secretaries of state tonight. Some observations from Fred Barnes, executive editor of the "Weekly Standard." Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio and the syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer, Fox News contributors, all.

So what about this Rice optimism and the Albright assertions? Fred?

FRED BARNES, "WEEKLY STANDARD": I don't think Albright read the letter from Ahmadinejad or she wouldn't have said that. Is somebody supposed to go and explain the basis for Israel's right to exist to Ahmadinejad or go tell him that gee, American securities were not involved in 9/11? This letter was an accusation, it was an attack on the Bush administration, anyway. I think she's way off base on that.

Here's why I think Condoleezza Rice is optimistic, remains optimistic about actually getting the Iranian's to flinch short of the military option having to be exercised. I think she believes, one, diplomacy will work. Two that .

HUME: Meaning what, there will be .

BARNES: Ultimately. That there's time to play out the diplomatic card and, in other words, that it will be a few years before the Iranians have a nuclear weapon. Diplomacy will work, that Iran, unlike North Korea, can be isolated. I mean, it's an open country, a generally open country. Iranian Americans go back all the time to see their relatives, there's commerce with Europe and India and so on. You can't isolate North Korea any more than it's isolated but you can isolate Iran and I think she believe she believes as you play this out, others like even China and Russia will join the U.S. so you will get some sort of serious resolution from the Security Council or a new coalition of the willing that will impose some severe economic sanctions if the Iranians don't back down and then they will flinch. I think that's why she believes. And that's why she doesn't mention the military option. She doesn't, President Bush doesn't, nobody in the administration does.

MARA LIASSON, NPR: That's clearly what she believes. And I guess it makes me a little worried when someone says over and over again that they're optimistic. Almost as if they're convincing themselves. The fact is, that might be what she believes. We haven't seen any sign of that yet, the Chinese and the Russians don't want sanctions.

HUME: For a while it was thought you couldn't get the matter before the Security Council, remember?

LIASSON: That's right. I'm not saying it's been a total loss.

HUME: It isn't really fair to say there have been no signs.

LIASSON: No, absolutely. OK. There have been not been no signs. However, you have today the Russian ambassador to the UN saying we're going in a different direction, given Tehran a package of incentives, not sanctions. They don't want sanctions. Now if you're going to put together a coalition of the willing to impose sanctions, skip having the Security Council impose them. China is a very big important purchaser of Iranian oil and if they're not on board, I wonder what kind of sanctions you're going to design that will really isolate Iran in the way it would .

HUME: So you don't see why she's so optimistic?

LIASSON: Not yet. Not yet.

HUME: What do you think, Charles? Why do you think she's optimistic?

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Because if you can get China and Russia to abstain and you keep the western Europeans in with us, you can end up with significant sanctions. And what I think is pernicious about the Albright statement is that by calling for bilateral talks between the U.S. and Iran, which I said last night is now starting to be the chorus of the defeatists here and abroad, it's not only incredibly critical but undermine our diplomacy.

HUME: Why is it hypocritical?

KRAUTAMMER: It's hypocritical because Albright and the Democrats on the left here and in Europe have been attacking the administration for five years for unilateralism. On the ABM treaty, on Kyoto, on Iraq. You have to work, remember, what Kerry would say over and over again with the French and the Germans and the Europeans.

So on Iran, that's exactly what the United States had done. The administration two years ago wanted to act on Iranian infractions. Instead it gave the ball to France and Germany and Britain and they've carried it after two years of our patience, they have concluded that Iran is cheating and that there has to be international action. To now recommend that America abandon all of that, we give up the only thing to come out of these three years of negotiations, which is the west Europeans had a stake in these negotiations in helping us and not imposing sanctions. Once you abandon the multilateral process and end up with American negotiations with Iran, all the blame will be on us, the West Europeans will be off the hook on sanctions. And end up a disaster. And for a former secretary of state to advocate that at a critical time in this diplomacy, to undermine our position is, let me look for a diplomatic word, disgraceful.

BARNES: Well, it is. The key thing .

HUNE: Quickly.

BARNES: . is I don't think Mara quite understands about the secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, she thinks there's time that we don't need to have sanctions imposed tomorrow. That the Security Council doesn't have to act. They're talking months even years, but when you can build up support and then really apply some severe sanctions.

LIASSON: We hear from all the experts is we don't know how far Iran is away from the bomb. It could be five years, 10 years or less than five.

BARNES: The administration thinks it's somewhere four or five years.

KRAUTHAMMER: But our whole policy has been to go the extra mile and that means new negotiations now and not an American unilateral approach.

HUME: When we come back with the panel, Katherine Harris, Katherine Harris stands now alone in the Republican effort to unseat Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson. Yet Republicans claim she doesn't have a chance, or some have said that. Stay tuned for that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEB BUSH, FLORIDA GOVERNOR: I'm going to support the Republican nominee and if she is the nominee, sure. If there is no one else filing, she will get the support of all godfearing Republicans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: Well, that represented a bit of a change of tune for the distinguished governor of Florida and the president's brother who has been saying until today that Katherine Harris should not run for the Senate seat now held by Bill Nelson who is up for re-election and someone else should.

The candidate he was backing decided he didn't want to go and Katherine Harris now stands alone as the Republican candidate for the Senate and Governor Bush said she couldn't win before and now he says it's too early to tell what will happen. Godfearing Republicans will rally to her side. What about this race, Charles? And are we once again -- we wouldn't be the first to do this -- underestimating Katherine Harris?

KRAUTHAMMER: I think her problem now, her political problem is there may not be enough Republicans in Florida who have the fear of God in them, and that could be a fatal campaign deficit on her part.

Look, she had her moment in the sun in the year 2000 and she got a bum wrap from the media. She actually did her job and followed the law as it was and not as it should have been. And at least out of that moment she got herself a House seat and two terms. But that's it. And the idea that .

HUME: You think she's got no chance?

KRAUTHAMMER: She has got no chance and everyone knows it except Katherine Harris. That's why .

HUME: They said she had no chance for the nomination, Charles.

KRAUTHAMMER: Look. You only get a 1,000-1 shot once in life. Not twice. You win the lottery once and she got it on the House seats and got very lucky that she's not going to have a challenger. She's going to get thrashed and the Republicans will suffer because it's a seat that potentially Republicans might hold.

LIASSON: And it's a seat they really wanted to get. Look, I saw that clip from Jeb Bush. He could barely keep a straight face and I would say if the Republicans have any sense of humor about their political problems this year, this is the race to laugh about to stop from crying. Because when you read the stories about her campaign, you couldn't make these up. The $2,800 dinner with the defense contractor who is connected with Duke Cunningham. Her promotion of something called celestial drops to cute citrus canker. And then there was the speech about the foiled terrorist plot that didn't exist. There's been one story after another. And Jeb Bush said flatly a couple days ago, she can't win. And I think that is the consensus of Republicans and that's why they tried so hard to recruit somebody else in the first place and then even just up until the last minute, the filing deadline is Friday to get somebody else. So I think that, you know, their assessment is that she's a polarizing figure and does more to bring out Democrats against her then she does -- even though she has some core-committed supporters, than to bring out Republicans more.

BARNES: Hey, there are two more days to find a candidate. You know what, Allan Bense who was a house speaker and who is now term-limited and wants to go back to Panama City, Florida rather than run for the senate race, they tried him early and tried him last week, they tried him late. And I think it surprised some of them that he said no. I talked to Jeb Bush last week and was in Florida interviewing him for a story I'm doing about him and I asked him why didn't he run for the Senate and he has no interest. I happened to run into his lieutenant governor, Tony Jennings (ph), she says she has no interest. And two obvious candidates, Charlie Chris (ph), the attorney general, and Tom Gallagher (ph), who's won statewide, they're running for governor. That's an open seat. They'd rather be governor. You think of other people, Adam Putnam, the young congressman, he's doing well in the House.

HUME: He's very well-spoken. I've seen him in action on C-SPAN.

BARNES: He's moving up in the House hierarchy Republican leadership so he doesn't want to run. And others - we used to use this excuse that she can raise so much money but the fact is she's not doing very well in fundraising.

HUME: So she's toast.

BARNES: I don't know she's toast but it certainly doesn't look good. Bill Nelson is vulnerable and yet he is beating her by 30 or 40 points in the polls. So this is a disaster for the republicans and their margin for error is smaller in the races in 2006. I mean, this fall, if they could win this race and it would almost assure they wouldn't lose control of the Senate and here they're conceding.

KRAUTHAMMER: She's a longer shot than Seabiscuit was early in his career.

HUME: And she's farther along in her career than Seabiscuit was in his.

---

Sponsored Links

About Us | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy         © RealClearPolitics 2006