2008 Polls National Iowa New Hampshire General Election GOP | Dem GOP | Dem GOP | Dem Head-to-Head

---

September 05, 2006

Special Report Roundtable - September 5

FOX News Special Report With Brit Hume

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Bin Laden and his allies are absolutely convinced they can succeed in forcing America to retreat and causing our economic collapse. They believe our nation is weak and decadent and lacking in patience and resolve, and they're wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: In support of that argument, the president today presented a newly declassified document in the form of a letter from bin Laden to Mullah Omar, remember him, the former Taliban boss of Afghanistan -- in which he outlined a number of objectives suggesting they would do everything they could to defeat the United States anywhere and he argued that Iraq, where al Qaeda is as busy as ever, is now, as he has said before, a central front in the war on terror. Democrats said just the opposite.

Some thoughts on this now from Fred Barnes, executive editor of the "Weekly Standard"; Mort Kondracke, executive editor of the "Roll Call"; and Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, FOX NEWS contributors all.

Well, this is a case the president has been making or trying to for a long time. He had a little bit of new ammunition today, nothing major. Is this a makeable case, or is the public decided it doesn't buy this, and is it too late -- Mara.

MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: I think it's potentially a makeable case, although I think it's an uphill climb. I think what the president tried to describe to the country is a theme he stressed before, which is, this is like World War II, we're facing kind of an Islamic fascist enemy, and I think that on that, I think he could get a lot of people to agree with him. I think the thing he didn't address is this speech and what the Democrats are harping is that problems in Iraq, which top military officials have said are civil war right now, not just the insurgency, he doesn't necessarily have an answer for that, and they are focusing on the fact that the policies aren't working. What he's trying to focus on is his political opponents want to leave earlier than he does.

MORT KONDRACKE, "ROLL CALL": On the points that he was making today that we face this menace from al Qaeda, from Sunni extremism, he didn't use Islam-fascism by the way, today.

LIASSON: But he has in the past.

KONDRACKE: He has in the past. That plays very badly, by the way, in the world and the State Department.

HUME: Oh, dear.

KONDRACKE: Well, I know, but nonetheless, State Department has been telling the White House that that's not a good term. So anyway, I don't know whether it's off or it's on, but in any event, that is the fact and that's been going on. But he didn't use those terms. But, I think that on the issue of are we faced with a menace from al Qaeda and from Iran? I think that there's point.

HUME: Everybody agreed on that.

KONDRACKE: Yeah, exactly, everybody agrees on that, now his -- see...

HUME: If that's true, what about the id -- can you win in a struggle against al Qaeda and its allies if you run away from the fight in Iraq?

KONDRACKE: I think not, but that is the issue that he is not seemingly able to convince people of, because the -- I mean, the public does not want to pull out of Iraq.

HUME: Immediately.

KONDRACKE: Immediately, but it wants to go out.

HUME: But it doesn't like the war at all, it's hugely unpopular.

KONDRACKE: Exactly. And he -- and even though, I think that it's -- that Iraq is the central front because these bad guys say it is and because if we pull out, we will lose to them as well as to the insurgents in Iraq, but that case doesn't seem to be going over.

As to the Democrats, I must say, one, don't give Bush any credit for anything that has happened since 9/11. Not the, you know, not the elimination of Afghanistan as a base or anything else, and they have no counterstrategy themselves.

FRED BARNES, "WEEKLY STANDARD": That's what struck me. The Democrats have some report that some group you never heard of turned out, saying how things are much worse and they harped on that, but what are they going to do? I mean they -- it's gotten worse in North Korea. Well, what's their strategy? I don't know what -- they didn't mention one. They're worse in Iran. And it's true. Obviously Iran is more threatening today on the verge of getting nuclear weapons than it was five years ago or six years ago. So, what's their strategy? Well talk, maybe. The only things I can draw from it is they're in favor of talking to bad guys and they want to get out of Iraq, other than that -- and they went through all these different national security issues, had no idea of what their strategy was if they have one.

(CROSSTALK)

LIASSON: Yeah but the president also.

KONDRACKE: The one thing that would be convincing to me is if they want to pull out of Iraq, and they said, we're going to deploy the forces that we pull out of Iraq in Afghanistan and we're going to finish the job there, we're going to capture bin Laden, we're going to wipe out the Taliban and all that kind of stuff, that would -- now that would be something, that would be an arresting point, but I have not heard one Democrat say that.

LIASSON: Yeah, and on the other hand, President Bush isn't offering a strategy to make Iraq work, other than just staying there. I mean, there's a -- if there's a burgeoning civil war, he hasn't laid out exactly how American forces will prevent that.

(CROSSTALK)

KONDRACKE: We are trying to pacify Baghdad. I don't think we've got enough troops to do it, but that's what he's trying to do.

BARNES: He certainly does have a strategy in Iraq and it either works or doesn't. But it's not that he doesn't have a strategy. And look, I think that poll question about, well, do you think Iraq is a part of the war on terror and so on -- the answer is utterly meaningless. It means nothing. I mean, there's nothing the Democrats can make out of that. Most people think, look, they're a bunch of terrorists overseas and we have these terrorists who were the 9/11 type and then we have Iraq and there are also some terrorists there, they may not be the same thing, but it's a poll question that brings out something.

HUME: I know, but you say it's a meaningless poll question.

BARNES: It's fundamentally meaningless.

HUME: I know that, but if the whole question were as meaningless as you suggest it is and suggested the polling on it is, then why do you have the president seeking continually to make this case, because don't you think that.

BARNES: Because the war is unpopular and he's trying to make the war more popular.

HUME: Well, exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

HUME: Well, how can what the public thinks of his argument be meaningless?

BARNES: The -- ah -- look -- look, uh, uh, the public doesn't want to withdraw, they know there're terrorists there. That's why they don't want to withdraw, they don't want to reward the terrorists there.

LIASSON: Or Iran which, which is another thing that will happen.

HUME: When he come back with the panel, Congress gets back to work this week and we'll talk about what they're likely to work on -- with the all-stars in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL FRIST (R-TN), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: Mr. President, as you can see, we have a lot on our plate. Bipartisan support on each of these issues is absolutely necessary. It's election time and the tendency is to make everything political. For the American people, we need to rise above this.

HARRY REID (D-NV), SENATE MINORITY LEADER: If Republicans want to work with Democrats during the next four weeks to address their mistakes on national security, we welcome that. It's about time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: (LAUGHING) Well, you get the idea, folks. On the other hand, the agenda that the Republicans are going to focus on is one centered on national security, not that national security isn't important, but it's also useful to them politically to have it focused on an issue where they're seen as strong, or believe they're being seen in strong. Democrats, well, you get the idea, but nonetheless, is there's a likelihood that some of these things, such as those that Major Garrett mentioned earlier in the broadcast, legislation dealing with legitimizing and making Guantanamo's operation OK and other national security legislation likely to pass?

LIASSON: Well, it's possible. I mean, if they can find a consensus on these issue the problem is that they've turned to national security because they weren't willing to go forward, or at least they in the House Weren't willing to go forward on some other issues like immigration, which is actually an issue where there was incredible bipartisan consensus in the Senate if not in the House and they haven't been able to move forward on that.

HUME: You do need it in both Houses in America.

LIASSON: You need it in both Houses, but at least, you know, in the Senate, there was, and they've dropped that, there are quite other big domestic issues that they have tried to do in the past and have failed: Social Security, immigration, and now they're left with national security, which as you said is one that benefits the Republicans. So I think yeah, they could make some progress if they're willing to make compromises. The question is do they want.

HUME: Do they have to make many compromises to put these bills through, or do they get to have it both ways, they either get the issue to beat the Democrats with in the election or they get the legislation passed.

LIASSON: In some case, but in Guantanamo, there are plenty of Republicans who have concerns, so I think on that one some compromise is required.

KONDRACKE: Yeah, the -- there's -- a number of these things will pass for sure, like the Defense Department appropriation, that's got to pass. The homeland security appropriation, that will pass, and I think that the - - it will be beefed up to the point where they can.

HUME: Authorizing the eavesdropping program.

KONDRACKE: Now there, I think, the question is, what are the Republicans going to serve up that the Democrats won't swallow that can be used against them in the 2006 election, and I think that is the likeliest candidate, because Arlen Specter, the judiciary chairman.

HUME: Now this would be a bill that would says that this program intercept what the administration says is al Qaeda phone calls into and out of the United States in which American citizens do get listened in on in some instances, is OK, this would authorize that? Your view is the Democrats will vote against that?

KONDRACKE: Well, the Democrats object to the blanket treatment of these. In other words, what the Democrats want is that every single time the administration wants to wiretap somebody, or intercept something, that they should have to go to the FISA court to get the authorization for it...

LIASSON: Not necessarily in advance.

KONDRACKE: Well, in any event, every single case has to be an authorization. What the administration wants is a blanket provision that these things would be in the clear, that they would be legal, and that's the issue upon which the Demo.

(CROSSTALK)

HUME: So you anticipate a fight on that?

KONDRACKE: I.

HUME: How will that play out -- Fred.

BARNES: Well, look, the Democrats really don't want to vote for anything the Republicans anyway, I mean, Nancy Pelosi's idea in the House of Representatives is no bipartisanship at all, now co-sponsoring everything, fight everything, reject everything. Harry Reid goes around talking about what's the big issue? The do-nothing Congress. He's not going to help out.

One thing that may happen, though, is John Bolton may be confirmed permanently as the U.N. ambassador. Actually he needs all the Republican votes he can get, Chuck Hagel came out for him today and he's got a lot better chance than he did a year ago when he got a recess appointment.

HUME: So anything else?

KONDRACKE: No look, the -- the.

HUME: If this happens the way you describe, Mort, and Democrats resist on this -- on this so-called wiretapping program, who wins politically?

KONDRACKE: See, I think Iraq trumps terrorism. I just do. I mean.

(CROSSTALK)

HUME: Who wins on that issue?

LIASSON: Who wins.

(CROSSTALK)

KONDRACKE: Well of course, on that issue, the Republicans will win. But I don't think they can win the way that issue.

HUME: I don't mean they can win the election on that, but.

LIASSON: That one issue.

BARNES: Well, of course they win.

KONDRACKE: Of they win because the country.

HUME: So they get a little help out of this agenda is that what...

LIASSON: But that's about it, though. On wiretapping, unlike anything else about the war on terrorism or Iraq, the polls have consistently shown the people are willing to give the president a pretty wide -- pretty broad.

HUME: Quickly.

BARNES: The Republicans need to stir up their own people raising judicial nominations helps.

---

Sponsored Links

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