Special Report Roundtable - October 23

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), ILLINOIS: I am still at the point where I have not made a decision to pursue higher office, but it is true that I have thought about it over the last several months.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: Barack Obama on with Tim Russert, yesterday. You heard a little bit of Tim there at the end.

Some analytical thoughts about this now from Fred Barnes, executive editor of the Weekly Standard; Mort Kondracke, executive editor for Roll Call; and the syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer, FOX NEWS contributors all.

MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: I'm Mort.

HUME: Oh, did I say that? This is Mara Liasson, folks, she's the national political correspondent of national political radio. Sorry about that, Mara. I consider that a promotion for Mort.

What about, when a guy says what he just said, what does that usually mean?

FRED BARNES, WEEKLY STANDARD: He's going to run.

HUME: Let's look at a little bit of the taste of the kind of attention he's been getting. Time magazine cover -- he's not running in `06, but there you see he's on the cover of Time magazine and there's a promotion on the cover of Harper's magazine for an article about him. Harper's is not unfriendly to liberal Democrats. So, what does this say about him, about the `08 situation, at the moment, and about the two parties generally, if anything?

BARNES: Well, it says he's charming and charismatic and says that the 2008 race among Democrats for the presidential nomination is not Hillary's to grab on her own. I think it should -- his emergence, as some guy who's enormously popular with Democrats, and of course he's been all around the country, says he's had this excuse of he's coming out with a book and it should one, scare Hillary Clinton, because I think he'd be a strong candidate against her.

And two, it should raise some interest with Al Gore, because look, somebody is going to merge -- there's going to be Hillary and there's going to be the anti-Hilary candidate, ultimately, in the Democratic primaries. If Al Gore is going to run, he better get in there quickly or his territory, the anti-Hillary territory, might be taken up Barack Obama.

LIASSON: Yeah look, I think it goes -- it says something, as Fred said, about the incredible kind of rock star appeal he has. He's created the biggest buzz in the Democratic field of anybody. He has an incredibly compelling personal story and yes, there is no credible alternative to Hillary and there are a lot of Democrats who feel she's not electable in there should be one. And who is it going to be?

Mark Warner stepped off the scene a week ago. And it was on that day that I started hearing more and more about Barack Obama. I do think, though, I mean, you almost have to laugh when you read about this. I mean, he just got elected and the thought that he would actually be the nominee of his party after having never even won re-election to the Senate is pretty unusual. But, look, he is a riding a wave, maybe he'd be crazy to not at least take advantage of this incredible buzz around him, at least for the moment.

HUME: Another words, if the great mentioner is mentioning you, let him.

LIASSON: Why not let him? Yes.

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: And he should, look, he's got a lot on his side. As Fred indicated, he's extremely attractive personally; there area a lot of people in the country, including me, who would love to see an African-American president as a way -- a great moment in the civil rights revolution, where (ph) African-Americans have their place in American society -- deserve a place, rightful place in American society. And lastly, because the `08 election is the first since 1952, which is really open. You don't have a president or incumbent or vice president running. But, he.

HUME: In either party.

KRAUTHAMMER: In either party. It's not happening in over half a century, but he doesn't have a chance of being elected and the reason is 9/11. We're at war. We're not going to elect a man who's been in national office two years as commander in chief.

Look, when John Kennedy thought of running the first time for a national office, as a freshman senator, he only aimed for the vice presidency in 1956 and he'd already served two in the Congress. He was a war hero, he knew a lot about national security.

Obama offers nothing on that front. If were in peacetime, he'd have a chance. There's no way he'd be elected, but he ought to run because, like Kennedy in `56, if you go for high office, you do reasonably well. And if he ends up as No. 2 on the ticket, which is a plausible eventuality, he'd be a natural. He'd have the experience he'd need. He'd gather it and he'd be a presidential candidate in eight years after that.

BARNES: Look, I think times have changed a lot. He is nominatable, he doesn't have to settle for No. 2. Look, I'm not saying he's going to run, but I think he could win the presidential nomination. And Democrats remember -- Republicans usually nominate the next guy in line. The Democrats, their primaries are much more wide open, that's how George McGovern came in and Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. The front runner doesn't always win.

HUME: All right, let's turn our attention, just briefly, to the situation in the current race for control of the U.S. Congress. There are a couple of polls that were kicking around. One of them involving the Maryland Senate race, Ben Cardin and Michael Steele. Michael Steele an African-American, as been considered an attractive candidate, the one who appear to be down on the polls, unlikely to win. Then all of a sudden a poll comes out toward the end of the week that suggests that the race may be a tie.

Similarly, down in Tennessee, the man who is considered to be Barack Obama's, sort of, competition, to bet the leading young African-American politician in the Democratic party running for that open seat down there, had appeared to be well ahead or at least comfortably ahead for a while. That race supposedly closing.

What about those two races? Because they could me the difference -- both of them -- if Steele were to come back and Corker were to win, that would pretty much foreclose Democrat hopes of -- the Democratic Party hopes of retaining the Senate. What do you think?

LIASSON: Certainly would, but I haven't talked to any Republicans who think that Maryland really is a possibility. Tennessee, they do think that they could hang onto.

BARNES: It's a possibility. I mean, Steele's within a half dozen points or less. The poll you cited showed even. That's probably not the case. Steele is one of the most interesting candidates, he's had the best ads, funny ads. Cardin is kind of a dreary guy, a respected Democratic house member, though. So, Steele could win.

Look, there's only one reason why Michael Steele hasn't gotten the attention that Harold Ford has, he's a Republican.

All right -- Charles.

KRAUTHAMMER: And that's why, even though he's doing well, his ads are great, he's a very attractive candidate. Maryland is a blue state. I live in Maryland. It's hard to see how he'd win, but I think he'll exceed expectations a lot. But Tennessee is a dead heat and I'm not sure which way that's going to go right now.

HUME: Mara, what do think of Tennessee -- quickly.

LIASSON: I think the Republicans have a chance to pull that out. Still, it's a toss up.

BARNES: I do, too. But Steele, if he gets 25 percent of the black vote, he wins.

HUME: OK, let's take a break here. When we're back, we'll look at the White House's response to that New York Times story in Iraq that's got everybody so stirred up. Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN BARTLETT, COUNSELOR TO THE PRESIDENT: This is something that has been well underway for weeks if not months, to set up very identifiable milestones or benchmarks, or whatever you want to call it, both on the security front and on the political front for the new Iraqi government to take more control over their country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: What he's talking about, Dan Bartlett, is a story that ran in Sunday's edition of the New York Times that said that not only was the administration considering setting up some benchmarks for achievements by the Iraqi government, but also would have a timetable for the achievement of those benchmarks or else. The timetable side of that has been quite strongly denied by the administration, but it has caused a discussion as only the New York Times can.

Back with our panel on this issue. Now, what's going on here -- Fred.

BARNES: Well look, the administration -- wants the Iraqi government to do a not more, that's for sure. Maliki, is now -- who -- the prime minister has not been able to stop the violence. He's in a situation where he's stuck with the Shiite coalition that he heads that can't reach agreement with the Sunnis. I mean, what you obviously need is some sort of an overall agreement that brings in the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis. But what they have to is they have to work out how do you share the oil revenues, how do you roll back some of the de-Baathification program, and the Shiite coalition doesn't want to do that..

HUME: How long have those things bee out there as goals known to the U.S. and known to Maliki.

BARNES: Well, I would say, ever since the war itself ended back in 2003.

LIASSON: Yeah, I mean, look, everybody says, there's not a military solution to this, it has to be a political solution and what Fred just said is what has to happen. And I don't think that the Maliki government needs some kind of a threat to know that what it has to do. I don't think it can achieve that. And I think right now, the discussion that everyone.

HUME: It can't or won't?

LIASSON: I think it's a combination of both. I don't think it's able to do that. There's not the political will on the part of Shiites to truly share power with the Sunnis and there's not the ability on the part of the Sunnis to accept being out of control after so many years of running the country.

KRAUTHAMMER: I believe that we're trying to do milestones is a way to set not deadlines, but sort of the timetable for achieving these results -- the reconciliation, the offer to the Sunnis, but it's not working. Milestones is what you do when things are improving, as we did when -- at the beginning where we had election, constitution, and transfer of power, et cetera. But things are deteriorating. Milestones is not what ought to be happening here.

The Maliki government has been in office half a year, which was essentially what we had thought about. When it took office in the Spring, it's going to have half a year to work out its agenda and to get things moving. It's not acting, it's a failure. And the reason is structural. It's composed of elements in the Shiite coalition, some of whom are at war with each other as we saw in the film from Amara where you had one party, the al Sadr's against the -- another.

HUME: Yeah, Badr Brigade

KRAUTHAMMER: The Badr Brigade. Actually had war with each other. So you have an insurgency, you've got Sunnis against Shiites and Shiites against each other.

HUME: So, does this sound like Maliki, in your judgment, can turn around if he decides to act?

KRAUTHAMMER: With his government now, no. You have to have a new government, with a new coalition excluding the Sadr and including Sunnis.

HUME: Any chance that'll happen -- Mara.

LIASSON: I don't think so, I mean, Maliki is absolutely dependent upon Sadr for -- in power. They have about 30 seats in Parliament.

BARNES: Well, he does now, but if he goes to a different coalition that will have some Shiites, some Sunnis, and some Kurds, you could have a majority coalition, but it will take leadership by Maliki and he showed very little.