CNN Europe CNN Asia
On CNN TV Transcripts Headline News CNN International About Preferences
powered by Yahoo!
Return to Transcripts main page


Are There To Many Medical Lawsuits? Anti-War Ads Are Revivied; Weapons Inspectors Find Warheads

Aired January 16, 2003 - 16:00   ET



ANNOUNCER: The White House declares a medical emergency, and President Bush prescribes the cure.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There are too many lawsuits in America, and there are too many lawsuits filed against doctors and hospitals without merit.

ANNOUNCER: A coincidence or a campaign attack? Mr. Bush is pointing a finger at the former profession of a Democrat who wants his job.

War and remembrance: on the 12th anniversary of Desert Storm, Iraq hears new warnings about war.

HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: The situation is very tense, and very dangerous.

ANNOUNCER: A new twist on one of the most famous political ads ever.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Maybe it will spread. Maybe (UNINTELLIGIBLE).


ANNOUNCER: Live, from Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS with Judy Woodruff.

WOODRUFF: Thank you for joining us. Well, at least one U.N. official says that a discovery by U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq today does not appear to be a smoking gun. They found 11 empty chemical warheads in excellent condition outside of Baghdad, and another that's requiring more evaluation.

In this "NewsCycle," Iraq says these warheads are not a violation of the U.N. weapons ban.


GEN. HUSSAM AMIN, IRAQI NATIONAL MONITORING DIRECTORATE: It is neither chemical, neither biological. It is empty warheads, it is small (UNINTELLIGIBLE) rockets, it is expired rockets, and they were forgotten without any intention to use them, because they were expired ten years ago.


WOODRUFF: Also today, U.N. teams searched private homes in Iraq, a first in their weapons hunt. A physicist questioned went off with inspectors carrying a bulging box of documents.

Meantime, "TIME" magazine has an exclusive report that Saudi leaders hope to avoid war in Iraq by encouraging Saddam Hussein's generals to overthrow him. Let us bring in our White House correspondent, Suzanne Malveaux -- Suzanne, some at the U.N. are saying this is not the smoking gun. What are they saying there?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the White House is not calling this discovery a smoking gun, but the Bush administration is encouraged by what they see as mounting evidence against Saddam Hussein.

President Bush arrived at the White House just a couple of hours ago from a brief trip to Scranton, Pennsylvania. We are told that the president has been notified of these findings, and that he is not going to be giving any kind of comments about their significance until he gets more information. But earlier today in Pennsylvania, President Bush made it very clear that he does believe Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, and he also warned that the end game is near.


BUSH: So far, the evidence hasn't been very good that he is disarming, and time is running out. At some point in time, the United States' patience will run out. In the name of peace, if he does not disarm, I will lead a coalition of the willing to disarm Saddam Hussein.


MALVEAUX: The White House is also heartened by some of the toughest language yet that they have heard from U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix, who called the situation in Baghdad, saying that it was very tense and dangerous, that Iraq had to comply.

The White House strategy is to continue with those aggressive inspections, to push for that, as well as access to Iraqi scientists for interviews to make sure that they get as much information as possible on, perhaps, these hidden weapons programs.

Also, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer earlier today saying, look at January 27 as an important benchmark, an important date. That when U.N. weapons inspectors present their findings to the U.N. Security Council. He says, in the weeks to come, it will be very critical for the president to make his decision whether or not military action will be necessary -- Judy. WOODRUFF: All right. Suzanne, interesting that the White House itself is now talking about that date of January 27. Thanks very much.

Well, now to the main message that President Bush delivered today in politically important Pennsylvania. He called on Congress to quickly approve limits on malpractice lawsuits, for, he says, the sake of affordable health care in America.


BUSH: Excessive jury awards will continue to drive up insurance costs, will put good doctors out of business, or run them out of your community, and will hurt communities like Scranton, Pennsylvania. That's a fact.


WOODRUFF: The legislation backed by Mr. Bush would cap noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, at a quarter of a million dollars. Punitive damages would have the same cap. But there would be no limit on actual financial losses, such as wages and medical expenses.

A coalition of health care providers is making its own push for malpractice reform in ads that have been airing in Washington, in Pittsburgh, and in hard-hit West Virginia.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My husband was in an accident. He was rushed to the hospital, but the surgeons who could have helped him were no longer there. Lawsuits against doctors and hospitals have made it too expensive for them to practice.


WOODRUFF: Responding to these reform advocates, Pennsylvania's Democratic governor-elect Ed Rendell says the president's plan to cap malpractice awards won't solve the problem.


ED RENDELL (D), GOVERNOR-ELECT, PENNSYLVANIA: The president was in Pennsylvania today, and gave us some advice about what we should do to deal with the medical malpractice crisis. That advice, in my judgment, was not very well informed, and not very helpful. The president ignores the fact that the Pennsylvania legislature has taken some very dramatic steps to deal with tort reform in the medical malpractice crisis.


WOODRUFF: Even as the liability debate heats up, a new study on medical mistakes found that operating room teams around the nation leave sponges, clamps, and other tools inside about 1,500 patients every year.

At least one White House official acknowledges the president's new push for malpractice reform has a presidential campaign connection. That official is quoted as calling this "whack John Edwards day," referring to the Democratic presidential hopeful and former trial lawyer.


WOODRUFF (voice-over): John Edwards has been getting whacked for years for being a lawyer. The attack line goes like this:

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He makes millions suing people: our hospitals, and family doctors, so we all pay more for health insurance and medical care.

WOODRUFF: That was 1998, the year Edwards ran for the Senate. The day Edwards announced for president, the Republican National Committee sent out an e-mail of news clippings that established: A, he's a trial lawyer; B, most of the money for his political action committee has come from fellow trial lawyers; and C, he has opposed attempts to cap jury awards.

Those awards can be staggering. In 1997, Edwards won a then record $23 million verdict from the botched delivery of a baby, much of it going to pay for the care of the child.

Edwards says he shares the White House concern that the high cost of malpractice insurance is driving doctors away from risky procedures. But Edwards and consumer groups blame the insurance companies that invest their money in the stock market. They argue what really drives malpractice rates are the markets.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When the stock market goes down, their investments aren't doing well, they are losing money. So what do they do? They raise the premiums on doctors.

WOODRUFF: In a statement released last night, Edwards accused the president of -- quote -- "once again siding with his insider friends in the insurance industry, and standing against seriously injured children and families," and he proposed stripping insurance companies of what he called their special legal status, establishing tough standards of evidence for lawyers to cut frivolous lawsuits, and cracking down on bad doctors.

Edwards says he's proud of his old profession, but if the poll numbers are any guide, it is a tough job to defend. Surveys show most Americans think lawyers do not have high ethical standards.


WOODRUFF: Our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley, joins us now.

Candy, somebody anonymously at the White House calling this "whack John Edwards day," but are they specifically targeting him? CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck -- but the White House says this is not a duck, and they say, Listen, the president has always wanted to put caps on malpractice suits for noneconomic compensation.

They note that he introduced this before, but the fact that he introduced it in North Carolina is sort of interesting, because that is, of course, the home state of John Edwards.

They also point out that at this point in the election cycle, almost two years out, it really doesn't behoove the president to look like he's getting in to this. One political strategist said to me, Look, there is enough blood in the water now as the Democrats cut each other up. They can chum on each other for a while, and we'll just let the president be the president, which is a pretty tried and true way to go about it. Presidents usually like to look very presidential, and they let the politicians go ahead and be politicians.

WOODRUFF: Well, he takes this malpractice message and goes to the state of Pennsylvania. Why there, Candy?

CROWLEY: Well, let me change the question. Why there for the 18th time since he has been president? And it's mathematics and it is political science. Pennsylvania is a swing state, and it has 23 electoral votes. George Bush lost it last time, despite the fact he had a Republican governor, Tom Ridge, in office.

He really would like to have Pennsylvania this time, and as part of the strategy. But just for fun, we looked at some of the other states that were in the top 10 or 15 of where the president has gone, the frequent flyer states as we call them. We just wanted you to take a look at them. Michigan, Missouri, Iowa, Florida, Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania. All of these, and the numbers you see are the number of times the President has gone to those states. Pretty interesting. They are all, many of them, swing states. But also in all of them, the president either won or lost in 2000 by very narrow margins, and they are very important to electoral strategy, so that he shows up in those states can't be coincidental.

WOODRUFF: Can't be coincidental. Candy, I know you say they say it's too early. It doesn't behoove the president to be going after these Democrats, but the Republican Party is -- but is John Edwards -- and I think I know the answer to this -- the only one that you are hearing them talk about right now?

CROWLEY: No, absolutely not. As each of these come out, we get a little help from the Republican National Committee that has a research arm. And by the way, the Democrats do this, too, but they have research they put out. You showed that one in the John Edwards piece. They have also put it out about Joe Lieberman, sort of questioning his pretzel-like stances on issues where he changes back and forth.

They've also gone after Vermont governor Howard Dean, former Vermont governor, Howard Dean, saying he is an ultraliberal. So, clearly, you can read these things and see where the -- or the Republicans would go if any one of these men should become the primary opponents, but I think they have a pretty good case that right now, it's better for them to stay out of the primary and not sort of enhance anybody's position by letting the president attack him.

WOODRUFF: OK. Candy Crowley, thanks very much.

Well, Candy talked about how many Democrats there are. We have another example of how this presidential race is taking off on the Democratic side. The New Hampshire Democratic Party has invited ten White House hopefuls, possible hopefuls included, to an annual fund- raiser in Manchester on February the 27th. Now, the ten include the six who are already in the race, and four said to be considering a run. Gary Hart, Senator Bob Graham, Senator Chris Dodd, and former General Wesley Clark.

President Bush and the Democrats who want his job may want to take note of a new survey of the news stories that Americans are following closely. Iraq is by far the top story, according to the Pew poll. Next comes the economy, North Korea, and the Bush economic plan.

As for some purely political stories, 20 percent say they followed the Trent Lott controversy closely, and 14 percent say they are keeping a close eye on the Democratic candidates. Same percentage of Americans interested in reports of human cloning. No connection.

There is much more ahead on INSIDE POLITICS.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: It is reckless to ignore a direct threat to the United States of America in the form of a missile and nuclear weapons that can strike us.

WOODRUFF: Senator John McCain talks to me about the situation in North Korea and the showdown with Iraq.

Also ahead...


WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: I'm Bill Schneider at CNN Center in Atlanta. It was strikingly powerful the first time around. I'll look at the return of a famous political scare tactic.


WOODRUFF: Plus, the day the Clinton administration stood still, and Americans first heard of Monica Lewinsky. This is INSIDE POLITICS, the place for campaign news.


WOODRUFF: Arizona Senator John McCain is taking a harder line than the Bush administration in the current standoff with North Korea. Voicing concerns that North Korea, not Iraq, poses a bigger threat to U.S. national security.

Just a little while ago, I spoke with Senator McCain, and I started by asking what he thinks now, given today's developments in Iraq?


MCCAIN: I'm not surprised that we have found these weapons that are containers that Saddam Hussein has. In 1998, when the inspectors left, were forced out, there was ample evidence that he had these weapons, and there's been no authentication of any kind that he may have destroyed them.

So, yes, North Korea still poses a greater threat, but that does not diminish the fact that Iraq is still a significant clear and present danger.

WOODRUFF: With regard to Iraq, it is now -- there are more of those outside the administration who are saying their concern that the president may be about to let Saddam Hussein out with him, and delay any kind of military action, just because of the back and forth, the uncertainty over what he has, and what the United States knows. Do you have those concerns?

MCCAIN: Well, I certainly think there are concerns when you have the United Nations playing a significant role, when Mr. Blix is calling for continued inspections, but the fact is I think that the administration, buttressed by information that just came to light today and other information, can make a case to the United Nations and the world that Saddam Hussein has has not complied, if he continues with what he's doing, which is non-compliance.

WOODRUFF: Back to North Korea.

You also write in the "Weekly Standard" that, in your view, the administration has demonstrated a deterioration of its resolve that you say is reckless. Do you really mean that?

MCCAIN: I think we're dealing with a sociopath that rules the most Stalinist, oppressive state in the world. If you saw news reports last night about 200,000 people in prison camps and where people die every day, which are as bad as the Gulag, that they have developed these weapons in direct violation of their commitments to the United States.

We and other nations have given them a billion dollars in oil and food supply. Meanwhile, 2 million of their citizens starve to death, and this person has kidnapped people, he's dug tunnels, they've provoked small gun fights with the South Koreans.

Of course it's dangerous, and this administration has got to make it clear that they must comply with the agreements that they made before we make further offers of food or oil or anything else, particularly odious is propping up a regime that is so outrageously oppressive. WOODRUFF: What's so wrong, though, with the administration saying to North Korea, if you disarm, we will help you with oil and with food and so forth?

MCCAIN: But first -- that would be fine with me, although I find it distasteful as an advocate of human rights that we would prop up a regime that starved to death 2 million of its citizens during the 1990s, but first they have to hand over the rods that Yongbyon, hand over the enriched uranium that they are now constructing additional nuclear weapons with.

Then we will talk about our relationship with North Korea, not before, because they are in complete violation of the agreement that they made. How can you trust them to keep another agreement if they broke the last one?

WOODRUFF: How do you account for the administration last week saying, we won't talk, we won't negotiate with the North Koreans, and this week making this offer?

MCCAIN: The administration, as far as I can tell collectively, has said everything, from we negotiate and continue to, we won't negotiate to, we won't be blackmailed. There has said everything. There's got to be coherently in their message to scary with, no matter what it is, and their policy. Second of all, we have to recognize that these people will not abide by an agreement that's not verifiable. We have to go back to Ronald Reagan. Trust but verify.

WOODRUFF: The word you use, reckless, it's a strong word.

MCCAIN: It is reckless to ignore a direct threat to the United States of America in the form of a missile and nuclear weapons that can strike us. It is reckless to, which they are developing, to neglect or to not take head-on a challenge that, of a nuclear weapon and a missile that can strike Tokyo.


WOODRUFF: Senator John McCain talking to me just an hour ago.

Well, the potential for U.S. war with Iraq is the subject of a new TV commercial. It is an updated version of perhaps the mother of all negative ads.

Senior political analyst Bill Schneider has more on the ad and its explosive message.



SCHNEIDER: It's probably the most famous political ad in history. Democrats ran it during the 1964 presidential campaign. The idea was to scare people. If you elect Barry Goldwater, he could start a nuclear war. It worked. Lyndon Johnson carried 44 states.


SCHNEIDER: It worked so well that an Internet group called has updated the original Daisy ad. The original Daisy ad featured a frightening warning.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are the stakes. To make a world in which all of god's children can live or go into the dark. We must either love each other or we must die.

SCHNEIDER: The new Daisy ad also features a scary warning.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: War with Iraq -- may be it will end quickly. Maybe not. Maybe it will spread. Maybe extremist, will countries with nuclear weapons.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Five, four, three, two, one, zero.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Maybe -- the unthinkable.

SCHNEIDER: Both ads target Republicans who seem eager to go to war. In 1964, the Republican candidate, Goldwater. In 2003, Republican president, George W. Bush. Both ads play to deep-seeded anxiety. Many Americans are uncomfortable with the idea of the United States starting a war. Isn't it enough to contain the enemy, then the Soviet union, now Iraq? Especially with the risks, they're so great.

Will the new daisy ad work as well as the old one did? Times have changed. Then the world war was at its peak. the United States and Soviet Union had just gone eye ball to eyeball in the Soviet missile crisis. The threat of war seemed real. Now the united states is the world's unchallenged superpower. The U.S. has already defeated Iraq once. Then the ads asked Americans to support a popular president.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Vote for President Johnson on November 3.

SCHNEIDER: Now the ads are asking Americans to oppose a popular president.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Maybe that's why Americans are saying to President Bush -- let the inspections work.


SCHNEIDER: And one more difference. Now the Daisy ads are running in 12 cities across the country. Then, the Daisy ad ran exactly once on a national network broadcast. But once was enough to provoke a huge response -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: It's all very sobering. All right. Bill Schneider, thank you.

Coming up, a mystery under the dome. The case of the missing senators. We'll live to Capitol Hill for the latest.

But first, "Breaking News" out of Baghdad may have taken a bite out of your pocketbook. Rhonda Schaffler joins us live from Wall Street with the details.

RHONDA SCHAFFLER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Judy, that's right. Growing concerns about U.S. military action in Iraq helped to push stocks lower today. Wall Street did take a turn for the worst after U.N. inspectors found those empty chemical warheads, and that came despite strong earnings growth from General Motors, United Technologists, Yahoo!. At the closing bell, the Dow was down 24 points. Nasdaq losing 14. Some nervous investors fled to gold, $7 an ounce to its highest level in almost six years.

At the same time, investors sold the U.S. dollar, oil prizes rose again, but traders stepped lightly ahead of an after the bell earnings report from IBM and Microsoft. Ibm's numbers we have for you, quarterly profits fell for the sixth quarter in a row, but wales rose slightly. IBM shares are up slightly in after-hours trading. Up to 78 million Americans could file their taxes for free online this year. The IRS has private tax preparers keeping the cost at about $12. To find out you're eligible, go to That is the very latest from Wall Street. More INSIDE POLITICS ahead, including advice from the Vatican for Catholic politicians.

WOODRUFF: It's time to test your "I.P." I.Q. How many Democratic senators voted to authorize U.S. military action against Saddam Hussein in January, 1991? Was it, a, 10, b, 15 or, c, 20? The answer, coming up on INSIDE POLITICS.


WOODRUFF: It may be hard to believe, but it has been five years since Monica Lewinsky became a household name. Coming up, how a Clinton intern helped land George W. Bush in the White House. But first, this "News Alert."


WOODRUFF: On Capitol Hill, a Senate hearing on Tom Ridge's nomination to be the homeland security director is on track for tomorrow now that the Senate stalemate over committee funding has been revolved. But Democrats may be facing a different kind of stalemate.

Our congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl is on the Hill.

Jonathan, the Democratic presidential race already having an effect up there?

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It sure looks that way. And this may not be the last time we report a story like this, but it is the first.

And that is, there have been two very interesting absences today in the Senate. As the Democrats have been going through a series of votes trying to increase spending on homeland security and on education, John Edwards and John Kerry, both of whom are running for president, have not been here for these votes. And these are votes that Democrats have cast as very important votes, critical votes, that talk about the central priorities of the country. And both John Kerry and John Edwards have not been here, causing some real frustration on the part of Democratic aides. And these are very important votes from the perspective of Tom Daschle.

Listen to him from earlier today.


SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: What you want to do is send as clear as message as we can that we're willing to commit the resources of this country to carry the rhetoric that we've heard so often on the floor of the Senate and in every one of these State of the Union messages. We've got to match our commitment in resources to the rhetoric we hear from our leaders. That's what you're doing.



KARL: Now, there Tom Daschle was aiming his fire at the Republicans. But, privately, senior Democratic aides are aiming some fire at John Kerry and John Edwards and warning, as one person said: This is a harbinger of things to come. We are facing critical votes and these guys are off campaigning for president.

Now, as far as what John Edwards and John Kerry are saying, John Edwards' office has no comment on this and, in fact, could not tell us where he is, except to say that he's in the South. John Kerry is up in Boston. His spokesperson for his campaign said that John Kerry has a long record of loyalty to the Democratic caucus, and when there are critical votes, they will be here.

Now, Judy, two important points on this: One, the votes that have taken place so far today, the Democrats would have lost even if Kerry and Edwards were here. But there is a critical vote coming tonight on education funding that could be quite close, where those votes could be critical.

And the second thing is that those are not the only two people that are missing. There are two others that have been not here, Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, neither of whom are, however, running for president -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: All right, it will be interesting to see how this plays out through the year, won't it, Jon?

KARL: Absolutely.

WOODRUFF: OK, Jon Karl at the Capitol.

Roman Catholic politicians got a message from the Vatican today. The pope says that church teaching demands Catholic political figures defend -- quote -- "the basic right to life from conception to natural death." The guidelines were released before major demonstrations planned in the U.S. next week to mark the anniversary of the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Well, the pope's political message will get the once-over in our daily debate. Coming up next, Donna Brazile and Bay Buchanan also will put their spins on the president's global policy.

Stay with us.


WOODRUFF: With us now: former Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile and Bay Buchanan, president of American Cause.

Donna, first of all, there's starting to be some criticism, more criticism, of the administration policy internationally, toward Iraq, people saying maybe he's going to be outsmarted by Saddam Hussein with all these delays. On North Korea, we heard John McCain a few minutes ago saying the president's been all over the map. He's not tough enough. Are any of these criticisms valid?


First of all, they've been acting the political equivalent of Bigfoot, hoping that the whole world would march walk in lockstep with the administration on foreign policy, when no one really understands what the administration's foreign policy is on the Middle East, on Iraq, on North Korea. They send out all these trial balloons, hoping that they'll land somewhere.

And, right now, we don't know what the plan is in North Korea. Will they talk? Will they not talk? In Iraq, will we go ahead on schedule or we will wait until the evidence is in and then move forward? So, I think the administration's in a real pickle.


I think that the president -- I think, rhetorically, there's been some mistakes here. But that's not serious. I think the action is what you have to look at. And when the president took a look at the situation in North Korea, there was a lot of hotheads and a lot of tough words. But he recognized, which was essential, that this is the most -- one of the most dangerous regimes around.

We're talking about nuclear, biological, chemical weapons that North Korea has. We're talking a million-man army, missiles, an arsenal missiles that can reach 100,000 American troops. So, this is not a time when we want to really look at military actions, since we'd be enormously vulnerable to that.

He's brought the cooler heads in. They're looking at it. He's trying to get the allies to help. The allies don't want to help us. And I think one of the good things that is going to come out of this, he is negotiating. And that's what he should do. One of the good things is that the president now knows that this is not a place we need to be, that those troops over there shouldn't be there. We're going to bring them out. And I think, in two years, you're to see real change. And this is in our best interests.

BRAZILE: First they said they wouldn't talk. Now they're talking. Now they're offering food and fuel. And the North Koreans are saying, that's pie in the sky. They don't want to talk.

But, look, I think the administration has to have a consistent foreign policy, regardless of the situation, although they have to readapt to the circumstances and the leaders. But if they had a consistent, coherent foreign policy and not just America's...

BUCHANAN: Donna, one would assume -- and I think it's fair for the president to assume that, since we've been defending South Korea for 50 years, that they might come to our aid and be with us on this. And they are not. Japan's not with us. China doesn't want to get themselves in the front, and neither does Russia.

We need to now reassess our situation over there. Bill Clinton didn't do it. He worked with them. And things were rather stable during that period, but nothing changed. Now it's time to actually change. And I think that's what's going to happen as a result of this.

BRAZILE: Clinton kept the peace.

WOODRUFF: Change the subject: the Vatican putting out this declaration today saying that they believe all Catholic politicians, if they vote against the church on a position, whether it's abortion or whether it's war and peace, that they are being unfaithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

What does this mean, Donna?

BUCHANAN: Are you listening, my Catholic friend?

BRAZILE: Well, I keep believing, if I'm going down, it's probably at the bottom.


BRAZILE: No, I think this is a matter of conscience for every Catholic.

First of all, Catholic lawmakers are sworn to uphold the Constitution. Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land. I don't believe -- look, the church doctrine, on many issues, I believe is some very good doctrine on. Some issues, I think the church could open up its doors and listen to a couple of us in confession and say, bless, me, Father, we may have sinned, but if you talk to us about contraceptives, maybe we can help you come up with a reproductive- rights policy.

BUCHANAN: The real problem here is, is the Catholic Church going to have moral authority or is it just some kind of a club out there? And the idea is, if you're Catholic, that you believe that the pope is the lord's chosen vessel to head the church and that he is infallible on a number of issues, dogma. And that includes abortion, issues of life, etcetera.

BRAZILE: The death penalty also, right.

BUCHANAN: And the key here is that the Catholics, to have a public person, the Catholics say, well, it doesn't matter; he's not right on that; I can actually oppose the church on this and still call myself Catholic undermines its authority.

And I think the guidelines are not only excellent, but there's no enforcement. That's the trouble. I think there should be some excommunications. And that would really turn things around.

WOODRUFF: Well, on war and peace, that raises all sorts of questions. If you vote for war and you're Catholic...

BRAZILE: Absolutely.

BUCHANAN: But that's not the dogma. That's not the dogma. The dogma -- on issues of dogma, he is infallible.

WOODRUFF: More later on all this.

Bay, Donna thank you both.

BRAZILE: Thank you.

WOODRUFF: It's always great to see you.

BUCHANAN: Good to be here.

WOODRUFF: Well, today's developments in Iraq occurred on a historic anniversary.

Up next: a look back at the 1991 Gulf War a dozen years after the first night of bombing in Baghdad.



WOODRUFF (voice-over): Time again to test your "I.P. I.Q.": How many Democratic senators voted to authorize U.S. military action against Saddam Hussein in January, 1991? Was it, A, 10, B, 15, or, C, 20? The answer: A. Ten of the 56 Democrats then in the Senate voted in favor of military action.


WOODRUFF: Well, as we know, the 1991 Gulf War began 12 years ago today. The U.S.-led coalition started bombing Baghdad in the dark of night, as Iraqi anti-aircraft batteries opened fire. Our Bruce Morton has a look back at the last time U.S. forces went to war in the Persian Gulf and how events back then compare with the situation today.


BRUCE MORTON, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Then, we knew when it started. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and a president named Bush said, no way.




MORTON: When did it start this time, back then or last October, when Congress authorized the use of force, or in November, when the U.N. Security Council passed its resolution? Pick a date.

Then, the U.S. led a 34-nation coalition, including even Arab states like Syria. This time, only Britain, though polls shows people there want U.N. approval for a war. No agreement on bases in Turkey, nor Saudi Arabia. Then: a five-month buildup, more than half-a- million Americans in the Gulf, plus 160,000 coalition troops. Now: perhaps 140,000 Americans by mid-February.

Allies paid much of the cost of that war. The U.S. share was only about $7 billion; this time, more than that, of course, though no one can be sure how much more. Then, the U.S. suffered 148 battle deaths, 145 nonbattle. The Iraqi army lost maybe 100,000 and, Baghdad said, 35,000 civilians. This time, who knows.

Back then, of course, the rest of the world was rolling along, too, the biggest movie draw, "Home Alone." And that January, the National Society of Film Critics named Martin Scorsese's "Goodfellas" the best movie of 1990. His "Gangs of New York" is in theaters now.

The first lady, Barbara Bush, broke a leg in a sledding accident at Camp David -- nothing like that this winter. Whitney Houston had the top rhythm-and-blues album, and she's still working. Michael Crichton had a book on the best-seller list that January, and this January. Sean Lennon, John's son, who was 15 then, wrote some lyrics for his father's "Give Peace a Chance." And the U.N. sent a deadline for Saddam to withdraw from Kuwait, but he didn't.

And New York activist Al Sharpton was stabbed in the chest by a white man during a Brooklyn demonstration. He recovered, of course, and is running for president. And back then, on this day, the air war started, and put a young all-news cable network on the map.


BERNARD SHAW, CNN ANCHOR: The skies over Baghdad have been illuminated. (END VIDEO CLIP)

MORTON: The sounds of war 12 years ago. Will we hear them again?

Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.


WOODRUFF: It sure doesn't seem like 12 years.

Well, how do you spell political embarrassment? Find out ahead in our "Campaign News Daily."

Also up next, Bob Novak has the latest "Buzz" on Hillary Clinton and concerns about her profile.


WOODRUFF: You're looking at the first video CNN has received a those chemical warheads that were found today by U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq, 11 empty chemical warheads said to be found by these inspectors at an ammunition dump about 150 kilometers south of Baghdad. In addition to the 11 empty warheads, there was an additional warhead that required further evaluations. The warheads were described as being in excellent condition. They were also said to be similar to ones that Iraq had imported in the late 1980s.

Now, I'm told -- and you're seeing here -- that this is Iraqi government video. This is video shot by representatives of the Iraqi government. But, again, these are presumably the empty chemical warheads found today by U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq.

Moving on now to Bob Novak joining us with some "Inside Buzz."

And, Bob, turning to politics, I understand there's some talk among Republicans on the Hill about the junior senator from New York?

ROBERT NOVAK, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Judy, there is no question that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a rising star in the Senate. And Republicans are scared to death she's going to be the vice presidential nominee in '04.

So, one veteran operative has got a memo out cautioning Republican senators to stay away from her. Don't co-sign letters with her. Don't co-sponsor legislation with her. Don't be photographed with her. Don't go on junkets with her. And, above all, don't socialize with her. Stay away from Hillary.

WOODRUFF: So, we won't see her with any Republicans over the next two years.

All right, what's this about Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania cutting some kind of deal?

NOVAK: Republican Senator Specter is a strong environmentalist. He desperately wanted to get on the Environmental and Public Works Committee to push green legislation. That's what made him unacceptable. Senator Frist, the new majority leader, kept him off.

But I am told, as a consolation prize, he's going to get a fund- raiser in Pennsylvania by the White House. Now, what's significant about that is, there was talk about a conservative, Patrick Toomey, congressman from Pennsylvania, challenging him in the primary. That won't happen if the White House is backing Arlen Specter.

WOODRUFF: I guess the senator is happy with that deal.

OK, moving south to the Georgia flag issue, what are you picking up about that?

NOVAK: Well, we've all heard how the Confederate flag issue elected a Republican, Sonny Perdue, governor of Georgia.

But there's been a very hot legislative race for the Georgia House of Representatives. Democrat Mike Snow, in the latest count, is just 64 votes ahead, apparently, won it. At one time, it was thought that that would determine who was elected speaker of the house in Georgia. And Mike Snow has a yard sign with that Georgia Confederate flag there. And his motto is: "Mike voted to keep our flag. Let's vote to keep Mike." So, using the Confederate flag down South, Judy, is bipartisan.

WOODRUFF: Even for the Democrats.

OK, and not but not least, the Democratic races coming up in '03 looking how for the Republicans?

NOVAK: It's not looking too good for the Republicans, three governor's races, Mississippi, Kentucky and -- Mississippi, Kentucky and Louisiana. You can't forget Louisiana.

And it looks not too good for the Republicans. Their best shot is in Mississippi, where the Republicans say former Republican National Chairman Haley Barbour is running, very colorful, a good candidate. But it's hard to beat an incumbent. The Democratic governor of Mississippi is Ronnie Musgrove. So, some Democrats -- high-level, Republicans -- I'm sorry -- some high-level Republicans tell me they could go 0-3 in '03.

WOODRUFF: Well, we know it's hard to beat Bob Novak. Thanks very much.

NOVAK: Thank you, Judy.

Great to see you. Appreciate it.

Checking the headlines in our "Campaign News Daily" now: A Democratic source tells CNN that former Illinois Senator Carol Moseley-Braun is considering a run for president. Our source says Moseley-Braun called DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe last night to say that she will not make another run for the Senate. Instead, she asked him to hold a slot for her at the party's upcoming winter meeting next month.

In New York, Governor George Pataki is handing out bonuses to key staffers in his successful reelection bid, even though the campaign is several hundred thousand dollars in debt. Pataki's daughter Emily ran his grassroots efforts. She received a $9,500 bonus. A spokeswoman says larger bonuses are planned for the campaign manager and other top strategists.

In West Virginia, several candidates for city office in Charleston could have used a spell check on their official filing forms. Four Democrats and two Republicans misspelled the word Democrat and the word Republican, as you see here. One candidate said he was in a hurry. Another said she was just careless. It probably doesn't matter, however, but a current city councilman misspelled Democrat four years ago and he won. This year, he misspelled it again. So, maybe it doesn't matter.

Believe it or not, it has been five years since the scandal that rocked Bill Clinton's White House.


WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.


WOODRUFF: So many famous lines and pictures, so many memories.

Our Jeff Greenfield revisits the flak and the fallout.


WOODRUFF: So many of us still remember the dizzying moments when Monica Lewinsky became a household word.

Our senior analyst, Jeff Greenfield, certainly does.


JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. ANALYST (voice-over): The big news five Januaries ago was the pope's visit to Cuba. American journalists by the planeload had flown down to cover the pontiff's visit. After all, things were pretty much all quiet on the domestic front.

And then the story that had first surfaced on the Web exploded into television. Had the president of the United States tried to buy the silence of a young woman with whom he'd been sexually involved?


CLINTON: There is not a sexual relationship.


GREENFIELD: He said is. What about was? And just what was a sexual relationship?


WOODRUFF: Explosive new allegations that...


GREENFIELD: And so it began: facts, rumors and rampant speculation trampling all over each other. There were tapes. There was a blue dress. Resignation was imminent. The images were incessant: the hug in the crowd, the president's wagging finger, the August confession.


CLINTON: ... that I am profoundly sorry.


GREENFIELD: The presidential deposition, with its most famous line.


CLINTON: It depends upon what the meaning of the word is is.


GREENFIELD: And, ultimately, an impeachment and an acquittal.

(on camera): Back then, much of the argument for and against Clinton's removal centered on the distinction between a public and private act. Ultimately, the Senate and the public decided that the misconduct was essentially private. What is striking, however, is how many public lives were reshaped by that act.

(voice-over): House Speaker Newt Gingrich lost his job after Republican zeal led to a public backlash and a GOP setback in the 1998 midterm elections. His successor to be, Bob Livingston, gave up his job in the midst of the impeachment debate, caught out in his own sexual misdeed.


SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: Wrong and inappropriate.


GREENFIELD: Senator Joseph Lieberman, the first Democrat to openly criticize Clinton, was chosen by Al Gore as his running mate in 2000, in large measure because of that stand. Lieberman is now a candidate for the presidency.

Hillary Rodham Clinton became viewed in a far more sympathetic light. And that, in no small measure, led to her election to the U.S. Senate and a possible run for the presidency. Vice President Gore's campaign in 2000 was severely hampered by the Clinton controversy, muddling a peace-and-prosperity message that, under normal circumstances, might well have led to an easy victory.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The president of the United States.

GREENFIELD: And, but for that scandal, the promise of George W. Bush to restore honesty and integrity to the White House would have had far less resonance.

(on camera): And there's been one other clear impact on us, the media. Web sites such as TheDrudgeReport became far more visible and influential as near-instant sources of news and rumor.

Once-taboo topics, such as oral sex, became the stuff of evening newscasts. The late-night comics became genuinely significant political players. The shock of September 11 may have dimmed the memory of the president and the intern, but its political significance is very much still with us.

Jeff Greenfield, CNN, New York.


WOODRUFF: In fact, it's hard to think of anything that wasn't affected, one way or another, by what happened five years ago.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Judy Woodruff. Thanks for joining us.


Revivied; Weapons Inspectors Find Warheads>

© 2004 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us.
external link
All external sites will open in a new browser. does not endorse external sites.