Return to Transcripts main page

Lou Dobbs Tonight

Army Working to Speed Armoring of Vehicles; Senator Speaks Out Over Top Secret Program; Critics Fear National I.D. Proposal

Aired December 10, 2004 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, what took so long? The military today finally ordered additional armored Humvees for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. But only after a bipartisan storm of protest.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: That's the president's top commitment to our troops, making sure that they have the best equipment so that they can complete their mission.

DOBBS: We'll have that report.

And despite the oil-for-food scandal and congressional calls for U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to resign, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations supports Annan. One of the leading experts on the Middle East, however, says Annan must go. Ariel Cohen is our guest.

Democrats in disarray. MoveOn.org says the Democratic Party belongs to them and not the elites of the political consulting class. That report coming up.

TERRY MCAULIFFE, DNC CHAIR: In the Democratic Party, we like to sort of form these circular firing squads.

DOBBS: And while many are worried about gays as a threat to the institution of marriage, there are far larger, more critical and profound threats to marriage in America. We'll focus on those in our special report tonight, our "Culture in Decline."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Friday, December 10. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: Good evening.

Tonight after a firestorm of bipartisan protests, the Pentagon has ordered more armored Humvees for our troops. An additional 100 armored Humvees will be delivered to the Army each month.

Incredibly, the manufacturer of those armored Humvees has been saying for several weeks that it can produce more vehicles. But the Pentagon took action only after a National Guard soldier publicly complained.

Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Army is moving to buy more armored Humvees and see if other production lines can be accelerated, just two days after a pointed question from this soldier put Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the spot about the lack of armor for military vehicles.

Army officials say they were surprised to hear from news reports that Armor Holdings of Jacksonville, Florida, was prepared to sell the Pentagon 550 armored Humvees a month, because originally, the Army was told it could only get 450 because of commitments to other customers.

Pentagon officials say the new Army secretary, Francis Harvey, who was sworn in less than a month ago, called the CEO of the company directly, and is negotiating to buy all the Humvees the company can supply, which is up to 100 more a month.

Another company, ArmorWorks of Tempe, Arizona, says it could double production of armor plates that can be added to existing Humvees.

MATT SALMON, PRESIDENT ARMORWORKS: We produce 300 kits a month. We could be doing 600 kits a month. So when you hear language from the Pentagon that we're doing everything humanly possible, I'm telling you that the industry base is being underutilized.

MCINTYRE: But the Army says it already has a backlog of armor kits and can't install them any faster.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE: Just to be clear, Lou, it's not clear the Army will be able to get those extra Humvees anytime soon. The negotiations are still going on, and now it turns out that the company says in order to deliver the extra 100, they would have to retool the assembly line and stop its commitments to other customers. But that's something that could take weeks or months.

Meanwhile, the Army has set up a special armor task force to take a look at all the contracts to see if any of the production can be accelerated at other companies or if there are other ways to get armor to the battlefield faster.

DOBBS: It's remarkable, Jamie, when you put this in historical context. The United States was producing a Liberty ship every single day in world war ii when we were a nation of just under half what we are today.

How in the world is the Pentagon, the leadership in Washington, both parties, the White House, the Senate, the House, how in the world do people explain this kind of inaction and the fact that it required a soldier standing up in a town hall meeting with the secretary of defense for someone to even at least act like they're taking action? MCINTYRE: Well, you know, the Army would tell you that this issue is a lot more complicated than it seems. It's an industrial base question. That is, the requirement for this kind of armor three years ago was very small. There just were very few companies making it, and they all have suppliers and people who they have to work with. It just takes time to ramp up that production.

The Army says they were taken aback when they heard this company say they could produce more. And they're now calling them on that claim, and they're discovering, once again, it's a little more complicated. They might not be able to get the extra vehicles as fast as they want.

But there's a new Army secretary in charge. He's Rumsfeld's guy. He's described as a can-do former CEO who knows enough to pick up the phone and call the top guy at the company and try to get answers.

So the Pentagon is insisting they're going to try to cut through as much red tape as they can.

DOBBS: It's remarkable that there are only two companies in all of the United States, the world's only superpower, that can produce these kits and these armored Humvees. That speaking to the issue you raised, and that is a significant question about our industrial base.

Jamie, thank you very much. Jamie McIntyre, our senior Pentagon correspondent.

Three more American troops have been killed in Iraq. A U.S. Marine was killed in combat in al-Anbar province. That's west of Baghdad. And in the northern city of Mosul, two soldiers were killed in an accident involving two helicopters at an airfield. Twelve hundred and 87 Americans have now been killed in Iraq.

Elsewhere in Iraq, insurgents launched more attacks against Iraqi National Guardsmen. A roadside bomb in Baqubah exploded as an Iraqi National Guard patrol was passing by. Three Iraqi civilians were wounded in that explosion.

All but lost in the negotiations and the ultimate passage of the intelligence reform legislation is a simmering controversy over a spy program that elected officials can't talk about publicly, at least with any specificity.

It's a so-called black program that cannot be named, the budget of which can't be disclosed, and whose likely effectiveness can't be discussed, at least openly.

Two leading senators, however, are now declared opponents of this mysterious program.

National security correspondent David Ensor has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The mystery concerns a top-secret, multibillion-dollar program, which a knowledgeable source says involves a future potential type of spy satellite.

This week, a heated debate over the program burst into the open on the floor of the U.S. Senate with a key senator saying he'll fight to stop funds for a Bush administration program that he would not describe.

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV), VICE CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: My decision to take this somewhat unprecedented decision is based solely on my strenuous objection, shared by many in our committee, to a particular major funding acquisition program that I believe is totally unjustified and very, very wasteful and dangerous to the national security.

ENSOR: Dangerous, aides explained, because it sucks up black- budget money better spent elsewhere.

Fellow Democrat Senator Ron Wyden said in a statement, quote, "The original justification for developing this technology has eroded in importance due to the changed practices and capabilities of our adversaries."

Spy satellites act as both eyes and ears for U.S. intelligence. No one will say what the controversial program seeks to do. But outside experts say possibilities include radar satellites to target a battlefield as planes and UAVs now do, or stealthy spy satellites, designed to look to an adversary like space debris.

JOHN PIKE, DIRECTOR, GLOBALSECURITY.ORG: The challenge, then, is to make the signature of the satellite so small that, rather than looking like a satellite the size of a city bus, it looks like a small Coke can-sized space debris, and it blends in with the other 8,000 pieces of space junk out there.

ENSOR (on camera): Knowledgeable sources say the problem is these secret programs cost so much money that when you fund one, you block others. That is why there's been such sharp debate about a program shrouded in mystery.

David Ensor, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: The new intelligence reform legislation failed to introduce adequate measures to secure our borders, and it failed altogether to stop illegal aliens from obtaining U.S. driver's licenses.

But the legislation does contain national standards for driver's licenses and birth certificates for the first time ever. Some civil liberty groups say that even those limited measures go too far.

Lisa Sylvester reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Soon there will be more scrutiny in the way driver's licenses and other state I.D.s are handed out. The new intelligence bill requires the departments of transportation and homeland security establish new identification standards within 18 months.

Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchison promised to work with states to establish the new rules.

ASA HUTCHISON, UNDERSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I will be a voice for strong security measures in the travel documents, in the driver's licenses, so that we can make sure that we do not let that be used as a tool of terrorists, as we have seen in the past.

SYLVESTER: Eighteen of the 19 September 11 hijackers obtained some form of U.S. identification, some by fraud. But some liberal and civil libertarian groups see the identification standards as a back- door move to set up a national citizenship registry.

ELLIOT WINCHBERG, PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: That's certainly a concern. Today, national standards, tomorrow, a national database with everybody's information, and it can be misused.

SYLVESTER: The American Civil Liberties Union in a letter to Congress this week said a federal standard creates what amounts to a national I.D. card.

But immigration reform advocates say the government needs to play a greater role.

DAN STEIN, FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM: States have the authority to issue the most important I.D. document in the country. It is the keys to the kingdom, the basis on which all benefits and access to entitlements is determined.

SYLVESTER: Reporter: Most of the other industrialized countries have national identification cards.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Under the new intelligence bill, two years after the standards are published, federal agencies will stop accepting state I.D. cards and birth certificates which do not meet the new criteria -- Lou.

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much.

Lisa Sylvester.

As many as three million illegal aliens will have entered this country by the end of the year. It turns out now that some of those illegal aliens crossed our borders with the help of U.S. Customs.

Casey Wian has the report from Los Angeles -- Casey. CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it's a stunning development out of southern Texas, a Customs and Border Protection officer has been arrested and charged with helping smuggle at least 500 illegal aliens into this country.

According to the U.S. Attorney's indictment, 41-year-old Fabian Solis received $300 for each illegal alien he allowed to pass through lanes he worked as three Texas border crossings -- Roma, Rio Grand City and Falcon Heights.

Since March 2003, prosecutors allege Officer Solis made at least $170,000 from the scheme. He now faces up to 45 years in prison and a million dollars in fines. Prosecutors declined to comment on a judge's decision to release him after posting bail of just $15,000.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesman called the alleged smuggling conspiracy an awful thing if it's true, a black mark on us all -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, what is the consideration? How widespread is this?

WIAN: Well, there's really no way to tell, but, just less than a month ago, another Customs and Border Protection official in the Texas area, this one a senior inspector, was indicted as part of a plot to smuggle more than 10,000 pounds of marijuana into this country from Mexico. Customs and Border Protection officials say those are isolated incidents -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much.

Casey Wian reporting from Los Angeles.

Still ahead here, is the Democratic Party run by a group of ineffectual elites who are chronic losers or by moveon.org which now says it owns the Democratic Party? We'll have that report for you.

And a Christmas story tonight featuring Scrooge. Putting profits before charity hardly sounds like the stuff of a religious holiday. Is Christmas really about retailing? That story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The leadership of the Democratic Party is divided after its losses in the presidential and congressional elections. Tonight, upstart independent organization moveon.org says it has wrested control of the Democratic Party from the political elites.

Judy Woodruff has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Vacationers at Orlando's many amusement parks may enjoy being in freefall, but the Democrats meeting there sure don't. More than a month after their election losses, Democrats appear to be engaged in a battle for, as Pat Buchanan once put it for Republicans, the heart and soul of the party.

The liberal leaning Internet-driven group moveon clearly has a dog in that fight. In an e-mail to supporters, the head of moveon's political action committee blasts outgoing DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe as a tool for corporate donors and a professional election loser.

Eli Pariser says the grass-roots contributors who made moveon a political powerhouse bought the party, own it, and now he says, We are going to take it back."

TERRY MCAULIFFE, DNC CHAIRMAN: They didn't buy it, and nobody should say that. Listen, they are -- they're entitled to whatever their opinion is. You know, in the Democratic Party, we like to sort of form these circular firing squads. That's not my nature. I am very positive. I am very optimistic.

WOODRUFF: McAuliffe is particularly upbeat about his success in shoring up the party's bottom line. The DNC is in the black and outraised the RNC in the '04 election cycle for the first time ever.

But other Democrats saying money isn't everything.

HOWARD DEAN, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The way to rebuild the Democratic Party is not from the consultants down. It is from the ground up.

WOODRUFF: Howard Dean is likely to be a hot topic of conversation in Orlando, as Democrats look ahead to their February vote for a new party chairman. Dean is one of many possible and official candidates for the job. The crowded field underscores the various party factions and their often opposing ideas about how to win again. Some want to compete on the GOP's faith and family turf.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), FORMER VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Our faith is enormously important to us. Our family is obviously enormously important to us.

WOODRUFF: Other Democrats argue the party should stay true to its traditions and convince voters that issues such as equal rights, health care and education are moral values.

DONNA BRAZILE, DNC VOTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE: We need candidates at all levels that connect head to heart with voters.

WOODRUFF: Left or center? What about national security? Try to win back the red states or rebuild and expand the base? It's enough to make any Democrat's head spin.

Judy Woodruff, CNN, reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE) DOBBS: Retail giant Target has made itself the target of critics this season. The company has banned Salvation Army bell ringers from collecting donations at Target stores this Christmas.

Peter Viles reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PETER VILES, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Salvation Army's tradition of raising money at Christmas is over 100 years old, but it's overshadowed this year by an even older Christmas tradition. Since the age of Dickens, somebody plays the role of Scrooge. This year, it's the Target Corporation, which has banned Salvation Army bell ringers from all 1,300 of its stores.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Christmas hearing is The Salvation bell ringing and trying to put the spirit into people and show them what it's really about, not just shopping.

VILES: Target says the issue is fairness. It has long banned solicitors from its grounds, always make an exception for The Salvation Army, but it decided months ago, "If we continue to allow The Salvation Army to solicit, then it opens the door to any other groups that wish to solicit our guests." That is the kind of logic Wall Street understands.

HOWARD DAVIDOWITZ, RETAIL CONSULTANT: I think in the mind of Target and other retailers, you don't want your customers feeling pressured, either real or unreal, even by a charity as great as The Salvation Army.

VILES: But the Internet and talk radio are full of backlash, like this Web site, don'tshoptarget.com.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're going to lose a lot of customers. I wouldn't go back to them, to Target, if that's the way they feel.

VILES: The Salvation Army, meantime, trying to make up the lost donations elsewhere.

MAJ. GEORGE HOOD, THE SALVATION ARMY: The public response has been far beyond anything we ever expected, and it only shows that there is such a love affair and such a trust factor between the consumer public of this country and The Salvation Army.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VILES: The Salvation Army collected $9 million outside Target stores last winter. That was about one-tenth of its entire Christmas campaign.

And for the record, Lou, Kmart and Wal-Mart still do welcome The Salvation Army -- Lou.

DOBBS: Pete, thank you very much.

Peter Viles from Los Angeles.

For those of you who are interested in making a donation to The Salvation Army, you may do so by visiting their Web site, salvationarmyusa.org. That is salvationarmyusa.org.

Coming up next here, three of the nation's top political journalists join me. We'll be talking about intelligence reform, the armor crisis facing our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a great deal more.

Also ahead, are Kofi Annan's days at the United Nations numbered? U.N. ambassador -- the U.N. ambassador from the United States says no. Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation says yes. He's our guest next.

And in our special report, "Culture in Decline," tonight, the institution of marriage is under assault in this country. We'll have a special report next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Our special report now on our "Culture in Decline." Voters in 11 states passed bans on gay marriage. Advocates say they are defending the sanctity of the institution of marriage by doing so.

But marriage in this country was in trouble long before gay marriages were being performed in Massachusetts and the city of San Francisco. Marriage, in fact, has been under assault in this country now for decades.

Christine Romans reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At a theater near you, a cynical view of marriage.

JUDE LAW, ACTOR: Are you married?

JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: Yes. No. Yes.

LAW: Which?

ROBERTS: Separated.

ROMANS: And separations are a permanent feature of our society today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You may now kiss the bride.

ROMANS: Couples getting married today have an almost 50/50 chance of ending in divorce, and that first marriage probably won't last more than eight years.

DAVID BLANKENHORN, INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES: Compared to 30 or 40 years ago, there's been a definite weakening of marriage and the family, a much higher divorce rate. We have a very high rate of out- of-wedlock child bearing. About one of every three babies born today is born to an unmarried mother. People are spending less of their total lives married.

ROMANS: The early baby boomers have led the way. A third of Americans born between 1945 and 1954 have divorced at least once. And we're now marrying later. Women are waiting until they're at least 25 years old; men, almost 27. And we're not having as many kids.

KAREN KORNBLUM, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: There's also a lot more stress. There is stress about money, and then -- the other side of that coin -- there's a lot of stress about time, how are you going to find the time to raise your children and to have a quality of life.

ROMANS: Couples are spending more time at work. All those extra hours amount to 12 more weeks a year, and only 30 percent of families have a parent who stays home. It all adds up to enormous pressure on married couples.

At the same time, marriage advocates say popular culture makes a mockery out of marriage.

MATT DANIELS, ALLIANCE FOR MARRIAGE: Here we have a media culture that is celebrating behaviors and attitudes which are destructive to marriage, and what they're really celebrating is something that is destructive to the well-being of children.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROMANS: A dire assessment overall, but the divorce rate over the past few years has stalled, Lou, and teen pregnancy is declining sharply. That leaves the marriage rights lobby, the marriage -- pro- marriage groups lobbying to make sure that marriage is just for a man and a woman in this country.

DOBBS: Christine, thank you very much.

Christine Romans.

That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Do you think high divorce rates are contributing to our decline in culture? Yes or no. Please cast your votes at loudobbs.com. We'll have the results for you later in the broadcast.

Your thoughts on the shortage of armor for our troops in Iraq as well as three of the best political journalists in the country are coming up here next.

Also tonight, the United States officially supports U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation and others say Annan must go. Ariel Cohen is our guest.

And in "Heroes" tonight, an Oregon National Guardsman wounded in Iraq who says he would go back tomorrow. We'll have his remarkable story.

Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: "Lou Dobbs Tonight" continues. Here now for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: In just a moment, three of this country's top political journalists will be joining us to assess the events of this week, and there are many.

But, first, a look at some of the other top stories tonight.

Chrysler just a short while ago announced it will recall some 600,000 Dodge Durangos, Dodge Dakota pickup trucks from the 2000 through 2003 model years. Chrysler will replace front suspension upper ball joints, it says, which may be subject to progressive wear. Chrysler has sought to play down reports recently that right front wheels on the vehicles can actually suddenly fly off.

Rescuers off the coast of Alaska still searching for six missing crew members of a disabled Malaysian cargo ship. It split in two in heavy seas. But now officials face another critical problem. Half a million gallons of fuel from the ship has spilled into the waters of the Bering Sea. That threatening the nearby Aleutian Islands.

A food shortage in space. The crew of the international space station may be forced to return to earth if a supply mission isn't able to deliver food later this month. The crew of space station Alpha has already been forced to cut back on their meals. Russian space vehicles have been resupplying the station and ferrying crews since the Columbia disaster.

Three of this country's top journalists join me, Ron Brownstein of the "Los Angeles Times," Karen Tumulty of "TIME" and Michael Isikoff of "Newsweek."

Let me begin with you, Karen. The fact that Donald Rumsfeld stands up and says, we don't go to war with anything other than the army we have, a firestorm erupts from both Republicans and Democrats, and today suddenly we have armor being ordered. What in the world is Washington thinking about?

KAREN TUMULTY, "TIME": Yes, you know, funny how that works, Lou. I think in the annals of unfortunate comments, Secretary Rumsfeld, from a couple days ago will have to rank pretty high. Because this is, you know, part of his style, which has often been sort of dismissive and blunt-spoken. But the fact is, of course, all along the administration has been arguing that they have been giving our troops everything that they need. And certainly those -- that soldier's questions and then the reactions of the entire audience really sort of, I think, have shown a spotlight on a real problem over there.

DOBBS: Michael, the important passage of the most sweeping overhaul, as it's styled, of our intelligence agencies in a half century, what are the immediate impacts? MICHEAL ISIKOFF, "NEWSWEEK": Well, I mean, it has an immediate impact on sort of bureaucrats in Washington because a lot of this is just simply bureaucratic redrawing of the boxes. It's not at all clear that it's going to have an immediate impact on the front lines in the war on terror, and FBI agents doing their job or CIA agents doing their job. I mean, this is something that was a sort of symbolic victory for the White House because at some point, it sort of political clout was being questioned there because the president had come out for it during the campaign, and then when push came to shove right after the election, two conservative Republicans in the House were able to hold the thing up despite the fact that the White House was allegedly lobbying on it.

DOBBS: That may be an incredibly clever strategy on the part of the particularly Senator Joseph Lieberman who said it was all up to the president at the end of last week. It seemed, leading up to that, that in point of fact, the White House was tepid about the passage of the legislation.

ISIKOFF: They were tepid up to the point that sort of their manhood got challenged.

DOBBS: Right.

ISIKOFF: And once they got called on that, and it was being perceived as sort of weakness on the president's part, I mean, I had done a piece a couple weeks ago about Jim Sensenbrenner, who had been called by the president, when the piece went down, Sensenbrenner said the president was mild-mannered, didn't really arm-twist him, was extremely low-key conversation. It sort of raised questions, well, how much did he really want this? And I sort of -- once that sort of became the issue, then symbolically, this was important politically for the president to win because he has, you know, things he really does care about down the road in which his clout with Congress is going to be essential, and he needed to maintain the aura of invincibility.

DOBBS: Let me ask you this, Ron, first. The fact is that the passage of this legislation, do you agree with Michael first that it really amounts to not much more than a bureaucratic reshuffling and oar chart exercise, if you will, or is there something substantive here, and if not what in the world was all this about?

BROWNSTEIN: I don't think it's simply bureaucratic reshuffling. And even if it was only that, it's not clear that that isn't important, Lou. I mean, like the department of homeland security, this is something whose impact will have to be measured in practice. The idea of centralizing authority in a national intelligence director, centralizing more responsibility to counterterrorism center could be important if it works out to increase coordination. If it's adding another layer, as some have suggested, it won't. It won't have much impact. Can I make just one other point that links both stories this week which is extraordinary?

We are accustomed to thinking in Washington that change can only be effected by powerful interests with lots of money and lots of access to the media. But in the case of this soldier who stood up and asked the question of Donald Rumsfeld and also in the case of the 9/11 families who really were the motive force behind this extraordinary change, in both instances, we saw ordinary Americans who were supposed to be powerless in our modern media society really shake Washington and force through changes that powerful interests didn't really want to pursue. I think it's a very encouraging week.

DOBBS: I think that's a wonderful point, Ron. And following up on that, Karen, we saw Jim Sensenbrenner, the congressman in charge of the House judiciary committee, the chairman stand up against the White House, his colleagues, and the leadership of the Republican leadership in the House, and really, really make a stand on principle, along with House armed services committee chairman Congressman Duncan Hunter. This looks like a sea change, if you will, in Washington. Do you think so?

TUMULTY: Well, I think that it would have been far more significant if, in fact, the president had not come back, you know, and struck with as much force as he had. Essentially, what Duncan Hunter got out of this was something like four additional words added to the bill.

DOBBS: Respect and shall not abrogate.

TUMULTY: If you talk to the sponsors, they say that, in fact, is not something that adds a particularly significant safeguard that wasn't already in the bill. And what Congressman Sensenbrenner got was essentially a rain check. And that's one of these things that, you know, you'll have to believe it when you see it because these immigration measures that he was advocating are going to have a lot less momentum if they are not attached to a must-pass bill like this 9/11 intelligence reform.

DOBBS: Do you agree, Michael?

ISIKOFF: Yes. I mean, certainly it's hard to know how this shakes out. And the idea of centralizing intelligence sounds like a good one. It sort of forgets -- the fact is, there's been a lot of centralization. There's been a lot of focus ever since September 11. And, you know, my impression is, over time, that generally, what matters in Washington, is what people are paying attention to at the very top. What's on the front pages of the paper. What has political meaning in Washington. And there's no question, and there hasn't been any question ever since September 11 that terrorism is the primary issue people are concerned about at the time. There is high level interest at the very top of the government in staying focused on this issue. And for that reason, I mean, the troops down in the field and the bureaucracies is focused on it. Once that -- once that -- the political interest wanes, for whatever reason, something else takes its place, then it doesn't matter how you've devised the boxes. The best example...

DOBBS: Michael, I'm sorry, we're just about out of time. Karen, final word?

TUMULTY: Lou, again, I do think that this is -- we're going to look back on this as a very significant week, and proof that a second term could be, if anything, even more interesting than the first one.

DOBBS: Ron, you get the last word.

As opposed to the final word.

BROWNSTEIN: The other important thing that happened this week, the president seemed to rule out Social Security tax increases as part of a plan to reform the system, making it more difficult to imagine a bipartisan cooperation on this issue. That's one that he wants to come out of the box with very hard and push. But if it's going to be solely benefit cuts and borrowing to fund a transition to Social Security, it becomes harder to see how you get to the 60 votes in the Senate, much less any Democratic support in the House.

DOBBS: I'll make a prediction. One we won't be testing that vote for the next several years, at least. Two, I think this week we saw a sea change in the U.S. Congress. They're going to start to assert their proper role constitutionally in this republic of ours, and I think that's a good thing for all of us. Ron, thank you very much for being with us. Karen, Michael. Have a great weekend.

In heroes, Oregon national guardsman Peter Wood was wounded in Iraq, now he's recovering at home, and he's sharing his story with a group of very curious young people. Bill Tucker has this story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The children at St. Pius School in Portland, Oregon, Second Lieutenant Peter Wood brings a faraway war much closer to home.

2ND LT. PETER WOOD, OREGON NATIONAL GUARD: I was in Iraq from April to September. I was in an area called Taji (ph), which is located just northwest of Baghdad.

TUCKER: Wood tells the children about his work helping the Iraqis repair broken water pipes, sewers and roads. He talks about the children.

WOOD: When we go and see kids your guys' age, they run up to humvees. They're not really wanting candy or food. A lot of them are just wanting pencils and papers to write because they love to write.

TUCKER: Wood patiently fields questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's it like being in war?

TUCKER: And describes being scared. What he doesn't talk about is the bomb that hit his humvee and nearly cost him his life.

WOOD: I remember the blast. I remember feeling it. It took our vehicle for a good ride. As far as it threw us into a canal. And so we tumbled around in the Humvee. I don't remember hearing the blast, but I remember seeing it and feeling it.

TUCKER: Wood lost two of his friends that day. Shrapnel tore through the tendons of his wrist and fingers leading to surgery and being sent home to recover. Wood hopes to recover full use of his hand one day and wishes he could return to Iraq.

WOOD: If I could go back today, I'd hop on a plane and go back.

TUCKER: While his hand heals, woods works at an armory and speaks publicly about his Iraq experience.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thanks.

WOOD: No problem, bud. What's your name?

TUCKER: With a degree in political science, Wood hopes to stay in the military a few for years and move on to a career as diplomat or politician. Bill Tucker, CNN, reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: Coming up next here, is it time for Kofi Annan to resign at the United Nations? Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation will be here. He says it's past time for him to leave his post.

And what do balding men and "beam me up Scotty" have in common? We'll have that story for you and a great deal more next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Embattled U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan finally received a public decoration of support from the United States yesterday. U.S. Ambassador John Danforth said the United States isn't pushing for Annan's resignation.

But certainly others are. Annan's critics say the escalating scandal over the U.N.'s corrupt Oil for Food Program means Annan will eventually have to go.

One of those critics is Ariel Cohen, fellow with the Heritage foundation, joining us tonight from Washington.

Ariel, John Danforth, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., says he's doing just fine, thank you. And you say he has to go. What do you think the basis of the difference of view is?

ARIEL COHEN, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, first of all, Lou, it's not only I say he has to go, a lot of folks on the Capitol Hill in the Congress, but also...

DOBBS: Ariel, Ariel, I said, you among them...

COHEN: Yes. Right. And the foreign governments, especially the Asian governments are very interested in seeing Kofi Annan going, because Asia will be next to nominate the next Secretary-General, and they can't wait for him to leave.

DOBBS: But, again, my question is, Ariel, why do you think the United States ambassador to the United Nations, John Danforth, gives Kofi Annan a pledge of support, if you will, and you think he should go? What is the base of the difference in view?

COHEN: The difference is that Kofi Annan presided over a massive failure of his organization, of the United Nations, in administering a program that put about $20 billion in the pocket of Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein went and spent this money on the development of weapons of mass destruction, on oppressing his own people as well as on personal luxury. In the meantime, the U.N. did very little, if anything...

DOBBS: Ariel, Ariel, I'm sorry. You're sort of rehashing here what we all know and have been reporting here for months.

COHEN: OK. Right.

DOBBS: Again, I'm going to repeat the question. What do you think is the basis of the difference between the support of the United States ambassador to the United Nations who offered support to Kofi Annan and your own view in which you seek and suggest and say outright that he should leave?

COHEN: I think that he provided poor leadership, that his organization is on the verge of moral and financial bankruptcy. And I think this is the U.S. taxpayer dollar that is spent in a very wrong way.

DOBBS: Well, do you believe the United Nations has any relevance at all, or is it an institution, whether Kofi Annan is there or not, should simply dissipate and disappear from the geopolitical scene?

COHEN: Lou, I think that as long as Kofi Annan is there, any reform of the United Nations is not going to be possible. We tried this for decades now. The United States is funding 25 percent of the U.N. budget. The United States does not have the vote that is proportionate to its funding. It doesn't have the manpower, the personnel in the United Nations that would reflect the power and the funds that come from the American taxpayer to the United Nations.

If things were to be done right, if things were to be done right, just as the United States have the voting power on the board of the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund, the United States should have the similar clout of the United Nations.

DOBBS: OK. I'm sorry, we're out of time. Thank you very much for being here.

Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts. William Gilmore, Miami, Florida. "What happened to the America of World War II that would mandate rationing to get the troops what they need to do win? If our troops in Iraq need armor for their vehicles, then why aren't we doing everything possible to get it for them?"

Robert Moore in Warren, Rhode Island. "I'm glad to see your coverage of the lack of armor on the military vehicles in Iraq. But you should know that we just received e-mail from a young marine friend camped out by the Euphrates asking us to send socks. Socks! What does that tell you?" Donald Hutchinson from Dothan, Alabama. "Thousands of men died to stop the spread of Communism into South Korea and South Vietnam. We spent billions to fight the Cold War. Now aren't we rewarding Communism by sending our jobs, technology and our companies to communist China?"

Kay Gray in Sierra Vista, Arizona. "If it is reasonable and accepted that we arrive two hours prior to a flight to clear security at an airport, why not expect to spend at least that much time to clear security into the United States at the ports of entry?"

We love hearing from you. Send us your e-mails and your thoughts to loudobbs.com.

A reminder now to vote in our poll tonight. The question, "do you think high divorce rates are contributing to our decline in culture?" Yes or no? Cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll have the results coming up in just a few moments.

Next, though, from amazing moments in space to exciting discoveries at the molecular level. I'll be talking about the year's biggest scientific breakthroughs with the editor-in-chief of Discover magazine. Steven Petranek. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: With new drugs that target cancer cells to the advancement in space tourism, 2004 certainly packed with scientific breakthroughs. "Discover" magazine's "The Year in Science" issue, it highlights what it calls the 100 most important discoveries and developments during one revolution around the sun.

Joining me now is the editor-in-chief of "Discover," Stephen Petranek. Good to have you with us.

STEPHEN PETRANEK, EDITOR IN CHIEF, "DISCOVER" MAGAZINE: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

DOBBS: Well, Steve, let's start, what do you consider to be the number one story, science story of this year?

PETRANEK: Well, the number one story in the magazine this year is global warming, because we think it was a real turning point in which scientists stopped looking at whether or not it's real and started looking at what we're going to do about it, because the consequences of it are significant.

DOBBS: And Spaceshipone, referencing...

PETRANEK: Love Burt Rutan.

DOBBS: You have to.

PETRANEK: One of my favorite guys in the whole world. I think he's another Wright brother. He's one of the most innovative, creative aircraft designers who's ever lived. It's always startling to me that he doesn't work for Boeing or Airbus.

DOBBS: Well, perhaps a Boeing or Airbus isn't the right environment for him. Because I'm delighted that he is achieving what he's doing. And I don't think many other people on his team -- he and his team just deserve so much credit, because they did it with so little money, great ingenuity, great inventiveness. It's remarkable. I certainly agree with you on that.

What else did Spaceshipone eclipse, if you will?

PETRANEK: Well, the importance of Spaceshipone is that anybody can do this. That's the real deal. It doesn't require a government. It doesn't require billions of dollars. You don't have to have something that weighs what the shuttle weighs, and burns billions of pounds of energy just to get into orbit. Really, anybody can do this. Rutan's operation is a small operation. He did this for 20 million bucks.

DOBBS: And it's just inconceivable. Because you can't build an aircraft anymore for that amount of money.

PETRANEK: Executive aircraft costs three times what it cost him to build a rocket that goes into space. So soon we'll all be there.

DOBBS: Well, and we hope very soon.

Let's move to cloning. One of the most controversial issues. You look upon that as one of the most important stories as well.

PETRANEK: Absolutely. The Koreans and the Chinese have declared as national policy that they want to become the leaders, not a leader, the leaders in biotechnology in the near future.

DOBBS: Say that again, Steve, because I think that's really important.

PETRANEK: Both the Koreans and the Chinese have stated as national policy that they think their economies and their futures are tied to being the leaders in biotechnology.

DOBBS: Let me ask you something not necessarily on this story, and not in the 100. But the fact that the United States, either through its government, or through its business leadership, its technology leadership says, the United States will be number one in anything. There's been no declaration, no aspirational statement by a single leader, the Congress, the executive branch or the business community of this country, or the technology part of this community, this nation, about the United States being first. Do you find that peculiar?

PETRANEK: Well, we've always assumed it. We've always assumed that Boeing would beat Airbus. We've always assumed that we would be number one in medicine. We've always assumed that if you were going to get an operation someplace, you'd come to the United States, because that's the best place. We've always assumed that all the best drugs in the world would be made here. It's natural... DOBBS: Now they're not even made here, let alone the best.

PETRANEK: That's correct. That's correct. About 80 percent of our generics are made in China now. China has a stated policy that they want to become the leaders in all pharmacology in the future. And this development by the Koreans...

DOBBS: You want to say that again? The Chinese are saying that they want to be the leaders.

PETRANEK: In making drugs.

DOBBS: And the United States...

PETRANEK: And developing drugs.

DOBBS: ... is buying what they're already producing, rather than producing and advancing the technology...

PETRANEK: That's correct.

DOBBS: ... in biomedical science. Extraordinary.

PETRANEK: Well, it has partly to do with the confusion we have and the way we've tied leadership and biotechnology to agendas that have to do with moral leadership, so to speak.

DOBBS: I'm more of a simple fellow on these issues. I think it's a little bit about our leadership forgetting the traditions of this country and losing sight of our destiny. And that's concerning, I think, for all of us, no matter what field we're in.

Let's talk about teleportation, because that's exciting.

PETRANEK: Well, we have a guy at the National Bureau of Standards and an Austrian scientist who were able to take all the information from an atom, an individual atom, and recreate it in another spot. Very close by, but without moving the atom. And if I could put this in human terms, this won't -- I'm not expecting in my lifetime or my children's lifetime that we will be able to do the "beam me up Scotty" thing.

But the basic deal is that we collect a pile of material that you're made out of, the chemicals you're made out of, you know, some...

DOBBS: Better start with you, Steve.

PETRANEK: All right. With me. Some water, and a pile of basic chemicals and some water in one spot and we...

DOBBS: And you really believe this is at hand?

PETRANEK: Oh, yeah. But not for us. I believe it's at hand at the very small level, at the atomic level. And the reason this is important it will help us build quantum computers, which will make our regular computers look like chicken feed.

DOBBS: Steve Petranek, thanks for being here.

PETRANEK: It's a pleasure.

DOBBS: It's an exciting issue, and a wonderful edition of "Discover" magazine. Thanks.

PETRANEK: Thank you.

DOBBS: Coming up next, the results of our poll tonight, a preview of what's ahead come Monday. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Sixty-eight percent of you say that indeed divorce rates are contributing to our cultural decline.

Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us here Monday. For all of us here, we wish you a very pleasant weekend. Good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired December 10, 2004 - 18:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, what took so long? The military today finally ordered additional armored Humvees for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. But only after a bipartisan storm of protest.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: That's the president's top commitment to our troops, making sure that they have the best equipment so that they can complete their mission.

DOBBS: We'll have that report.

And despite the oil-for-food scandal and congressional calls for U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to resign, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations supports Annan. One of the leading experts on the Middle East, however, says Annan must go. Ariel Cohen is our guest.

Democrats in disarray. MoveOn.org says the Democratic Party belongs to them and not the elites of the political consulting class. That report coming up.

TERRY MCAULIFFE, DNC CHAIR: In the Democratic Party, we like to sort of form these circular firing squads.

DOBBS: And while many are worried about gays as a threat to the institution of marriage, there are far larger, more critical and profound threats to marriage in America. We'll focus on those in our special report tonight, our "Culture in Decline."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Friday, December 10. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: Good evening.

Tonight after a firestorm of bipartisan protests, the Pentagon has ordered more armored Humvees for our troops. An additional 100 armored Humvees will be delivered to the Army each month.

Incredibly, the manufacturer of those armored Humvees has been saying for several weeks that it can produce more vehicles. But the Pentagon took action only after a National Guard soldier publicly complained.

Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Army is moving to buy more armored Humvees and see if other production lines can be accelerated, just two days after a pointed question from this soldier put Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the spot about the lack of armor for military vehicles.

Army officials say they were surprised to hear from news reports that Armor Holdings of Jacksonville, Florida, was prepared to sell the Pentagon 550 armored Humvees a month, because originally, the Army was told it could only get 450 because of commitments to other customers.

Pentagon officials say the new Army secretary, Francis Harvey, who was sworn in less than a month ago, called the CEO of the company directly, and is negotiating to buy all the Humvees the company can supply, which is up to 100 more a month.

Another company, ArmorWorks of Tempe, Arizona, says it could double production of armor plates that can be added to existing Humvees.

MATT SALMON, PRESIDENT ARMORWORKS: We produce 300 kits a month. We could be doing 600 kits a month. So when you hear language from the Pentagon that we're doing everything humanly possible, I'm telling you that the industry base is being underutilized.

MCINTYRE: But the Army says it already has a backlog of armor kits and can't install them any faster.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE: Just to be clear, Lou, it's not clear the Army will be able to get those extra Humvees anytime soon. The negotiations are still going on, and now it turns out that the company says in order to deliver the extra 100, they would have to retool the assembly line and stop its commitments to other customers. But that's something that could take weeks or months.

Meanwhile, the Army has set up a special armor task force to take a look at all the contracts to see if any of the production can be accelerated at other companies or if there are other ways to get armor to the battlefield faster.

DOBBS: It's remarkable, Jamie, when you put this in historical context. The United States was producing a Liberty ship every single day in world war ii when we were a nation of just under half what we are today.

How in the world is the Pentagon, the leadership in Washington, both parties, the White House, the Senate, the House, how in the world do people explain this kind of inaction and the fact that it required a soldier standing up in a town hall meeting with the secretary of defense for someone to even at least act like they're taking action? MCINTYRE: Well, you know, the Army would tell you that this issue is a lot more complicated than it seems. It's an industrial base question. That is, the requirement for this kind of armor three years ago was very small. There just were very few companies making it, and they all have suppliers and people who they have to work with. It just takes time to ramp up that production.

The Army says they were taken aback when they heard this company say they could produce more. And they're now calling them on that claim, and they're discovering, once again, it's a little more complicated. They might not be able to get the extra vehicles as fast as they want.

But there's a new Army secretary in charge. He's Rumsfeld's guy. He's described as a can-do former CEO who knows enough to pick up the phone and call the top guy at the company and try to get answers.

So the Pentagon is insisting they're going to try to cut through as much red tape as they can.

DOBBS: It's remarkable that there are only two companies in all of the United States, the world's only superpower, that can produce these kits and these armored Humvees. That speaking to the issue you raised, and that is a significant question about our industrial base.

Jamie, thank you very much. Jamie McIntyre, our senior Pentagon correspondent.

Three more American troops have been killed in Iraq. A U.S. Marine was killed in combat in al-Anbar province. That's west of Baghdad. And in the northern city of Mosul, two soldiers were killed in an accident involving two helicopters at an airfield. Twelve hundred and 87 Americans have now been killed in Iraq.

Elsewhere in Iraq, insurgents launched more attacks against Iraqi National Guardsmen. A roadside bomb in Baqubah exploded as an Iraqi National Guard patrol was passing by. Three Iraqi civilians were wounded in that explosion.

All but lost in the negotiations and the ultimate passage of the intelligence reform legislation is a simmering controversy over a spy program that elected officials can't talk about publicly, at least with any specificity.

It's a so-called black program that cannot be named, the budget of which can't be disclosed, and whose likely effectiveness can't be discussed, at least openly.

Two leading senators, however, are now declared opponents of this mysterious program.

National security correspondent David Ensor has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The mystery concerns a top-secret, multibillion-dollar program, which a knowledgeable source says involves a future potential type of spy satellite.

This week, a heated debate over the program burst into the open on the floor of the U.S. Senate with a key senator saying he'll fight to stop funds for a Bush administration program that he would not describe.

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV), VICE CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: My decision to take this somewhat unprecedented decision is based solely on my strenuous objection, shared by many in our committee, to a particular major funding acquisition program that I believe is totally unjustified and very, very wasteful and dangerous to the national security.

ENSOR: Dangerous, aides explained, because it sucks up black- budget money better spent elsewhere.

Fellow Democrat Senator Ron Wyden said in a statement, quote, "The original justification for developing this technology has eroded in importance due to the changed practices and capabilities of our adversaries."

Spy satellites act as both eyes and ears for U.S. intelligence. No one will say what the controversial program seeks to do. But outside experts say possibilities include radar satellites to target a battlefield as planes and UAVs now do, or stealthy spy satellites, designed to look to an adversary like space debris.

JOHN PIKE, DIRECTOR, GLOBALSECURITY.ORG: The challenge, then, is to make the signature of the satellite so small that, rather than looking like a satellite the size of a city bus, it looks like a small Coke can-sized space debris, and it blends in with the other 8,000 pieces of space junk out there.

ENSOR (on camera): Knowledgeable sources say the problem is these secret programs cost so much money that when you fund one, you block others. That is why there's been such sharp debate about a program shrouded in mystery.

David Ensor, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: The new intelligence reform legislation failed to introduce adequate measures to secure our borders, and it failed altogether to stop illegal aliens from obtaining U.S. driver's licenses.

But the legislation does contain national standards for driver's licenses and birth certificates for the first time ever. Some civil liberty groups say that even those limited measures go too far.

Lisa Sylvester reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Soon there will be more scrutiny in the way driver's licenses and other state I.D.s are handed out. The new intelligence bill requires the departments of transportation and homeland security establish new identification standards within 18 months.

Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchison promised to work with states to establish the new rules.

ASA HUTCHISON, UNDERSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I will be a voice for strong security measures in the travel documents, in the driver's licenses, so that we can make sure that we do not let that be used as a tool of terrorists, as we have seen in the past.

SYLVESTER: Eighteen of the 19 September 11 hijackers obtained some form of U.S. identification, some by fraud. But some liberal and civil libertarian groups see the identification standards as a back- door move to set up a national citizenship registry.

ELLIOT WINCHBERG, PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: That's certainly a concern. Today, national standards, tomorrow, a national database with everybody's information, and it can be misused.

SYLVESTER: The American Civil Liberties Union in a letter to Congress this week said a federal standard creates what amounts to a national I.D. card.

But immigration reform advocates say the government needs to play a greater role.

DAN STEIN, FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM: States have the authority to issue the most important I.D. document in the country. It is the keys to the kingdom, the basis on which all benefits and access to entitlements is determined.

SYLVESTER: Reporter: Most of the other industrialized countries have national identification cards.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Under the new intelligence bill, two years after the standards are published, federal agencies will stop accepting state I.D. cards and birth certificates which do not meet the new criteria -- Lou.

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much.

Lisa Sylvester.

As many as three million illegal aliens will have entered this country by the end of the year. It turns out now that some of those illegal aliens crossed our borders with the help of U.S. Customs.

Casey Wian has the report from Los Angeles -- Casey. CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it's a stunning development out of southern Texas, a Customs and Border Protection officer has been arrested and charged with helping smuggle at least 500 illegal aliens into this country.

According to the U.S. Attorney's indictment, 41-year-old Fabian Solis received $300 for each illegal alien he allowed to pass through lanes he worked as three Texas border crossings -- Roma, Rio Grand City and Falcon Heights.

Since March 2003, prosecutors allege Officer Solis made at least $170,000 from the scheme. He now faces up to 45 years in prison and a million dollars in fines. Prosecutors declined to comment on a judge's decision to release him after posting bail of just $15,000.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesman called the alleged smuggling conspiracy an awful thing if it's true, a black mark on us all -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, what is the consideration? How widespread is this?

WIAN: Well, there's really no way to tell, but, just less than a month ago, another Customs and Border Protection official in the Texas area, this one a senior inspector, was indicted as part of a plot to smuggle more than 10,000 pounds of marijuana into this country from Mexico. Customs and Border Protection officials say those are isolated incidents -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much.

Casey Wian reporting from Los Angeles.

Still ahead here, is the Democratic Party run by a group of ineffectual elites who are chronic losers or by moveon.org which now says it owns the Democratic Party? We'll have that report for you.

And a Christmas story tonight featuring Scrooge. Putting profits before charity hardly sounds like the stuff of a religious holiday. Is Christmas really about retailing? That story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The leadership of the Democratic Party is divided after its losses in the presidential and congressional elections. Tonight, upstart independent organization moveon.org says it has wrested control of the Democratic Party from the political elites.

Judy Woodruff has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Vacationers at Orlando's many amusement parks may enjoy being in freefall, but the Democrats meeting there sure don't. More than a month after their election losses, Democrats appear to be engaged in a battle for, as Pat Buchanan once put it for Republicans, the heart and soul of the party.

The liberal leaning Internet-driven group moveon clearly has a dog in that fight. In an e-mail to supporters, the head of moveon's political action committee blasts outgoing DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe as a tool for corporate donors and a professional election loser.

Eli Pariser says the grass-roots contributors who made moveon a political powerhouse bought the party, own it, and now he says, We are going to take it back."

TERRY MCAULIFFE, DNC CHAIRMAN: They didn't buy it, and nobody should say that. Listen, they are -- they're entitled to whatever their opinion is. You know, in the Democratic Party, we like to sort of form these circular firing squads. That's not my nature. I am very positive. I am very optimistic.

WOODRUFF: McAuliffe is particularly upbeat about his success in shoring up the party's bottom line. The DNC is in the black and outraised the RNC in the '04 election cycle for the first time ever.

But other Democrats saying money isn't everything.

HOWARD DEAN, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The way to rebuild the Democratic Party is not from the consultants down. It is from the ground up.

WOODRUFF: Howard Dean is likely to be a hot topic of conversation in Orlando, as Democrats look ahead to their February vote for a new party chairman. Dean is one of many possible and official candidates for the job. The crowded field underscores the various party factions and their often opposing ideas about how to win again. Some want to compete on the GOP's faith and family turf.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), FORMER VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Our faith is enormously important to us. Our family is obviously enormously important to us.

WOODRUFF: Other Democrats argue the party should stay true to its traditions and convince voters that issues such as equal rights, health care and education are moral values.

DONNA BRAZILE, DNC VOTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE: We need candidates at all levels that connect head to heart with voters.

WOODRUFF: Left or center? What about national security? Try to win back the red states or rebuild and expand the base? It's enough to make any Democrat's head spin.

Judy Woodruff, CNN, reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE) DOBBS: Retail giant Target has made itself the target of critics this season. The company has banned Salvation Army bell ringers from collecting donations at Target stores this Christmas.

Peter Viles reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PETER VILES, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Salvation Army's tradition of raising money at Christmas is over 100 years old, but it's overshadowed this year by an even older Christmas tradition. Since the age of Dickens, somebody plays the role of Scrooge. This year, it's the Target Corporation, which has banned Salvation Army bell ringers from all 1,300 of its stores.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Christmas hearing is The Salvation bell ringing and trying to put the spirit into people and show them what it's really about, not just shopping.

VILES: Target says the issue is fairness. It has long banned solicitors from its grounds, always make an exception for The Salvation Army, but it decided months ago, "If we continue to allow The Salvation Army to solicit, then it opens the door to any other groups that wish to solicit our guests." That is the kind of logic Wall Street understands.

HOWARD DAVIDOWITZ, RETAIL CONSULTANT: I think in the mind of Target and other retailers, you don't want your customers feeling pressured, either real or unreal, even by a charity as great as The Salvation Army.

VILES: But the Internet and talk radio are full of backlash, like this Web site, don'tshoptarget.com.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're going to lose a lot of customers. I wouldn't go back to them, to Target, if that's the way they feel.

VILES: The Salvation Army, meantime, trying to make up the lost donations elsewhere.

MAJ. GEORGE HOOD, THE SALVATION ARMY: The public response has been far beyond anything we ever expected, and it only shows that there is such a love affair and such a trust factor between the consumer public of this country and The Salvation Army.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VILES: The Salvation Army collected $9 million outside Target stores last winter. That was about one-tenth of its entire Christmas campaign.

And for the record, Lou, Kmart and Wal-Mart still do welcome The Salvation Army -- Lou.

DOBBS: Pete, thank you very much.

Peter Viles from Los Angeles.

For those of you who are interested in making a donation to The Salvation Army, you may do so by visiting their Web site, salvationarmyusa.org. That is salvationarmyusa.org.

Coming up next here, three of the nation's top political journalists join me. We'll be talking about intelligence reform, the armor crisis facing our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a great deal more.

Also ahead, are Kofi Annan's days at the United Nations numbered? U.N. ambassador -- the U.N. ambassador from the United States says no. Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation says yes. He's our guest next.

And in our special report, "Culture in Decline," tonight, the institution of marriage is under assault in this country. We'll have a special report next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Our special report now on our "Culture in Decline." Voters in 11 states passed bans on gay marriage. Advocates say they are defending the sanctity of the institution of marriage by doing so.

But marriage in this country was in trouble long before gay marriages were being performed in Massachusetts and the city of San Francisco. Marriage, in fact, has been under assault in this country now for decades.

Christine Romans reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At a theater near you, a cynical view of marriage.

JUDE LAW, ACTOR: Are you married?

JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: Yes. No. Yes.

LAW: Which?

ROBERTS: Separated.

ROMANS: And separations are a permanent feature of our society today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You may now kiss the bride.

ROMANS: Couples getting married today have an almost 50/50 chance of ending in divorce, and that first marriage probably won't last more than eight years.

DAVID BLANKENHORN, INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES: Compared to 30 or 40 years ago, there's been a definite weakening of marriage and the family, a much higher divorce rate. We have a very high rate of out- of-wedlock child bearing. About one of every three babies born today is born to an unmarried mother. People are spending less of their total lives married.

ROMANS: The early baby boomers have led the way. A third of Americans born between 1945 and 1954 have divorced at least once. And we're now marrying later. Women are waiting until they're at least 25 years old; men, almost 27. And we're not having as many kids.

KAREN KORNBLUM, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: There's also a lot more stress. There is stress about money, and then -- the other side of that coin -- there's a lot of stress about time, how are you going to find the time to raise your children and to have a quality of life.

ROMANS: Couples are spending more time at work. All those extra hours amount to 12 more weeks a year, and only 30 percent of families have a parent who stays home. It all adds up to enormous pressure on married couples.

At the same time, marriage advocates say popular culture makes a mockery out of marriage.

MATT DANIELS, ALLIANCE FOR MARRIAGE: Here we have a media culture that is celebrating behaviors and attitudes which are destructive to marriage, and what they're really celebrating is something that is destructive to the well-being of children.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROMANS: A dire assessment overall, but the divorce rate over the past few years has stalled, Lou, and teen pregnancy is declining sharply. That leaves the marriage rights lobby, the marriage -- pro- marriage groups lobbying to make sure that marriage is just for a man and a woman in this country.

DOBBS: Christine, thank you very much.

Christine Romans.

That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Do you think high divorce rates are contributing to our decline in culture? Yes or no. Please cast your votes at loudobbs.com. We'll have the results for you later in the broadcast.

Your thoughts on the shortage of armor for our troops in Iraq as well as three of the best political journalists in the country are coming up here next.

Also tonight, the United States officially supports U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation and others say Annan must go. Ariel Cohen is our guest.

And in "Heroes" tonight, an Oregon National Guardsman wounded in Iraq who says he would go back tomorrow. We'll have his remarkable story.

Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: "Lou Dobbs Tonight" continues. Here now for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: In just a moment, three of this country's top political journalists will be joining us to assess the events of this week, and there are many.

But, first, a look at some of the other top stories tonight.

Chrysler just a short while ago announced it will recall some 600,000 Dodge Durangos, Dodge Dakota pickup trucks from the 2000 through 2003 model years. Chrysler will replace front suspension upper ball joints, it says, which may be subject to progressive wear. Chrysler has sought to play down reports recently that right front wheels on the vehicles can actually suddenly fly off.

Rescuers off the coast of Alaska still searching for six missing crew members of a disabled Malaysian cargo ship. It split in two in heavy seas. But now officials face another critical problem. Half a million gallons of fuel from the ship has spilled into the waters of the Bering Sea. That threatening the nearby Aleutian Islands.

A food shortage in space. The crew of the international space station may be forced to return to earth if a supply mission isn't able to deliver food later this month. The crew of space station Alpha has already been forced to cut back on their meals. Russian space vehicles have been resupplying the station and ferrying crews since the Columbia disaster.

Three of this country's top journalists join me, Ron Brownstein of the "Los Angeles Times," Karen Tumulty of "TIME" and Michael Isikoff of "Newsweek."

Let me begin with you, Karen. The fact that Donald Rumsfeld stands up and says, we don't go to war with anything other than the army we have, a firestorm erupts from both Republicans and Democrats, and today suddenly we have armor being ordered. What in the world is Washington thinking about?

KAREN TUMULTY, "TIME": Yes, you know, funny how that works, Lou. I think in the annals of unfortunate comments, Secretary Rumsfeld, from a couple days ago will have to rank pretty high. Because this is, you know, part of his style, which has often been sort of dismissive and blunt-spoken. But the fact is, of course, all along the administration has been arguing that they have been giving our troops everything that they need. And certainly those -- that soldier's questions and then the reactions of the entire audience really sort of, I think, have shown a spotlight on a real problem over there.

DOBBS: Michael, the important passage of the most sweeping overhaul, as it's styled, of our intelligence agencies in a half century, what are the immediate impacts? MICHEAL ISIKOFF, "NEWSWEEK": Well, I mean, it has an immediate impact on sort of bureaucrats in Washington because a lot of this is just simply bureaucratic redrawing of the boxes. It's not at all clear that it's going to have an immediate impact on the front lines in the war on terror, and FBI agents doing their job or CIA agents doing their job. I mean, this is something that was a sort of symbolic victory for the White House because at some point, it sort of political clout was being questioned there because the president had come out for it during the campaign, and then when push came to shove right after the election, two conservative Republicans in the House were able to hold the thing up despite the fact that the White House was allegedly lobbying on it.

DOBBS: That may be an incredibly clever strategy on the part of the particularly Senator Joseph Lieberman who said it was all up to the president at the end of last week. It seemed, leading up to that, that in point of fact, the White House was tepid about the passage of the legislation.

ISIKOFF: They were tepid up to the point that sort of their manhood got challenged.

DOBBS: Right.

ISIKOFF: And once they got called on that, and it was being perceived as sort of weakness on the president's part, I mean, I had done a piece a couple weeks ago about Jim Sensenbrenner, who had been called by the president, when the piece went down, Sensenbrenner said the president was mild-mannered, didn't really arm-twist him, was extremely low-key conversation. It sort of raised questions, well, how much did he really want this? And I sort of -- once that sort of became the issue, then symbolically, this was important politically for the president to win because he has, you know, things he really does care about down the road in which his clout with Congress is going to be essential, and he needed to maintain the aura of invincibility.

DOBBS: Let me ask you this, Ron, first. The fact is that the passage of this legislation, do you agree with Michael first that it really amounts to not much more than a bureaucratic reshuffling and oar chart exercise, if you will, or is there something substantive here, and if not what in the world was all this about?

BROWNSTEIN: I don't think it's simply bureaucratic reshuffling. And even if it was only that, it's not clear that that isn't important, Lou. I mean, like the department of homeland security, this is something whose impact will have to be measured in practice. The idea of centralizing authority in a national intelligence director, centralizing more responsibility to counterterrorism center could be important if it works out to increase coordination. If it's adding another layer, as some have suggested, it won't. It won't have much impact. Can I make just one other point that links both stories this week which is extraordinary?

We are accustomed to thinking in Washington that change can only be effected by powerful interests with lots of money and lots of access to the media. But in the case of this soldier who stood up and asked the question of Donald Rumsfeld and also in the case of the 9/11 families who really were the motive force behind this extraordinary change, in both instances, we saw ordinary Americans who were supposed to be powerless in our modern media society really shake Washington and force through changes that powerful interests didn't really want to pursue. I think it's a very encouraging week.

DOBBS: I think that's a wonderful point, Ron. And following up on that, Karen, we saw Jim Sensenbrenner, the congressman in charge of the House judiciary committee, the chairman stand up against the White House, his colleagues, and the leadership of the Republican leadership in the House, and really, really make a stand on principle, along with House armed services committee chairman Congressman Duncan Hunter. This looks like a sea change, if you will, in Washington. Do you think so?

TUMULTY: Well, I think that it would have been far more significant if, in fact, the president had not come back, you know, and struck with as much force as he had. Essentially, what Duncan Hunter got out of this was something like four additional words added to the bill.

DOBBS: Respect and shall not abrogate.

TUMULTY: If you talk to the sponsors, they say that, in fact, is not something that adds a particularly significant safeguard that wasn't already in the bill. And what Congressman Sensenbrenner got was essentially a rain check. And that's one of these things that, you know, you'll have to believe it when you see it because these immigration measures that he was advocating are going to have a lot less momentum if they are not attached to a must-pass bill like this 9/11 intelligence reform.

DOBBS: Do you agree, Michael?

ISIKOFF: Yes. I mean, certainly it's hard to know how this shakes out. And the idea of centralizing intelligence sounds like a good one. It sort of forgets -- the fact is, there's been a lot of centralization. There's been a lot of focus ever since September 11. And, you know, my impression is, over time, that generally, what matters in Washington, is what people are paying attention to at the very top. What's on the front pages of the paper. What has political meaning in Washington. And there's no question, and there hasn't been any question ever since September 11 that terrorism is the primary issue people are concerned about at the time. There is high level interest at the very top of the government in staying focused on this issue. And for that reason, I mean, the troops down in the field and the bureaucracies is focused on it. Once that -- once that -- the political interest wanes, for whatever reason, something else takes its place, then it doesn't matter how you've devised the boxes. The best example...

DOBBS: Michael, I'm sorry, we're just about out of time. Karen, final word?

TUMULTY: Lou, again, I do think that this is -- we're going to look back on this as a very significant week, and proof that a second term could be, if anything, even more interesting than the first one.

DOBBS: Ron, you get the last word.

As opposed to the final word.

BROWNSTEIN: The other important thing that happened this week, the president seemed to rule out Social Security tax increases as part of a plan to reform the system, making it more difficult to imagine a bipartisan cooperation on this issue. That's one that he wants to come out of the box with very hard and push. But if it's going to be solely benefit cuts and borrowing to fund a transition to Social Security, it becomes harder to see how you get to the 60 votes in the Senate, much less any Democratic support in the House.

DOBBS: I'll make a prediction. One we won't be testing that vote for the next several years, at least. Two, I think this week we saw a sea change in the U.S. Congress. They're going to start to assert their proper role constitutionally in this republic of ours, and I think that's a good thing for all of us. Ron, thank you very much for being with us. Karen, Michael. Have a great weekend.

In heroes, Oregon national guardsman Peter Wood was wounded in Iraq, now he's recovering at home, and he's sharing his story with a group of very curious young people. Bill Tucker has this story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The children at St. Pius School in Portland, Oregon, Second Lieutenant Peter Wood brings a faraway war much closer to home.

2ND LT. PETER WOOD, OREGON NATIONAL GUARD: I was in Iraq from April to September. I was in an area called Taji (ph), which is located just northwest of Baghdad.

TUCKER: Wood tells the children about his work helping the Iraqis repair broken water pipes, sewers and roads. He talks about the children.

WOOD: When we go and see kids your guys' age, they run up to humvees. They're not really wanting candy or food. A lot of them are just wanting pencils and papers to write because they love to write.

TUCKER: Wood patiently fields questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's it like being in war?

TUCKER: And describes being scared. What he doesn't talk about is the bomb that hit his humvee and nearly cost him his life.

WOOD: I remember the blast. I remember feeling it. It took our vehicle for a good ride. As far as it threw us into a canal. And so we tumbled around in the Humvee. I don't remember hearing the blast, but I remember seeing it and feeling it.

TUCKER: Wood lost two of his friends that day. Shrapnel tore through the tendons of his wrist and fingers leading to surgery and being sent home to recover. Wood hopes to recover full use of his hand one day and wishes he could return to Iraq.

WOOD: If I could go back today, I'd hop on a plane and go back.

TUCKER: While his hand heals, woods works at an armory and speaks publicly about his Iraq experience.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thanks.

WOOD: No problem, bud. What's your name?

TUCKER: With a degree in political science, Wood hopes to stay in the military a few for years and move on to a career as diplomat or politician. Bill Tucker, CNN, reporting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: Coming up next here, is it time for Kofi Annan to resign at the United Nations? Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation will be here. He says it's past time for him to leave his post.

And what do balding men and "beam me up Scotty" have in common? We'll have that story for you and a great deal more next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Embattled U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan finally received a public decoration of support from the United States yesterday. U.S. Ambassador John Danforth said the United States isn't pushing for Annan's resignation.

But certainly others are. Annan's critics say the escalating scandal over the U.N.'s corrupt Oil for Food Program means Annan will eventually have to go.

One of those critics is Ariel Cohen, fellow with the Heritage foundation, joining us tonight from Washington.

Ariel, John Danforth, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., says he's doing just fine, thank you. And you say he has to go. What do you think the basis of the difference of view is?

ARIEL COHEN, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, first of all, Lou, it's not only I say he has to go, a lot of folks on the Capitol Hill in the Congress, but also...

DOBBS: Ariel, Ariel, I said, you among them...

COHEN: Yes. Right. And the foreign governments, especially the Asian governments are very interested in seeing Kofi Annan going, because Asia will be next to nominate the next Secretary-General, and they can't wait for him to leave.

DOBBS: But, again, my question is, Ariel, why do you think the United States ambassador to the United Nations, John Danforth, gives Kofi Annan a pledge of support, if you will, and you think he should go? What is the base of the difference in view?

COHEN: The difference is that Kofi Annan presided over a massive failure of his organization, of the United Nations, in administering a program that put about $20 billion in the pocket of Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein went and spent this money on the development of weapons of mass destruction, on oppressing his own people as well as on personal luxury. In the meantime, the U.N. did very little, if anything...

DOBBS: Ariel, Ariel, I'm sorry. You're sort of rehashing here what we all know and have been reporting here for months.

COHEN: OK. Right.

DOBBS: Again, I'm going to repeat the question. What do you think is the basis of the difference between the support of the United States ambassador to the United Nations who offered support to Kofi Annan and your own view in which you seek and suggest and say outright that he should leave?

COHEN: I think that he provided poor leadership, that his organization is on the verge of moral and financial bankruptcy. And I think this is the U.S. taxpayer dollar that is spent in a very wrong way.

DOBBS: Well, do you believe the United Nations has any relevance at all, or is it an institution, whether Kofi Annan is there or not, should simply dissipate and disappear from the geopolitical scene?

COHEN: Lou, I think that as long as Kofi Annan is there, any reform of the United Nations is not going to be possible. We tried this for decades now. The United States is funding 25 percent of the U.N. budget. The United States does not have the vote that is proportionate to its funding. It doesn't have the manpower, the personnel in the United Nations that would reflect the power and the funds that come from the American taxpayer to the United Nations.

If things were to be done right, if things were to be done right, just as the United States have the voting power on the board of the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund, the United States should have the similar clout of the United Nations.

DOBBS: OK. I'm sorry, we're out of time. Thank you very much for being here.

Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts. William Gilmore, Miami, Florida. "What happened to the America of World War II that would mandate rationing to get the troops what they need to do win? If our troops in Iraq need armor for their vehicles, then why aren't we doing everything possible to get it for them?"

Robert Moore in Warren, Rhode Island. "I'm glad to see your coverage of the lack of armor on the military vehicles in Iraq. But you should know that we just received e-mail from a young marine friend camped out by the Euphrates asking us to send socks. Socks! What does that tell you?" Donald Hutchinson from Dothan, Alabama. "Thousands of men died to stop the spread of Communism into South Korea and South Vietnam. We spent billions to fight the Cold War. Now aren't we rewarding Communism by sending our jobs, technology and our companies to communist China?"

Kay Gray in Sierra Vista, Arizona. "If it is reasonable and accepted that we arrive two hours prior to a flight to clear security at an airport, why not expect to spend at least that much time to clear security into the United States at the ports of entry?"

We love hearing from you. Send us your e-mails and your thoughts to loudobbs.com.

A reminder now to vote in our poll tonight. The question, "do you think high divorce rates are contributing to our decline in culture?" Yes or no? Cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll have the results coming up in just a few moments.

Next, though, from amazing moments in space to exciting discoveries at the molecular level. I'll be talking about the year's biggest scientific breakthroughs with the editor-in-chief of Discover magazine. Steven Petranek. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: With new drugs that target cancer cells to the advancement in space tourism, 2004 certainly packed with scientific breakthroughs. "Discover" magazine's "The Year in Science" issue, it highlights what it calls the 100 most important discoveries and developments during one revolution around the sun.

Joining me now is the editor-in-chief of "Discover," Stephen Petranek. Good to have you with us.

STEPHEN PETRANEK, EDITOR IN CHIEF, "DISCOVER" MAGAZINE: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

DOBBS: Well, Steve, let's start, what do you consider to be the number one story, science story of this year?

PETRANEK: Well, the number one story in the magazine this year is global warming, because we think it was a real turning point in which scientists stopped looking at whether or not it's real and started looking at what we're going to do about it, because the consequences of it are significant.

DOBBS: And Spaceshipone, referencing...

PETRANEK: Love Burt Rutan.

DOBBS: You have to.

PETRANEK: One of my favorite guys in the whole world. I think he's another Wright brother. He's one of the most innovative, creative aircraft designers who's ever lived. It's always startling to me that he doesn't work for Boeing or Airbus.

DOBBS: Well, perhaps a Boeing or Airbus isn't the right environment for him. Because I'm delighted that he is achieving what he's doing. And I don't think many other people on his team -- he and his team just deserve so much credit, because they did it with so little money, great ingenuity, great inventiveness. It's remarkable. I certainly agree with you on that.

What else did Spaceshipone eclipse, if you will?

PETRANEK: Well, the importance of Spaceshipone is that anybody can do this. That's the real deal. It doesn't require a government. It doesn't require billions of dollars. You don't have to have something that weighs what the shuttle weighs, and burns billions of pounds of energy just to get into orbit. Really, anybody can do this. Rutan's operation is a small operation. He did this for 20 million bucks.

DOBBS: And it's just inconceivable. Because you can't build an aircraft anymore for that amount of money.

PETRANEK: Executive aircraft costs three times what it cost him to build a rocket that goes into space. So soon we'll all be there.

DOBBS: Well, and we hope very soon.

Let's move to cloning. One of the most controversial issues. You look upon that as one of the most important stories as well.

PETRANEK: Absolutely. The Koreans and the Chinese have declared as national policy that they want to become the leaders, not a leader, the leaders in biotechnology in the near future.

DOBBS: Say that again, Steve, because I think that's really important.

PETRANEK: Both the Koreans and the Chinese have stated as national policy that they think their economies and their futures are tied to being the leaders in biotechnology.

DOBBS: Let me ask you something not necessarily on this story, and not in the 100. But the fact that the United States, either through its government, or through its business leadership, its technology leadership says, the United States will be number one in anything. There's been no declaration, no aspirational statement by a single leader, the Congress, the executive branch or the business community of this country, or the technology part of this community, this nation, about the United States being first. Do you find that peculiar?

PETRANEK: Well, we've always assumed it. We've always assumed that Boeing would beat Airbus. We've always assumed that we would be number one in medicine. We've always assumed that if you were going to get an operation someplace, you'd come to the United States, because that's the best place. We've always assumed that all the best drugs in the world would be made here. It's natural... DOBBS: Now they're not even made here, let alone the best.

PETRANEK: That's correct. That's correct. About 80 percent of our generics are made in China now. China has a stated policy that they want to become the leaders in all pharmacology in the future. And this development by the Koreans...

DOBBS: You want to say that again? The Chinese are saying that they want to be the leaders.

PETRANEK: In making drugs.

DOBBS: And the United States...

PETRANEK: And developing drugs.

DOBBS: ... is buying what they're already producing, rather than producing and advancing the technology...

PETRANEK: That's correct.

DOBBS: ... in biomedical science. Extraordinary.

PETRANEK: Well, it has partly to do with the confusion we have and the way we've tied leadership and biotechnology to agendas that have to do with moral leadership, so to speak.

DOBBS: I'm more of a simple fellow on these issues. I think it's a little bit about our leadership forgetting the traditions of this country and losing sight of our destiny. And that's concerning, I think, for all of us, no matter what field we're in.

Let's talk about teleportation, because that's exciting.

PETRANEK: Well, we have a guy at the National Bureau of Standards and an Austrian scientist who were able to take all the information from an atom, an individual atom, and recreate it in another spot. Very close by, but without moving the atom. And if I could put this in human terms, this won't -- I'm not expecting in my lifetime or my children's lifetime that we will be able to do the "beam me up Scotty" thing.

But the basic deal is that we collect a pile of material that you're made out of, the chemicals you're made out of, you know, some...

DOBBS: Better start with you, Steve.

PETRANEK: All right. With me. Some water, and a pile of basic chemicals and some water in one spot and we...

DOBBS: And you really believe this is at hand?

PETRANEK: Oh, yeah. But not for us. I believe it's at hand at the very small level, at the atomic level. And the reason this is important it will help us build quantum computers, which will make our regular computers look like chicken feed.

DOBBS: Steve Petranek, thanks for being here.

PETRANEK: It's a pleasure.

DOBBS: It's an exciting issue, and a wonderful edition of "Discover" magazine. Thanks.

PETRANEK: Thank you.

DOBBS: Coming up next, the results of our poll tonight, a preview of what's ahead come Monday. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Sixty-eight percent of you say that indeed divorce rates are contributing to our cultural decline.

Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us here Monday. For all of us here, we wish you a very pleasant weekend. Good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com