Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Crossfire

Ted Kennedy Takes on President Bush

Aired January 12, 2005 - 16:30   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)
ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville. Sitting in on the right, Bay Buchanan.

In the CROSSFIRE: Ted Kennedy takes on the Bush administration on Iraq.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I do not retreat from the view that Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam.

ANNOUNCER: On Social Security.

KENNEDY: The biggest threat to Social Security today is not the retirement of the baby boomers. It's George Bush and the Republican Party.

ANNOUNCER: Will Kennedy's opposition fire up the Democratic Party? Or, after a big win on Election Day, is it full steam ahead for the Bush agenda?

Today on CROSSFIRE.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, James Carville and Bay Buchanan.

(APPLAUSE)

JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy called on the Democrats to be Democrats, while taking aim at President Bush. Kennedy says his agenda is just what the party needs after two White House losses and Congress still under the thumb of the GOP.

BAY BUCHANAN, CO-HOST: And, actually, Kennedy's remarks could be good news for the real America. If the Democrats listen to him, Republicans will hold on to that White House and Congress for years to come.

But, first, the best political briefing on television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."

CARVILLE: We started the war in Iraq because we were told there was collaboration between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission proved that was an entire fabrication on the part of the Bush administration.

But the real reason that we went to war in Iraq, we were told, is because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that, if we didn't invade, they would turn these weapons over to al Qaeda. And we were told that there was no doubt that we would find them. Now we find out the whole thing went out with a pathetic whimper.

In the last month, the search for weapons of mass destruction came to an inglorious and pitiful end. Now, one of the great lies of the last 20 years has been put to rest. My friends, we're not even looking for them anymore.

(LAUGHTER)

BUCHANAN: James, listen, how can you -- you can't even suggest that the president is -- he is not the only one that thought this. Clinton thought there was weapons of mass destruction, Gore, the British, the French, the Germans. Everybody knew there were weapons of mass destruction.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: By the time we went to war, they pretty much had a good idea they weren't there.

BUCHANAN: Not true.

CARVILLE: We kicked out 1,000 U.N. inspectors that had been there for 200, for 90 days or whatever. By the time that we went to war and they were begging us to say where they were.

BUCHANAN: James, that's not true.

CARVILLE: There were people before that, they knew when they went to war, they probably didn't have them. And they were still telling us.

(CROSSTALK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: No. Your friends with "The New York" -- your friends with "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" believed there were weapons of mass destruction up until the last minute. But we will move along.

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

CARVILLE: There's a lot of people -- the CIA didn't believe it. And the U.N. sure believe it and told us and asked us where they were. We couldn't point them out.

BUCHANAN: The president has outlined a bold agenda for his second term, confirming of conservative judges, overhauling the tax code, Social Security reform and reining in spending while funding the troops.

He campaigned on these issues and can claim a mandate on each of them. What's more, if he accomplishes any of them, his legacy will be firm. The same cannot be said, however, of his immigration proposal, amnesty for eight million and an open door for millions more. The president dropped this issue in his campaign for a reason. Americans are opposed to it, and so are many powerful leaders in his own party.

He'd be wise to put this one on the back-burner and leave it there.

CARVILLE: Let's see. What's his legacy? Bankrupting the country. They started a war based on a false pretense.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: That he has no idea that -- we're just going to slink out of that, I suspect here, within, you know, pretty soon after not too long, because we can't stay there any longer.

BUCHANAN: Yes, there's a few people that think like you do, but obviously they lost an election a couple months back, James.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? Everybody loses an election.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: The stuff they are digging up these days. First, they tell us that Jefferson and Strom Thurmond both had black mistresses that produced offspring. Now a fellow by the name of C.A. Tripp has come out with a book claiming that Abraham Lincoln was bisexual and shared a couple of cots with a couple of different males while he was married to Mary Todd.

And, in fact, Mr. Tripp, who died in 2003, quotes some rather affectionate letter closings to buttress his case. I think it is only fair to point out that Mr. Tripp had written other books on homosexuality before he penned the -- quote -- "The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln."

For me, I'm not that interested in the topic and will leave my curiosity up to the book review, but nearly point out what should be obvious to most people. What difference does it make whether he was bi, gay or not? When it comes down the leaders, what difference does it make what their sexual orientation is?

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: You know, it's kind of...

I was reading a quick thing. I think, to be fair, not that Lincoln needs anybody to be fair to him. He was probably our greatest president. People of that age probably did things a little differently than we do.

BUCHANAN: Yes, I don't buy it. I think this fellow will have a hard time making this case. And what is the point at this time anyhow?

CARVILLE: Well, I mean, history -- it's means one thing if you all like to suppress the present. No sense in suppressing the past with it, too. Let these historians write and...

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Outing Lincoln, I don't think so. OK.

Scientific research out of Britain says children under the age of 8 shouldn't use cell phones. A professor there says there's a chance of radiation-caused tumors. It's too great of a risk for these young kids. One cell phone maker in the U.K. responded to the news by suspending production of a line of phones aimed at kids between the ages of 4 and 8 years old.

Now, I ask you, how many 4-8 year olds are talking -- are we talking about here? How many of these people, little kids, have cell phones? And what are their parents thinking?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: And who are these 5-year-olds talking to? It's bad enough these kids watch TV hours on end. Now they are being encouraged to talk on the phone. Whatever happened to go out and play?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: These kids best -- these parents get better get a grip before it's too late.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? I agree with you, Bay. And I have got a 9-year-old and a 6-year-old. And they have those kind of Barbie cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Yes, they're fun things...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But the TV war, I've been less successful..

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I've been able to hold off the cell phones, but the TV is coming -- the TV ways are coming in the house. But I agree with you. There's no business for children between 4 and 8. And there's no business targeting kids like that with cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Exactly. And parents, come on.

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Why would you even buy such things? It's just ridiculous.

CARVILLE: You're exactly right. I agree with you.

BUCHANAN: All righty, James and I agree. Let's make a note.

Next on CROSSFIRE, the senators' liberal lion outage roars his outrage at the president, while trying to rally the faithful and lay out a vision for the future of the Democratic Party. Is he looking forward or just recycling his greatest hits?

And TheBigA and the Prowler are sending e-mails around Capitol Hill, their real identities disclosed to all by a House staffer with a click of a button. Find out who is behind the aliases when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

President Bush hasn't even been sworn in for a second term and Ted Kennedy comes in swinking -- swinging.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: The Democratic senator says that the president is going in the wrong direction and trying to take the rest of us with him. Is Senator Kennedy's call for action for the Democrats a better idea?

Today in the CROSSFIRE, former Republican Congressman Bob Walker of Pennsylvania and Democratic strategist Steve McMahon.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, there's no question that John Kerry was Kennedy's candidate. They're both up there, good friends, liberals from New Hampshire -- from Massachusetts, if you like. And yet you have Kennedy just basically acting as if this election has not occurred, saying the same old, same old. Is this the future of your party? Are you just going to continue with the same arguments?

STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, listen, I think, until there's health insurance for every American in this country, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that.

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Until there are balanced budgets at the White House, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that. Until there's a sense of social justice in this country, I think that's what the Democratic Party is going to stand for.

The election did occur, Bay. You're absolutely right. But what people remember in all this talk about a mandate is, if 51,000 votes in Ohio had gone the other way, we would be talking about the Kerry administration and what a brilliant job they did and the new Democratic vision for the future. So, we are going to stand and fight as Democrats. We're going to take our fight to the people. We're going to win in the midterms. And then we'll see.

BUCHANAN: So, in fairness, you do not see that the voters in this country absolutely rejected liberalism as described by Kerry and Kennedy today?

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Well, let's just take a look at history and what this mandate is that the president likes to talk about.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan won 48 states. That's a mandate. This time, the president won Ohio by a margin of 115,000 votes. As I said, if 50,000 votes or so had gone the other way, we'd have a different president. So, it was a very, very close election; 3.5 million votes is nice, but -- and we congratulate the president for his victory. But it's the smallest margin for any president reelected in this century.

CARVILLE: Congressman, I actually looked at what Senator Kennedy said in going off of the highlighted thing that was sent out on his speech. He called for building a skilled work force, said that we should compete not by lowering our wages, but by raising our skills, providing affordable health care, strengthening national purpose, supporting parents, and dealing with the clear and present danger of terrorism.

Now, maybe I'm way out there in left field somewhere, you know, wandering around, but that sounds like pretty commonsense things to me. Where have I sort of gone astray here?

BOB WALKER (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, the problem is that he describes them as the party of the American dream, and yet the American dream under the Democrats has become taxation, litigation and regulation.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Really? I thought...

WALKER: And the real problem is that, when you look at the details of what they mean by all of that glowing rhetoric, is, that's what they are really talking about.

CARVILLE: Well, what was it about the Clinton presidency that so offended you, the peace or the prosperity?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Which one was the thing that really you didn't like?

WALKER: Well, I think -- I think peace and prosperity works very well. And President Clinton was helped very much by a Republican Congress.

CARVILLE: Really?

WALKER: That came in and helped him balance the budget.

CARVILLE: No. He was balanced the budget in 1994 with the greatest economic plan ever devised by the mind of man.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: He didn't balance it in 1994.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: He built this economy, so you guys could suck on it.

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What did you like, the peace or the...

WALKER: The fact is, he didn't balance it in 1994, James.

CARVILLE: Oh, so Bush has balanced it, huh, Congressman? Bush has done a real good job with his Republican Congress.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It wasn't balanced until 1997, James.

CARVILLE: He put it in motion.

WALKER: And that's when the Republicans put into motion the balanced budget amendment.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Alan Greenspan said the biggest thing to do this was the president's 1994 plan. Why is this Republican Congress and this Republican president...

WALKER: That's not what he said.

CARVILLE: Sure he did.

WALKER: That's not what he said, James.

CARVILLE: I'll be glad to show it to you. Right.

WALKER: Alan Greenspan said that it was the fiscal discipline showed by the Republican Congress that made the biggest difference toward bringing this nation toward prosperity.

MCMAHON: He didn't say it.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Absolutely, he did. And you can find the testimony on Capitol Hill.

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you were on a campaign. You were in Howard Dean's campaign. And I think what you heard today from Kennedy was a great deal that you experienced out there.

There's enormous anger in this Democratic Party. They have enormous hatred to the president. And you saw Kennedy just slashing up the president, angry at him. All the president has done is whip you guys a couple months ago and this anger permeate -- are you all going to move on? Is there going to be an anger management session here? Or is this what is going to define for you another four years?

MCMAHON: Well, let's look -- let's just look at the record and what the president has done.

BUCHANAN: I am talking about anger. Do you not see it? You saw it in Congress.

MCMAHON: Well, there certainly is anger. Any time people are lied to systematically and repeatedly by the American government, there's going to be a little anger.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: When Richard Nixon...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: That's an outrageous and it's the only kind of attack that has been...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It's pretty pathetic to have a senior member of Congress in the Democratic Party come out and attack the president just a few days before his inauguration. That is not typical of what happens in American politics.

MCMAHON: Well, you tell me, where are the weapons of mass destruction, Congressman? Have we been able to find them? Has the Bush administration been able to find them? Where are they?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The weapons of mass destruction -- what we found out in the course...

MCMAHON: Are they...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... here?

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No. What we found out in the course of the investigation was that Saddam Hussein had plans to build weapons of mass destruction and he had plans to use them.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: That wasn't the case that was made, though; 1,300 people have died over there because the president made the case...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The Clinton administration believed that there were weapons of mass destruction there.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And so did this administration.

MCMAHON: They didn't take us to war, did they, Congressman? Did they take us to war?

WALKER: Yes, they did take us to war to fight terrorism.

BUCHANAN: One at a time. One at a time, fellows.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And the problem for Democrats is that they believe that terrorism -- they believe that terrorism should be fought here at home, not overseas. And the American people -- the American people believe that terrorism ought to be fought off our own borders, not inside our own borders.

(APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But, Congressman, didn't the 9/11 Commission say that Iraq had nothing to do with it?

WALKER: Sure they did. Sure they did.

CARVILLE: Let me show you a quote here -- let me show you a quote in this morning's paper that I think is -- you know, I will say, I think it's outrageous. You want to give me this quote out of "The Washington Post"? Boom. Five, four, three, two, one, well, let's see, I'll be able to just... (CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: It's up. OK.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: "Congress allotted hundreds of millions of dollars for the weapons hunt, but there's been no problem accounting of the money. A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency said the entire budget and expenditures remain classified."

Now, why wouldn't they tell us how much of our money they spent on a fruitless search?

WALKER: Well, I think because we use a lot of the intelligence assets of this country in order to do that search and that we may reveal information to terrorists that would be involved...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: If we say we spent $751,422,000.16 of the American taxpayers' money searching for nothing, how does that -- what does that tell the terrorists?

WALKER: I think -- I think...

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Make a case to me how that -- how the terrorists are going to take that information and hurt us.

WALKER: James, consistently, consistently, what the Democratic Party has done is suggested...

CARVILLE: I'm not asking about the Democratic Party. I'm asking, why can't they give us a figure?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Well, because you are doing -- you are doing what they typically do. And that is, they assure us that, by compromising how we fight terrorism, that we somehow can maintain our strong terrorist fight.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Let's say this is the figure. Hey, al Qaeda, don't look at that figure, man, because, if you get that, you're in...

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: ... real, real, real -- you're going to know something that we shouldn't know. BUCHANAN: You know, Steve, do you think -- do you all want to spend the next couple years being the party, anti-war party? Isn't it important to the Democrats that, at this stage, they start being recognized as a party that does support a strong defense and supports us being successful in Iraq?

MCMAHON: Absolutely. Absolutely, Bay.

It's not that we're an anti-war party. We're a party that's in favor of telling the truth to the American people. We're a party that's in favor of balancing budgets.

WALKER: There was a lot of truth-telling during the Clinton administration.

MCMAHON: We're a party that's in favor of health care for every American.

CARVILLE: Yes, is sure was.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: The congressman likes to talk about the Republicans in Congress. But the Republicans, as far as I'm aware, have been in charge of Congress since 1994. And we have the biggest budget deficits in the history of the world.

BUCHANAN: You know...

MCMAHON: And the Bush administration isn't leading us any closer to a balanced budget. They want...

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you are talking...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: They want to borrow $2 trillion more so they can dismantle Social Security.

BUCHANAN: Of all people, you know that perception is reality in this business. And the perception in this country is that party, the Democratic Party, your party, is not there when it needs to be when it comes to security in this country and sort of. And that's why you lost. So, if you want to continue that, fine. I don't see how that's going to be successful.

Up next, Ted Kennedy jumps into his party's internal battle over abortion.

And, after the break, the wild weather out West. Wolf Blitzer reports on the continuing search for survivors in the deadly California mudslide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Coming up at the top of the hour, California Governor Schwarzenegger tours the devastation as the death toll from Monday's mudslide climbs.

The hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq comes to an end.

And the United States Supreme Court issues an important ruling on federal sentencing guidelines with wide-ranging implications for all of us. We'll discuss the impact with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.

All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."

Now back to CROSSFIRE.

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

More on Senator Kennedy's criticism of the president and plans for the Democrats to realign past -- regain past party glory.

Joining us, Bob Walker, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, and Steve McMahon, Democratic strategist.

BUCHANAN: Steve, the nation is clearly, I think a case, a strong case can be made, is moving to the right in many, many issues, not just the social issues, much more conservative fever out there.

And yet your party has been defined by its left flank, the ACLU, the gay agenda, the feminists, etcetera. And the issue of abortion has come up inside your party that you all have to back off, for instance, parental rights. This is something you all should probably take a position on and be in favor of. Abortion on demand should be backed off. Do you think there is some room there for the Democrats to start moderating a little bit on some of these social issues?

MCMAHON: Well, I think inside the party, there's plenty of room.

I mean, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, the leader in the House, is staunchly pro-choice. And Harry Reid, the leader in the Senate, is much less so. So, I mean, I think there's plenty of room in our party. The Republicans talk about a big tent. Their tent in fact is a little bit smaller than it might appear. Our tent, actually, is quite large.

And so there's plenty of room in our party for dissent. There's plenty of room for disagreement. But on the main issues that Democrats have fought for all these years, they are going to continue to fight for, you know, health care for every American. The list -- the list goes on and on.

CARVILLE: Congressman, you say you have a lot -- I'm sure you do -- a lot of contacts in the intelligence community and everything. What do your contacts on you -- how soon after these -- the January 30 elections are we going to be able to turn the Iraqi country -- over to the Iraqi people and get our troops out of there and declare... WALKER: I hope very soon.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I know, but give us a date.

WALKER: Well, I can't give you a date. But...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But you talk -- what is a good guess? You're an educated man.

WALKER: I'm not going to even try to guess on that.

What I do know is that, if we get a stable government there and if we are able to help stand up a reasonable military force and police force in that country, that they have a very good chance of making it on their own and then we can begin to move our troops out.

CARVILLE: I know, but...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But, having done that, what we will also do is have a stable democratic country in that region of the world, which will be a real plus for us in the world.

And, secondly, I think that the fact that we fought the terrorists movement inside of Iraq and if we accomplish a defeat of them with a democratic regime, that that will also stand as a testament, that what George Bush is trying to do in terms of standing up democracy around the world is the right thing to do.

CARVILLE: But you don't have a -- you don't have a -- you know, all of your sources and everything, like maybe like June the 2nd or September the 25th? Or will it be -- obviously, it will be next year sometime.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: I don't know any source that could come up with that figure for you, James.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... until we get the respect of the world back.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, you have been -- you have now spent -- you have not given us one idea, new, fresh approach the Democrats are going to take that might tell me that you all know -- have a means by which you're going to get back a majority, nothing. Can you give me one now? Everything you say is just old hat.

WALKER: Well, one thing we think that we're going to do in 2006 is make the Republicans stand and run on their record and defend it.

If the president really wants to dismantle Social Security and cut benefits for retirees, then he should go ahead and do that. And then his party can stand. Ronald Reagan actually mentioned, just mentioned it back in 1982 and the Republicans lost 26 seats that year. I think...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

MCMAHON: The Bush administration is talking about doing it, Congressman.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: What they are talking about doing is, they are talking about personalizing savings accounts for people based upon the fact that they already are putting a lot of their savings into...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: Reducing benefits.

WALKER: No, they are not -- they are talking about not reducing any benefits for anybody who is collecting Social Security now or is going to collect Social Security in the near future. But what they are talking about is, there are a generation of Americans...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What's the near future? That's the word. What does that -- tell me what it means. I'm -- near future. Somebody 55, 10 years from now, they are going to be 65, are they protected?

WALKER: Yes. They are going to be protected.

CARVILLE: They are going to be protected.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: They are going to be protected. My guess is that most people over age 40 will be protected.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

MCMAHON: That's a guess, though. "The Washington Post" reported based on leaks in the administration it's going to be...

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: I've got to thank you both. WALKER: That was later a discredited report, so...

BUCHANAN: Let me thank you, Congressman, for being with us today.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: OK. Thanks.

BUCHANAN: Steve, thank you very much.

Up next, why is one member of Congress answering to the name Tiger? We'll help solve that mystery next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Have you ever pushed a computer button and immediately wished you hadn't?

TheBigA and the Prowler undoubtedly wish one particular button wasn't pushed. Those are just two of the private e-mail names of Republican members of Congress that aren't private anymore. Illinois Republican Mark Kirk uses Prowler, a type of military aircraft, for his nickname. And I'm glad he's explained that to us. And sending an e-mail to TheBigA will get you a message to Florida Representative Ander Crenshaw.

What happened? A staff member of Majority Whip Roy Blunt put several dozen House members' addresses in the "to" section of an e- mail, instead of the "blind copy" section, uncovering nicknames like Banjo Player, Smoky, Congo and Tiger. Rrrrr.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Wow.

BUCHANAN: I don't know, James. Who do you think that is?

CARVILLE: There's a lot of reasons to vote against these Republicans. Their e-mail nicknames is not one of them, I can assure you.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: From the left, I'm James Carville. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

BUCHANAN: And from the right, I'm Bay Buchanan. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

Join us again tomorrow night, same time.

(APPLAUSE)

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

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





(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville. Sitting in on the right, Bay Buchanan.

In the CROSSFIRE: Ted Kennedy takes on the Bush administration on Iraq.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I do not retreat from the view that Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam.

ANNOUNCER: On Social Security.

KENNEDY: The biggest threat to Social Security today is not the retirement of the baby boomers. It's George Bush and the Republican Party.

ANNOUNCER: Will Kennedy's opposition fire up the Democratic Party? Or, after a big win on Election Day, is it full steam ahead for the Bush agenda?

Today on CROSSFIRE.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, James Carville and Bay Buchanan.

(APPLAUSE)

JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy called on the Democrats to be Democrats, while taking aim at President Bush. Kennedy says his agenda is just what the party needs after two White House losses and Congress still under the thumb of the GOP.

BAY BUCHANAN, CO-HOST: And, actually, Kennedy's remarks could be good news for the real America. If the Democrats listen to him, Republicans will hold on to that White House and Congress for years to come.

But, first, the best political briefing on television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."

CARVILLE: We started the war in Iraq because we were told there was collaboration between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission proved that was an entire fabrication on the part of the Bush administration.

But the real reason that we went to war in Iraq, we were told, is because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that, if we didn't invade, they would turn these weapons over to al Qaeda. And we were told that there was no doubt that we would find them. Now we find out the whole thing went out with a pathetic whimper.

In the last month, the search for weapons of mass destruction came to an inglorious and pitiful end. Now, one of the great lies of the last 20 years has been put to rest. My friends, we're not even looking for them anymore.

(LAUGHTER)

BUCHANAN: James, listen, how can you -- you can't even suggest that the president is -- he is not the only one that thought this. Clinton thought there was weapons of mass destruction, Gore, the British, the French, the Germans. Everybody knew there were weapons of mass destruction.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: By the time we went to war, they pretty much had a good idea they weren't there.

BUCHANAN: Not true.

CARVILLE: We kicked out 1,000 U.N. inspectors that had been there for 200, for 90 days or whatever. By the time that we went to war and they were begging us to say where they were.

BUCHANAN: James, that's not true.

CARVILLE: There were people before that, they knew when they went to war, they probably didn't have them. And they were still telling us.

(CROSSTALK)

(APPLAUSE) BUCHANAN: No. Your friends with "The New York" -- your friends with "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" believed there were weapons of mass destruction up until the last minute. But we will move along.

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

CARVILLE: There's a lot of people -- the CIA didn't believe it. And the U.N. sure believe it and told us and asked us where they were. We couldn't point them out.

BUCHANAN: The president has outlined a bold agenda for his second term, confirming of conservative judges, overhauling the tax code, Social Security reform and reining in spending while funding the troops.

He campaigned on these issues and can claim a mandate on each of them. What's more, if he accomplishes any of them, his legacy will be firm. The same cannot be said, however, of his immigration proposal, amnesty for eight million and an open door for millions more. The president dropped this issue in his campaign for a reason. Americans are opposed to it, and so are many powerful leaders in his own party.

He'd be wise to put this one on the back-burner and leave it there.

CARVILLE: Let's see. What's his legacy? Bankrupting the country. They started a war based on a false pretense.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: That he has no idea that -- we're just going to slink out of that, I suspect here, within, you know, pretty soon after not too long, because we can't stay there any longer.

BUCHANAN: Yes, there's a few people that think like you do, but obviously they lost an election a couple months back, James.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? Everybody loses an election.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: The stuff they are digging up these days. First, they tell us that Jefferson and Strom Thurmond both had black mistresses that produced offspring. Now a fellow by the name of C.A. Tripp has come out with a book claiming that Abraham Lincoln was bisexual and shared a couple of cots with a couple of different males while he was married to Mary Todd.

And, in fact, Mr. Tripp, who died in 2003, quotes some rather affectionate letter closings to buttress his case. I think it is only fair to point out that Mr. Tripp had written other books on homosexuality before he penned the -- quote -- "The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln." For me, I'm not that interested in the topic and will leave my curiosity up to the book review, but nearly point out what should be obvious to most people. What difference does it make whether he was bi, gay or not? When it comes down the leaders, what difference does it make what their sexual orientation is?

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: You know, it's kind of...

I was reading a quick thing. I think, to be fair, not that Lincoln needs anybody to be fair to him. He was probably our greatest president. People of that age probably did things a little differently than we do.

BUCHANAN: Yes, I don't buy it. I think this fellow will have a hard time making this case. And what is the point at this time anyhow?

CARVILLE: Well, I mean, history -- it's means one thing if you all like to suppress the present. No sense in suppressing the past with it, too. Let these historians write and...

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Outing Lincoln, I don't think so. OK.

Scientific research out of Britain says children under the age of 8 shouldn't use cell phones. A professor there says there's a chance of radiation-caused tumors. It's too great of a risk for these young kids. One cell phone maker in the U.K. responded to the news by suspending production of a line of phones aimed at kids between the ages of 4 and 8 years old.

Now, I ask you, how many 4-8 year olds are talking -- are we talking about here? How many of these people, little kids, have cell phones? And what are their parents thinking?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: And who are these 5-year-olds talking to? It's bad enough these kids watch TV hours on end. Now they are being encouraged to talk on the phone. Whatever happened to go out and play?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: These kids best -- these parents get better get a grip before it's too late.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? I agree with you, Bay. And I have got a 9-year-old and a 6-year-old. And they have those kind of Barbie cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Yes, they're fun things...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But the TV war, I've been less successful..

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I've been able to hold off the cell phones, but the TV is coming -- the TV ways are coming in the house. But I agree with you. There's no business for children between 4 and 8. And there's no business targeting kids like that with cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Exactly. And parents, come on.

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Why would you even buy such things? It's just ridiculous.

CARVILLE: You're exactly right. I agree with you.

BUCHANAN: All righty, James and I agree. Let's make a note.

Next on CROSSFIRE, the senators' liberal lion outage roars his outrage at the president, while trying to rally the faithful and lay out a vision for the future of the Democratic Party. Is he looking forward or just recycling his greatest hits?

And TheBigA and the Prowler are sending e-mails around Capitol Hill, their real identities disclosed to all by a House staffer with a click of a button. Find out who is behind the aliases when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

President Bush hasn't even been sworn in for a second term and Ted Kennedy comes in swinking -- swinging.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: The Democratic senator says that the president is going in the wrong direction and trying to take the rest of us with him. Is Senator Kennedy's call for action for the Democrats a better idea?

Today in the CROSSFIRE, former Republican Congressman Bob Walker of Pennsylvania and Democratic strategist Steve McMahon.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, there's no question that John Kerry was Kennedy's candidate. They're both up there, good friends, liberals from New Hampshire -- from Massachusetts, if you like. And yet you have Kennedy just basically acting as if this election has not occurred, saying the same old, same old. Is this the future of your party? Are you just going to continue with the same arguments?

STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, listen, I think, until there's health insurance for every American in this country, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that.

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Until there are balanced budgets at the White House, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that. Until there's a sense of social justice in this country, I think that's what the Democratic Party is going to stand for.

The election did occur, Bay. You're absolutely right. But what people remember in all this talk about a mandate is, if 51,000 votes in Ohio had gone the other way, we would be talking about the Kerry administration and what a brilliant job they did and the new Democratic vision for the future. So, we are going to stand and fight as Democrats. We're going to take our fight to the people. We're going to win in the midterms. And then we'll see.

BUCHANAN: So, in fairness, you do not see that the voters in this country absolutely rejected liberalism as described by Kerry and Kennedy today?

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Well, let's just take a look at history and what this mandate is that the president likes to talk about.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan won 48 states. That's a mandate. This time, the president won Ohio by a margin of 115,000 votes. As I said, if 50,000 votes or so had gone the other way, we'd have a different president. So, it was a very, very close election; 3.5 million votes is nice, but -- and we congratulate the president for his victory. But it's the smallest margin for any president reelected in this century.

CARVILLE: Congressman, I actually looked at what Senator Kennedy said in going off of the highlighted thing that was sent out on his speech. He called for building a skilled work force, said that we should compete not by lowering our wages, but by raising our skills, providing affordable health care, strengthening national purpose, supporting parents, and dealing with the clear and present danger of terrorism.

Now, maybe I'm way out there in left field somewhere, you know, wandering around, but that sounds like pretty commonsense things to me. Where have I sort of gone astray here?

BOB WALKER (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, the problem is that he describes them as the party of the American dream, and yet the American dream under the Democrats has become taxation, litigation and regulation. (APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Really? I thought...

WALKER: And the real problem is that, when you look at the details of what they mean by all of that glowing rhetoric, is, that's what they are really talking about.

CARVILLE: Well, what was it about the Clinton presidency that so offended you, the peace or the prosperity?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Which one was the thing that really you didn't like?

WALKER: Well, I think -- I think peace and prosperity works very well. And President Clinton was helped very much by a Republican Congress.

CARVILLE: Really?

WALKER: That came in and helped him balance the budget.

CARVILLE: No. He was balanced the budget in 1994 with the greatest economic plan ever devised by the mind of man.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: He didn't balance it in 1994.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: He built this economy, so you guys could suck on it.

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What did you like, the peace or the...

WALKER: The fact is, he didn't balance it in 1994, James.

CARVILLE: Oh, so Bush has balanced it, huh, Congressman? Bush has done a real good job with his Republican Congress.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It wasn't balanced until 1997, James.

CARVILLE: He put it in motion.

WALKER: And that's when the Republicans put into motion the balanced budget amendment.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Alan Greenspan said the biggest thing to do this was the president's 1994 plan. Why is this Republican Congress and this Republican president...

WALKER: That's not what he said.

CARVILLE: Sure he did.

WALKER: That's not what he said, James.

CARVILLE: I'll be glad to show it to you. Right.

WALKER: Alan Greenspan said that it was the fiscal discipline showed by the Republican Congress that made the biggest difference toward bringing this nation toward prosperity.

MCMAHON: He didn't say it.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Absolutely, he did. And you can find the testimony on Capitol Hill.

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you were on a campaign. You were in Howard Dean's campaign. And I think what you heard today from Kennedy was a great deal that you experienced out there.

There's enormous anger in this Democratic Party. They have enormous hatred to the president. And you saw Kennedy just slashing up the president, angry at him. All the president has done is whip you guys a couple months ago and this anger permeate -- are you all going to move on? Is there going to be an anger management session here? Or is this what is going to define for you another four years?

MCMAHON: Well, let's look -- let's just look at the record and what the president has done.

BUCHANAN: I am talking about anger. Do you not see it? You saw it in Congress.

MCMAHON: Well, there certainly is anger. Any time people are lied to systematically and repeatedly by the American government, there's going to be a little anger.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: When Richard Nixon...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: That's an outrageous and it's the only kind of attack that has been...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It's pretty pathetic to have a senior member of Congress in the Democratic Party come out and attack the president just a few days before his inauguration. That is not typical of what happens in American politics.

MCMAHON: Well, you tell me, where are the weapons of mass destruction, Congressman? Have we been able to find them? Has the Bush administration been able to find them? Where are they?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The weapons of mass destruction -- what we found out in the course...

MCMAHON: Are they...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... here?

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No. What we found out in the course of the investigation was that Saddam Hussein had plans to build weapons of mass destruction and he had plans to use them.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: That wasn't the case that was made, though; 1,300 people have died over there because the president made the case...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The Clinton administration believed that there were weapons of mass destruction there.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And so did this administration.

MCMAHON: They didn't take us to war, did they, Congressman? Did they take us to war?

WALKER: Yes, they did take us to war to fight terrorism.

BUCHANAN: One at a time. One at a time, fellows.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And the problem for Democrats is that they believe that terrorism -- they believe that terrorism should be fought here at home, not overseas. And the American people -- the American people believe that terrorism ought to be fought off our own borders, not inside our own borders.

(APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But, Congressman, didn't the 9/11 Commission say that Iraq had nothing to do with it?

WALKER: Sure they did. Sure they did.

CARVILLE: Let me show you a quote here -- let me show you a quote in this morning's paper that I think is -- you know, I will say, I think it's outrageous. You want to give me this quote out of "The Washington Post"? Boom. Five, four, three, two, one, well, let's see, I'll be able to just...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: It's up. OK.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: "Congress allotted hundreds of millions of dollars for the weapons hunt, but there's been no problem accounting of the money. A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency said the entire budget and expenditures remain classified."

Now, why wouldn't they tell us how much of our money they spent on a fruitless search?

WALKER: Well, I think because we use a lot of the intelligence assets of this country in order to do that search and that we may reveal information to terrorists that would be involved...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: If we say we spent $751,422,000.16 of the American taxpayers' money searching for nothing, how does that -- what does that tell the terrorists?

WALKER: I think -- I think...

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Make a case to me how that -- how the terrorists are going to take that information and hurt us.

WALKER: James, consistently, consistently, what the Democratic Party has done is suggested...

CARVILLE: I'm not asking about the Democratic Party. I'm asking, why can't they give us a figure?

(CROSSTALK) WALKER: Well, because you are doing -- you are doing what they typically do. And that is, they assure us that, by compromising how we fight terrorism, that we somehow can maintain our strong terrorist fight.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Let's say this is the figure. Hey, al Qaeda, don't look at that figure, man, because, if you get that, you're in...

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: ... real, real, real -- you're going to know something that we shouldn't know.

BUCHANAN: You know, Steve, do you think -- do you all want to spend the next couple years being the party, anti-war party? Isn't it important to the Democrats that, at this stage, they start being recognized as a party that does support a strong defense and supports us being successful in Iraq?

MCMAHON: Absolutely. Absolutely, Bay.

It's not that we're an anti-war party. We're a party that's in favor of telling the truth to the American people. We're a party that's in favor of balancing budgets.

WALKER: There was a lot of truth-telling during the Clinton administration.

MCMAHON: We're a party that's in favor of health care for every American.

CARVILLE: Yes, is sure was.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: The congressman likes to talk about the Republicans in Congress. But the Republicans, as far as I'm aware, have been in charge of Congress since 1994. And we have the biggest budget deficits in the history of the world.

BUCHANAN: You know...

MCMAHON: And the Bush administration isn't leading us any closer to a balanced budget. They want...

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you are talking...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: They want to borrow $2 trillion more so they can dismantle Social Security. BUCHANAN: Of all people, you know that perception is reality in this business. And the perception in this country is that party, the Democratic Party, your party, is not there when it needs to be when it comes to security in this country and sort of. And that's why you lost. So, if you want to continue that, fine. I don't see how that's going to be successful.

Up next, Ted Kennedy jumps into his party's internal battle over abortion.

And, after the break, the wild weather out West. Wolf Blitzer reports on the continuing search for survivors in the deadly California mudslide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

Coming up at the top of the hour, California Governor Schwarzenegger tours the devastation as the death toll from Monday's mudslide climbs.

The hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq comes to an end.

And the United States Supreme Court issues an important ruling on federal sentencing guidelines with wide-ranging implications for all of us. We'll discuss the impact with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.

All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."

Now back to CROSSFIRE.

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

More on Senator Kennedy's criticism of the president and plans for the Democrats to realign past -- regain past party glory.

Joining us, Bob Walker, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, and Steve McMahon, Democratic strategist.

BUCHANAN: Steve, the nation is clearly, I think a case, a strong case can be made, is moving to the right in many, many issues, not just the social issues, much more conservative fever out there.

And yet your party has been defined by its left flank, the ACLU, the gay agenda, the feminists, etcetera. And the issue of abortion has come up inside your party that you all have to back off, for instance, parental rights. This is something you all should probably take a position on and be in favor of. Abortion on demand should be backed off. Do you think there is some room there for the Democrats to start moderating a little bit on some of these social issues?

MCMAHON: Well, I think inside the party, there's plenty of room. I mean, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, the leader in the House, is staunchly pro-choice. And Harry Reid, the leader in the Senate, is much less so. So, I mean, I think there's plenty of room in our party. The Republicans talk about a big tent. Their tent in fact is a little bit smaller than it might appear. Our tent, actually, is quite large.

And so there's plenty of room in our party for dissent. There's plenty of room for disagreement. But on the main issues that Democrats have fought for all these years, they are going to continue to fight for, you know, health care for every American. The list -- the list goes on and on.

CARVILLE: Congressman, you say you have a lot -- I'm sure you do -- a lot of contacts in the intelligence community and everything. What do your contacts on you -- how soon after these -- the January 30 elections are we going to be able to turn the Iraqi country -- over to the Iraqi people and get our troops out of there and declare...

WALKER: I hope very soon.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I know, but give us a date.

WALKER: Well, I can't give you a date. But...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But you talk -- what is a good guess? You're an educated man.

WALKER: I'm not going to even try to guess on that.

What I do know is that, if we get a stable government there and if we are able to help stand up a reasonable military force and police force in that country, that they have a very good chance of making it on their own and then we can begin to move our troops out.

CARVILLE: I know, but...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But, having done that, what we will also do is have a stable democratic country in that region of the world, which will be a real plus for us in the world.

And, secondly, I think that the fact that we fought the terrorists movement inside of Iraq and if we accomplish a defeat of them with a democratic regime, that that will also stand as a testament, that what George Bush is trying to do in terms of standing up democracy around the world is the right thing to do.

CARVILLE: But you don't have a -- you don't have a -- you know, all of your sources and everything, like maybe like June the 2nd or September the 25th? Or will it be -- obviously, it will be next year sometime.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: I don't know any source that could come up with that figure for you, James.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... until we get the respect of the world back.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, you have been -- you have now spent -- you have not given us one idea, new, fresh approach the Democrats are going to take that might tell me that you all know -- have a means by which you're going to get back a majority, nothing. Can you give me one now? Everything you say is just old hat.

WALKER: Well, one thing we think that we're going to do in 2006 is make the Republicans stand and run on their record and defend it.

If the president really wants to dismantle Social Security and cut benefits for retirees, then he should go ahead and do that. And then his party can stand. Ronald Reagan actually mentioned, just mentioned it back in 1982 and the Republicans lost 26 seats that year. I think...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

MCMAHON: The Bush administration is talking about doing it, Congressman.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: What they are talking about doing is, they are talking about personalizing savings accounts for people based upon the fact that they already are putting a lot of their savings into...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: Reducing benefits.

WALKER: No, they are not -- they are talking about not reducing any benefits for anybody who is collecting Social Security now or is going to collect Social Security in the near future. But what they are talking about is, there are a generation of Americans...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What's the near future? That's the word. What does that -- tell me what it means. I'm -- near future. Somebody 55, 10 years from now, they are going to be 65, are they protected?

WALKER: Yes. They are going to be protected.

CARVILLE: They are going to be protected.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: They are going to be protected. My guess is that most people over age 40 will be protected.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

MCMAHON: That's a guess, though. "The Washington Post" reported based on leaks in the administration it's going to be...

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: I've got to thank you both.

WALKER: That was later a discredited report, so...

BUCHANAN: Let me thank you, Congressman, for being with us today.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: OK. Thanks.

BUCHANAN: Steve, thank you very much.

Up next, why is one member of Congress answering to the name Tiger? We'll help solve that mystery next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Have you ever pushed a computer button and immediately wished you hadn't?

TheBigA and the Prowler undoubtedly wish one particular button wasn't pushed. Those are just two of the private e-mail names of Republican members of Congress that aren't private anymore. Illinois Republican Mark Kirk uses Prowler, a type of military aircraft, for his nickname. And I'm glad he's explained that to us. And sending an e-mail to TheBigA will get you a message to Florida Representative Ander Crenshaw.

What happened? A staff member of Majority Whip Roy Blunt put several dozen House members' addresses in the "to" section of an e- mail, instead of the "blind copy" section, uncovering nicknames like Banjo Player, Smoky, Congo and Tiger. Rrrrr.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Wow. BUCHANAN: I don't know, James. Who do you think that is?

CARVILLE: There's a lot of reasons to vote against these Republicans. Their e-mail nicknames is not one of them, I can assure you.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: From the left, I'm James Carville. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

BUCHANAN: And from the right, I'm Bay Buchanan. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

Join us again tomorrow night, same time.

(APPLAUSE)

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 January 12, 2005 - 16:30   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville. Sitting in on the right, Bay Buchanan.

In the CROSSFIRE: Ted Kennedy takes on the Bush administration on Iraq.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I do not retreat from the view that Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam.

ANNOUNCER: On Social Security.

KENNEDY: The biggest threat to Social Security today is not the retirement of the baby boomers. It's George Bush and the Republican Party.

ANNOUNCER: Will Kennedy's opposition fire up the Democratic Party? Or, after a big win on Election Day, is it full steam ahead for the Bush agenda?

Today on CROSSFIRE.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, James Carville and Bay Buchanan.

(APPLAUSE)

JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy called on the Democrats to be Democrats, while taking aim at President Bush. Kennedy says his agenda is just what the party needs after two White House losses and Congress still under the thumb of the GOP.

BAY BUCHANAN, CO-HOST: And, actually, Kennedy's remarks could be good news for the real America. If the Democrats listen to him, Republicans will hold on to that White House and Congress for years to come.

But, first, the best political briefing on television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."

CARVILLE: We started the war in Iraq because we were told there was collaboration between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission proved that was an entire fabrication on the part of the Bush administration.

But the real reason that we went to war in Iraq, we were told, is because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that, if we didn't invade, they would turn these weapons over to al Qaeda. And we were told that there was no doubt that we would find them. Now we find out the whole thing went out with a pathetic whimper.

In the last month, the search for weapons of mass destruction came to an inglorious and pitiful end. Now, one of the great lies of the last 20 years has been put to rest. My friends, we're not even looking for them anymore.

(LAUGHTER)

BUCHANAN: James, listen, how can you -- you can't even suggest that the president is -- he is not the only one that thought this. Clinton thought there was weapons of mass destruction, Gore, the British, the French, the Germans. Everybody knew there were weapons of mass destruction.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: By the time we went to war, they pretty much had a good idea they weren't there.

BUCHANAN: Not true.

CARVILLE: We kicked out 1,000 U.N. inspectors that had been there for 200, for 90 days or whatever. By the time that we went to war and they were begging us to say where they were.

BUCHANAN: James, that's not true.

CARVILLE: There were people before that, they knew when they went to war, they probably didn't have them. And they were still telling us.

(CROSSTALK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: No. Your friends with "The New York" -- your friends with "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" believed there were weapons of mass destruction up until the last minute. But we will move along.

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

CARVILLE: There's a lot of people -- the CIA didn't believe it. And the U.N. sure believe it and told us and asked us where they were. We couldn't point them out.

BUCHANAN: The president has outlined a bold agenda for his second term, confirming of conservative judges, overhauling the tax code, Social Security reform and reining in spending while funding the troops.

He campaigned on these issues and can claim a mandate on each of them. What's more, if he accomplishes any of them, his legacy will be firm. The same cannot be said, however, of his immigration proposal, amnesty for eight million and an open door for millions more. The president dropped this issue in his campaign for a reason. Americans are opposed to it, and so are many powerful leaders in his own party.

He'd be wise to put this one on the back-burner and leave it there.

CARVILLE: Let's see. What's his legacy? Bankrupting the country. They started a war based on a false pretense.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: That he has no idea that -- we're just going to slink out of that, I suspect here, within, you know, pretty soon after not too long, because we can't stay there any longer.

BUCHANAN: Yes, there's a few people that think like you do, but obviously they lost an election a couple months back, James.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? Everybody loses an election.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: The stuff they are digging up these days. First, they tell us that Jefferson and Strom Thurmond both had black mistresses that produced offspring. Now a fellow by the name of C.A. Tripp has come out with a book claiming that Abraham Lincoln was bisexual and shared a couple of cots with a couple of different males while he was married to Mary Todd.

And, in fact, Mr. Tripp, who died in 2003, quotes some rather affectionate letter closings to buttress his case. I think it is only fair to point out that Mr. Tripp had written other books on homosexuality before he penned the -- quote -- "The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln."

For me, I'm not that interested in the topic and will leave my curiosity up to the book review, but nearly point out what should be obvious to most people. What difference does it make whether he was bi, gay or not? When it comes down the leaders, what difference does it make what their sexual orientation is?

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: You know, it's kind of...

I was reading a quick thing. I think, to be fair, not that Lincoln needs anybody to be fair to him. He was probably our greatest president. People of that age probably did things a little differently than we do.

BUCHANAN: Yes, I don't buy it. I think this fellow will have a hard time making this case. And what is the point at this time anyhow?

CARVILLE: Well, I mean, history -- it's means one thing if you all like to suppress the present. No sense in suppressing the past with it, too. Let these historians write and...

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Outing Lincoln, I don't think so. OK.

Scientific research out of Britain says children under the age of 8 shouldn't use cell phones. A professor there says there's a chance of radiation-caused tumors. It's too great of a risk for these young kids. One cell phone maker in the U.K. responded to the news by suspending production of a line of phones aimed at kids between the ages of 4 and 8 years old.

Now, I ask you, how many 4-8 year olds are talking -- are we talking about here? How many of these people, little kids, have cell phones? And what are their parents thinking?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: And who are these 5-year-olds talking to? It's bad enough these kids watch TV hours on end. Now they are being encouraged to talk on the phone. Whatever happened to go out and play?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: These kids best -- these parents get better get a grip before it's too late.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? I agree with you, Bay. And I have got a 9-year-old and a 6-year-old. And they have those kind of Barbie cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Yes, they're fun things...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But the TV war, I've been less successful..

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I've been able to hold off the cell phones, but the TV is coming -- the TV ways are coming in the house. But I agree with you. There's no business for children between 4 and 8. And there's no business targeting kids like that with cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Exactly. And parents, come on.

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Why would you even buy such things? It's just ridiculous.

CARVILLE: You're exactly right. I agree with you.

BUCHANAN: All righty, James and I agree. Let's make a note.

Next on CROSSFIRE, the senators' liberal lion outage roars his outrage at the president, while trying to rally the faithful and lay out a vision for the future of the Democratic Party. Is he looking forward or just recycling his greatest hits?

And TheBigA and the Prowler are sending e-mails around Capitol Hill, their real identities disclosed to all by a House staffer with a click of a button. Find out who is behind the aliases when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

President Bush hasn't even been sworn in for a second term and Ted Kennedy comes in swinking -- swinging.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: The Democratic senator says that the president is going in the wrong direction and trying to take the rest of us with him. Is Senator Kennedy's call for action for the Democrats a better idea?

Today in the CROSSFIRE, former Republican Congressman Bob Walker of Pennsylvania and Democratic strategist Steve McMahon.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, there's no question that John Kerry was Kennedy's candidate. They're both up there, good friends, liberals from New Hampshire -- from Massachusetts, if you like. And yet you have Kennedy just basically acting as if this election has not occurred, saying the same old, same old. Is this the future of your party? Are you just going to continue with the same arguments?

STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, listen, I think, until there's health insurance for every American in this country, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that.

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Until there are balanced budgets at the White House, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that. Until there's a sense of social justice in this country, I think that's what the Democratic Party is going to stand for.

The election did occur, Bay. You're absolutely right. But what people remember in all this talk about a mandate is, if 51,000 votes in Ohio had gone the other way, we would be talking about the Kerry administration and what a brilliant job they did and the new Democratic vision for the future. So, we are going to stand and fight as Democrats. We're going to take our fight to the people. We're going to win in the midterms. And then we'll see.

BUCHANAN: So, in fairness, you do not see that the voters in this country absolutely rejected liberalism as described by Kerry and Kennedy today?

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Well, let's just take a look at history and what this mandate is that the president likes to talk about.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan won 48 states. That's a mandate. This time, the president won Ohio by a margin of 115,000 votes. As I said, if 50,000 votes or so had gone the other way, we'd have a different president. So, it was a very, very close election; 3.5 million votes is nice, but -- and we congratulate the president for his victory. But it's the smallest margin for any president reelected in this century.

CARVILLE: Congressman, I actually looked at what Senator Kennedy said in going off of the highlighted thing that was sent out on his speech. He called for building a skilled work force, said that we should compete not by lowering our wages, but by raising our skills, providing affordable health care, strengthening national purpose, supporting parents, and dealing with the clear and present danger of terrorism.

Now, maybe I'm way out there in left field somewhere, you know, wandering around, but that sounds like pretty commonsense things to me. Where have I sort of gone astray here?

BOB WALKER (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, the problem is that he describes them as the party of the American dream, and yet the American dream under the Democrats has become taxation, litigation and regulation.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Really? I thought...

WALKER: And the real problem is that, when you look at the details of what they mean by all of that glowing rhetoric, is, that's what they are really talking about.

CARVILLE: Well, what was it about the Clinton presidency that so offended you, the peace or the prosperity?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Which one was the thing that really you didn't like?

WALKER: Well, I think -- I think peace and prosperity works very well. And President Clinton was helped very much by a Republican Congress.

CARVILLE: Really?

WALKER: That came in and helped him balance the budget.

CARVILLE: No. He was balanced the budget in 1994 with the greatest economic plan ever devised by the mind of man.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: He didn't balance it in 1994.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: He built this economy, so you guys could suck on it.

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What did you like, the peace or the...

WALKER: The fact is, he didn't balance it in 1994, James.

CARVILLE: Oh, so Bush has balanced it, huh, Congressman? Bush has done a real good job with his Republican Congress.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It wasn't balanced until 1997, James.

CARVILLE: He put it in motion.

WALKER: And that's when the Republicans put into motion the balanced budget amendment.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Alan Greenspan said the biggest thing to do this was the president's 1994 plan. Why is this Republican Congress and this Republican president...

WALKER: That's not what he said.

CARVILLE: Sure he did.

WALKER: That's not what he said, James.

CARVILLE: I'll be glad to show it to you. Right.

WALKER: Alan Greenspan said that it was the fiscal discipline showed by the Republican Congress that made the biggest difference toward bringing this nation toward prosperity.

MCMAHON: He didn't say it.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Absolutely, he did. And you can find the testimony on Capitol Hill.

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you were on a campaign. You were in Howard Dean's campaign. And I think what you heard today from Kennedy was a great deal that you experienced out there.

There's enormous anger in this Democratic Party. They have enormous hatred to the president. And you saw Kennedy just slashing up the president, angry at him. All the president has done is whip you guys a couple months ago and this anger permeate -- are you all going to move on? Is there going to be an anger management session here? Or is this what is going to define for you another four years?

MCMAHON: Well, let's look -- let's just look at the record and what the president has done.

BUCHANAN: I am talking about anger. Do you not see it? You saw it in Congress.

MCMAHON: Well, there certainly is anger. Any time people are lied to systematically and repeatedly by the American government, there's going to be a little anger.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: When Richard Nixon...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: That's an outrageous and it's the only kind of attack that has been...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It's pretty pathetic to have a senior member of Congress in the Democratic Party come out and attack the president just a few days before his inauguration. That is not typical of what happens in American politics.

MCMAHON: Well, you tell me, where are the weapons of mass destruction, Congressman? Have we been able to find them? Has the Bush administration been able to find them? Where are they?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The weapons of mass destruction -- what we found out in the course...

MCMAHON: Are they...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... here?

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No. What we found out in the course of the investigation was that Saddam Hussein had plans to build weapons of mass destruction and he had plans to use them.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: That wasn't the case that was made, though; 1,300 people have died over there because the president made the case...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The Clinton administration believed that there were weapons of mass destruction there.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And so did this administration.

MCMAHON: They didn't take us to war, did they, Congressman? Did they take us to war?

WALKER: Yes, they did take us to war to fight terrorism.

BUCHANAN: One at a time. One at a time, fellows.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And the problem for Democrats is that they believe that terrorism -- they believe that terrorism should be fought here at home, not overseas. And the American people -- the American people believe that terrorism ought to be fought off our own borders, not inside our own borders.

(APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But, Congressman, didn't the 9/11 Commission say that Iraq had nothing to do with it?

WALKER: Sure they did. Sure they did.

CARVILLE: Let me show you a quote here -- let me show you a quote in this morning's paper that I think is -- you know, I will say, I think it's outrageous. You want to give me this quote out of "The Washington Post"? Boom. Five, four, three, two, one, well, let's see, I'll be able to just... (CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: It's up. OK.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: "Congress allotted hundreds of millions of dollars for the weapons hunt, but there's been no problem accounting of the money. A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency said the entire budget and expenditures remain classified."

Now, why wouldn't they tell us how much of our money they spent on a fruitless search?

WALKER: Well, I think because we use a lot of the intelligence assets of this country in order to do that search and that we may reveal information to terrorists that would be involved...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: If we say we spent $751,422,000.16 of the American taxpayers' money searching for nothing, how does that -- what does that tell the terrorists?

WALKER: I think -- I think...

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Make a case to me how that -- how the terrorists are going to take that information and hurt us.

WALKER: James, consistently, consistently, what the Democratic Party has done is suggested...

CARVILLE: I'm not asking about the Democratic Party. I'm asking, why can't they give us a figure?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Well, because you are doing -- you are doing what they typically do. And that is, they assure us that, by compromising how we fight terrorism, that we somehow can maintain our strong terrorist fight.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Let's say this is the figure. Hey, al Qaeda, don't look at that figure, man, because, if you get that, you're in...

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: ... real, real, real -- you're going to know something that we shouldn't know. BUCHANAN: You know, Steve, do you think -- do you all want to spend the next couple years being the party, anti-war party? Isn't it important to the Democrats that, at this stage, they start being recognized as a party that does support a strong defense and supports us being successful in Iraq?

MCMAHON: Absolutely. Absolutely, Bay.

It's not that we're an anti-war party. We're a party that's in favor of telling the truth to the American people. We're a party that's in favor of balancing budgets.

WALKER: There was a lot of truth-telling during the Clinton administration.

MCMAHON: We're a party that's in favor of health care for every American.

CARVILLE: Yes, is sure was.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: The congressman likes to talk about the Republicans in Congress. But the Republicans, as far as I'm aware, have been in charge of Congress since 1994. And we have the biggest budget deficits in the history of the world.

BUCHANAN: You know...

MCMAHON: And the Bush administration isn't leading us any closer to a balanced budget. They want...

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you are talking...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: They want to borrow $2 trillion more so they can dismantle Social Security.

BUCHANAN: Of all people, you know that perception is reality in this business. And the perception in this country is that party, the Democratic Party, your party, is not there when it needs to be when it comes to security in this country and sort of. And that's why you lost. So, if you want to continue that, fine. I don't see how that's going to be successful.

Up next, Ted Kennedy jumps into his party's internal battle over abortion.

And, after the break, the wild weather out West. Wolf Blitzer reports on the continuing search for survivors in the deadly California mudslide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Coming up at the top of the hour, California Governor Schwarzenegger tours the devastation as the death toll from Monday's mudslide climbs.

The hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq comes to an end.

And the United States Supreme Court issues an important ruling on federal sentencing guidelines with wide-ranging implications for all of us. We'll discuss the impact with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.

All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."

Now back to CROSSFIRE.

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

More on Senator Kennedy's criticism of the president and plans for the Democrats to realign past -- regain past party glory.

Joining us, Bob Walker, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, and Steve McMahon, Democratic strategist.

BUCHANAN: Steve, the nation is clearly, I think a case, a strong case can be made, is moving to the right in many, many issues, not just the social issues, much more conservative fever out there.

And yet your party has been defined by its left flank, the ACLU, the gay agenda, the feminists, etcetera. And the issue of abortion has come up inside your party that you all have to back off, for instance, parental rights. This is something you all should probably take a position on and be in favor of. Abortion on demand should be backed off. Do you think there is some room there for the Democrats to start moderating a little bit on some of these social issues?

MCMAHON: Well, I think inside the party, there's plenty of room.

I mean, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, the leader in the House, is staunchly pro-choice. And Harry Reid, the leader in the Senate, is much less so. So, I mean, I think there's plenty of room in our party. The Republicans talk about a big tent. Their tent in fact is a little bit smaller than it might appear. Our tent, actually, is quite large.

And so there's plenty of room in our party for dissent. There's plenty of room for disagreement. But on the main issues that Democrats have fought for all these years, they are going to continue to fight for, you know, health care for every American. The list -- the list goes on and on.

CARVILLE: Congressman, you say you have a lot -- I'm sure you do -- a lot of contacts in the intelligence community and everything. What do your contacts on you -- how soon after these -- the January 30 elections are we going to be able to turn the Iraqi country -- over to the Iraqi people and get our troops out of there and declare... WALKER: I hope very soon.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I know, but give us a date.

WALKER: Well, I can't give you a date. But...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But you talk -- what is a good guess? You're an educated man.

WALKER: I'm not going to even try to guess on that.

What I do know is that, if we get a stable government there and if we are able to help stand up a reasonable military force and police force in that country, that they have a very good chance of making it on their own and then we can begin to move our troops out.

CARVILLE: I know, but...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But, having done that, what we will also do is have a stable democratic country in that region of the world, which will be a real plus for us in the world.

And, secondly, I think that the fact that we fought the terrorists movement inside of Iraq and if we accomplish a defeat of them with a democratic regime, that that will also stand as a testament, that what George Bush is trying to do in terms of standing up democracy around the world is the right thing to do.

CARVILLE: But you don't have a -- you don't have a -- you know, all of your sources and everything, like maybe like June the 2nd or September the 25th? Or will it be -- obviously, it will be next year sometime.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: I don't know any source that could come up with that figure for you, James.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... until we get the respect of the world back.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, you have been -- you have now spent -- you have not given us one idea, new, fresh approach the Democrats are going to take that might tell me that you all know -- have a means by which you're going to get back a majority, nothing. Can you give me one now? Everything you say is just old hat.

WALKER: Well, one thing we think that we're going to do in 2006 is make the Republicans stand and run on their record and defend it.

If the president really wants to dismantle Social Security and cut benefits for retirees, then he should go ahead and do that. And then his party can stand. Ronald Reagan actually mentioned, just mentioned it back in 1982 and the Republicans lost 26 seats that year. I think...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

MCMAHON: The Bush administration is talking about doing it, Congressman.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: What they are talking about doing is, they are talking about personalizing savings accounts for people based upon the fact that they already are putting a lot of their savings into...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: Reducing benefits.

WALKER: No, they are not -- they are talking about not reducing any benefits for anybody who is collecting Social Security now or is going to collect Social Security in the near future. But what they are talking about is, there are a generation of Americans...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What's the near future? That's the word. What does that -- tell me what it means. I'm -- near future. Somebody 55, 10 years from now, they are going to be 65, are they protected?

WALKER: Yes. They are going to be protected.

CARVILLE: They are going to be protected.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: They are going to be protected. My guess is that most people over age 40 will be protected.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

MCMAHON: That's a guess, though. "The Washington Post" reported based on leaks in the administration it's going to be...

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: I've got to thank you both. WALKER: That was later a discredited report, so...

BUCHANAN: Let me thank you, Congressman, for being with us today.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: OK. Thanks.

BUCHANAN: Steve, thank you very much.

Up next, why is one member of Congress answering to the name Tiger? We'll help solve that mystery next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Have you ever pushed a computer button and immediately wished you hadn't?

TheBigA and the Prowler undoubtedly wish one particular button wasn't pushed. Those are just two of the private e-mail names of Republican members of Congress that aren't private anymore. Illinois Republican Mark Kirk uses Prowler, a type of military aircraft, for his nickname. And I'm glad he's explained that to us. And sending an e-mail to TheBigA will get you a message to Florida Representative Ander Crenshaw.

What happened? A staff member of Majority Whip Roy Blunt put several dozen House members' addresses in the "to" section of an e- mail, instead of the "blind copy" section, uncovering nicknames like Banjo Player, Smoky, Congo and Tiger. Rrrrr.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Wow.

BUCHANAN: I don't know, James. Who do you think that is?

CARVILLE: There's a lot of reasons to vote against these Republicans. Their e-mail nicknames is not one of them, I can assure you.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: From the left, I'm James Carville. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

BUCHANAN: And from the right, I'm Bay Buchanan. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

Join us again tomorrow night, same time.

(APPLAUSE)

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

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





(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville. Sitting in on the right, Bay Buchanan.

In the CROSSFIRE: Ted Kennedy takes on the Bush administration on Iraq.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I do not retreat from the view that Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam.

ANNOUNCER: On Social Security.

KENNEDY: The biggest threat to Social Security today is not the retirement of the baby boomers. It's George Bush and the Republican Party.

ANNOUNCER: Will Kennedy's opposition fire up the Democratic Party? Or, after a big win on Election Day, is it full steam ahead for the Bush agenda?

Today on CROSSFIRE.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, James Carville and Bay Buchanan.

(APPLAUSE)

JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy called on the Democrats to be Democrats, while taking aim at President Bush. Kennedy says his agenda is just what the party needs after two White House losses and Congress still under the thumb of the GOP.

BAY BUCHANAN, CO-HOST: And, actually, Kennedy's remarks could be good news for the real America. If the Democrats listen to him, Republicans will hold on to that White House and Congress for years to come.

But, first, the best political briefing on television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."

CARVILLE: We started the war in Iraq because we were told there was collaboration between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission proved that was an entire fabrication on the part of the Bush administration.

But the real reason that we went to war in Iraq, we were told, is because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that, if we didn't invade, they would turn these weapons over to al Qaeda. And we were told that there was no doubt that we would find them. Now we find out the whole thing went out with a pathetic whimper.

In the last month, the search for weapons of mass destruction came to an inglorious and pitiful end. Now, one of the great lies of the last 20 years has been put to rest. My friends, we're not even looking for them anymore.

(LAUGHTER)

BUCHANAN: James, listen, how can you -- you can't even suggest that the president is -- he is not the only one that thought this. Clinton thought there was weapons of mass destruction, Gore, the British, the French, the Germans. Everybody knew there were weapons of mass destruction.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: By the time we went to war, they pretty much had a good idea they weren't there.

BUCHANAN: Not true.

CARVILLE: We kicked out 1,000 U.N. inspectors that had been there for 200, for 90 days or whatever. By the time that we went to war and they were begging us to say where they were.

BUCHANAN: James, that's not true.

CARVILLE: There were people before that, they knew when they went to war, they probably didn't have them. And they were still telling us.

(CROSSTALK)

(APPLAUSE) BUCHANAN: No. Your friends with "The New York" -- your friends with "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" believed there were weapons of mass destruction up until the last minute. But we will move along.

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

CARVILLE: There's a lot of people -- the CIA didn't believe it. And the U.N. sure believe it and told us and asked us where they were. We couldn't point them out.

BUCHANAN: The president has outlined a bold agenda for his second term, confirming of conservative judges, overhauling the tax code, Social Security reform and reining in spending while funding the troops.

He campaigned on these issues and can claim a mandate on each of them. What's more, if he accomplishes any of them, his legacy will be firm. The same cannot be said, however, of his immigration proposal, amnesty for eight million and an open door for millions more. The president dropped this issue in his campaign for a reason. Americans are opposed to it, and so are many powerful leaders in his own party.

He'd be wise to put this one on the back-burner and leave it there.

CARVILLE: Let's see. What's his legacy? Bankrupting the country. They started a war based on a false pretense.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: That he has no idea that -- we're just going to slink out of that, I suspect here, within, you know, pretty soon after not too long, because we can't stay there any longer.

BUCHANAN: Yes, there's a few people that think like you do, but obviously they lost an election a couple months back, James.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? Everybody loses an election.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: The stuff they are digging up these days. First, they tell us that Jefferson and Strom Thurmond both had black mistresses that produced offspring. Now a fellow by the name of C.A. Tripp has come out with a book claiming that Abraham Lincoln was bisexual and shared a couple of cots with a couple of different males while he was married to Mary Todd.

And, in fact, Mr. Tripp, who died in 2003, quotes some rather affectionate letter closings to buttress his case. I think it is only fair to point out that Mr. Tripp had written other books on homosexuality before he penned the -- quote -- "The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln." For me, I'm not that interested in the topic and will leave my curiosity up to the book review, but nearly point out what should be obvious to most people. What difference does it make whether he was bi, gay or not? When it comes down the leaders, what difference does it make what their sexual orientation is?

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: You know, it's kind of...

I was reading a quick thing. I think, to be fair, not that Lincoln needs anybody to be fair to him. He was probably our greatest president. People of that age probably did things a little differently than we do.

BUCHANAN: Yes, I don't buy it. I think this fellow will have a hard time making this case. And what is the point at this time anyhow?

CARVILLE: Well, I mean, history -- it's means one thing if you all like to suppress the present. No sense in suppressing the past with it, too. Let these historians write and...

(CROSSTALK)

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Outing Lincoln, I don't think so. OK.

Scientific research out of Britain says children under the age of 8 shouldn't use cell phones. A professor there says there's a chance of radiation-caused tumors. It's too great of a risk for these young kids. One cell phone maker in the U.K. responded to the news by suspending production of a line of phones aimed at kids between the ages of 4 and 8 years old.

Now, I ask you, how many 4-8 year olds are talking -- are we talking about here? How many of these people, little kids, have cell phones? And what are their parents thinking?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: And who are these 5-year-olds talking to? It's bad enough these kids watch TV hours on end. Now they are being encouraged to talk on the phone. Whatever happened to go out and play?

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: These kids best -- these parents get better get a grip before it's too late.

CARVILLE: Well, you know what? I agree with you, Bay. And I have got a 9-year-old and a 6-year-old. And they have those kind of Barbie cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Yes, they're fun things...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But the TV war, I've been less successful..

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I've been able to hold off the cell phones, but the TV is coming -- the TV ways are coming in the house. But I agree with you. There's no business for children between 4 and 8. And there's no business targeting kids like that with cell phones.

BUCHANAN: Exactly. And parents, come on.

(BELL RINGING)

BUCHANAN: Why would you even buy such things? It's just ridiculous.

CARVILLE: You're exactly right. I agree with you.

BUCHANAN: All righty, James and I agree. Let's make a note.

Next on CROSSFIRE, the senators' liberal lion outage roars his outrage at the president, while trying to rally the faithful and lay out a vision for the future of the Democratic Party. Is he looking forward or just recycling his greatest hits?

And TheBigA and the Prowler are sending e-mails around Capitol Hill, their real identities disclosed to all by a House staffer with a click of a button. Find out who is behind the aliases when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

President Bush hasn't even been sworn in for a second term and Ted Kennedy comes in swinking -- swinging.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: The Democratic senator says that the president is going in the wrong direction and trying to take the rest of us with him. Is Senator Kennedy's call for action for the Democrats a better idea?

Today in the CROSSFIRE, former Republican Congressman Bob Walker of Pennsylvania and Democratic strategist Steve McMahon.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, there's no question that John Kerry was Kennedy's candidate. They're both up there, good friends, liberals from New Hampshire -- from Massachusetts, if you like. And yet you have Kennedy just basically acting as if this election has not occurred, saying the same old, same old. Is this the future of your party? Are you just going to continue with the same arguments?

STEVE MCMAHON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, listen, I think, until there's health insurance for every American in this country, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that.

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Until there are balanced budgets at the White House, the Democratic Party is going to stand for that. Until there's a sense of social justice in this country, I think that's what the Democratic Party is going to stand for.

The election did occur, Bay. You're absolutely right. But what people remember in all this talk about a mandate is, if 51,000 votes in Ohio had gone the other way, we would be talking about the Kerry administration and what a brilliant job they did and the new Democratic vision for the future. So, we are going to stand and fight as Democrats. We're going to take our fight to the people. We're going to win in the midterms. And then we'll see.

BUCHANAN: So, in fairness, you do not see that the voters in this country absolutely rejected liberalism as described by Kerry and Kennedy today?

(APPLAUSE)

MCMAHON: Well, let's just take a look at history and what this mandate is that the president likes to talk about.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan won 48 states. That's a mandate. This time, the president won Ohio by a margin of 115,000 votes. As I said, if 50,000 votes or so had gone the other way, we'd have a different president. So, it was a very, very close election; 3.5 million votes is nice, but -- and we congratulate the president for his victory. But it's the smallest margin for any president reelected in this century.

CARVILLE: Congressman, I actually looked at what Senator Kennedy said in going off of the highlighted thing that was sent out on his speech. He called for building a skilled work force, said that we should compete not by lowering our wages, but by raising our skills, providing affordable health care, strengthening national purpose, supporting parents, and dealing with the clear and present danger of terrorism.

Now, maybe I'm way out there in left field somewhere, you know, wandering around, but that sounds like pretty commonsense things to me. Where have I sort of gone astray here?

BOB WALKER (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, the problem is that he describes them as the party of the American dream, and yet the American dream under the Democrats has become taxation, litigation and regulation. (APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Really? I thought...

WALKER: And the real problem is that, when you look at the details of what they mean by all of that glowing rhetoric, is, that's what they are really talking about.

CARVILLE: Well, what was it about the Clinton presidency that so offended you, the peace or the prosperity?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: Which one was the thing that really you didn't like?

WALKER: Well, I think -- I think peace and prosperity works very well. And President Clinton was helped very much by a Republican Congress.

CARVILLE: Really?

WALKER: That came in and helped him balance the budget.

CARVILLE: No. He was balanced the budget in 1994 with the greatest economic plan ever devised by the mind of man.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: He didn't balance it in 1994.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: He built this economy, so you guys could suck on it.

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What did you like, the peace or the...

WALKER: The fact is, he didn't balance it in 1994, James.

CARVILLE: Oh, so Bush has balanced it, huh, Congressman? Bush has done a real good job with his Republican Congress.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It wasn't balanced until 1997, James.

CARVILLE: He put it in motion.

WALKER: And that's when the Republicans put into motion the balanced budget amendment.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Alan Greenspan said the biggest thing to do this was the president's 1994 plan. Why is this Republican Congress and this Republican president...

WALKER: That's not what he said.

CARVILLE: Sure he did.

WALKER: That's not what he said, James.

CARVILLE: I'll be glad to show it to you. Right.

WALKER: Alan Greenspan said that it was the fiscal discipline showed by the Republican Congress that made the biggest difference toward bringing this nation toward prosperity.

MCMAHON: He didn't say it.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: Absolutely, he did. And you can find the testimony on Capitol Hill.

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you were on a campaign. You were in Howard Dean's campaign. And I think what you heard today from Kennedy was a great deal that you experienced out there.

There's enormous anger in this Democratic Party. They have enormous hatred to the president. And you saw Kennedy just slashing up the president, angry at him. All the president has done is whip you guys a couple months ago and this anger permeate -- are you all going to move on? Is there going to be an anger management session here? Or is this what is going to define for you another four years?

MCMAHON: Well, let's look -- let's just look at the record and what the president has done.

BUCHANAN: I am talking about anger. Do you not see it? You saw it in Congress.

MCMAHON: Well, there certainly is anger. Any time people are lied to systematically and repeatedly by the American government, there's going to be a little anger.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: When Richard Nixon...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: That's an outrageous and it's the only kind of attack that has been...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: It's pretty pathetic to have a senior member of Congress in the Democratic Party come out and attack the president just a few days before his inauguration. That is not typical of what happens in American politics.

MCMAHON: Well, you tell me, where are the weapons of mass destruction, Congressman? Have we been able to find them? Has the Bush administration been able to find them? Where are they?

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The weapons of mass destruction -- what we found out in the course...

MCMAHON: Are they...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... here?

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

WALKER: No. What we found out in the course of the investigation was that Saddam Hussein had plans to build weapons of mass destruction and he had plans to use them.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: That wasn't the case that was made, though; 1,300 people have died over there because the president made the case...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: The Clinton administration believed that there were weapons of mass destruction there.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And so did this administration.

MCMAHON: They didn't take us to war, did they, Congressman? Did they take us to war?

WALKER: Yes, they did take us to war to fight terrorism.

BUCHANAN: One at a time. One at a time, fellows.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: And the problem for Democrats is that they believe that terrorism -- they believe that terrorism should be fought here at home, not overseas. And the American people -- the American people believe that terrorism ought to be fought off our own borders, not inside our own borders.

(APPLAUSE)

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But, Congressman, didn't the 9/11 Commission say that Iraq had nothing to do with it?

WALKER: Sure they did. Sure they did.

CARVILLE: Let me show you a quote here -- let me show you a quote in this morning's paper that I think is -- you know, I will say, I think it's outrageous. You want to give me this quote out of "The Washington Post"? Boom. Five, four, three, two, one, well, let's see, I'll be able to just...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: It's up. OK.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: "Congress allotted hundreds of millions of dollars for the weapons hunt, but there's been no problem accounting of the money. A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency said the entire budget and expenditures remain classified."

Now, why wouldn't they tell us how much of our money they spent on a fruitless search?

WALKER: Well, I think because we use a lot of the intelligence assets of this country in order to do that search and that we may reveal information to terrorists that would be involved...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: If we say we spent $751,422,000.16 of the American taxpayers' money searching for nothing, how does that -- what does that tell the terrorists?

WALKER: I think -- I think...

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Make a case to me how that -- how the terrorists are going to take that information and hurt us.

WALKER: James, consistently, consistently, what the Democratic Party has done is suggested...

CARVILLE: I'm not asking about the Democratic Party. I'm asking, why can't they give us a figure?

(CROSSTALK) WALKER: Well, because you are doing -- you are doing what they typically do. And that is, they assure us that, by compromising how we fight terrorism, that we somehow can maintain our strong terrorist fight.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: Let's say this is the figure. Hey, al Qaeda, don't look at that figure, man, because, if you get that, you're in...

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: ... real, real, real -- you're going to know something that we shouldn't know.

BUCHANAN: You know, Steve, do you think -- do you all want to spend the next couple years being the party, anti-war party? Isn't it important to the Democrats that, at this stage, they start being recognized as a party that does support a strong defense and supports us being successful in Iraq?

MCMAHON: Absolutely. Absolutely, Bay.

It's not that we're an anti-war party. We're a party that's in favor of telling the truth to the American people. We're a party that's in favor of balancing budgets.

WALKER: There was a lot of truth-telling during the Clinton administration.

MCMAHON: We're a party that's in favor of health care for every American.

CARVILLE: Yes, is sure was.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: The congressman likes to talk about the Republicans in Congress. But the Republicans, as far as I'm aware, have been in charge of Congress since 1994. And we have the biggest budget deficits in the history of the world.

BUCHANAN: You know...

MCMAHON: And the Bush administration isn't leading us any closer to a balanced budget. They want...

BUCHANAN: Steve, you know, you are talking...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: They want to borrow $2 trillion more so they can dismantle Social Security. BUCHANAN: Of all people, you know that perception is reality in this business. And the perception in this country is that party, the Democratic Party, your party, is not there when it needs to be when it comes to security in this country and sort of. And that's why you lost. So, if you want to continue that, fine. I don't see how that's going to be successful.

Up next, Ted Kennedy jumps into his party's internal battle over abortion.

And, after the break, the wild weather out West. Wolf Blitzer reports on the continuing search for survivors in the deadly California mudslide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

Coming up at the top of the hour, California Governor Schwarzenegger tours the devastation as the death toll from Monday's mudslide climbs.

The hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq comes to an end.

And the United States Supreme Court issues an important ruling on federal sentencing guidelines with wide-ranging implications for all of us. We'll discuss the impact with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.

All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."

Now back to CROSSFIRE.

CARVILLE: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

More on Senator Kennedy's criticism of the president and plans for the Democrats to realign past -- regain past party glory.

Joining us, Bob Walker, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, and Steve McMahon, Democratic strategist.

BUCHANAN: Steve, the nation is clearly, I think a case, a strong case can be made, is moving to the right in many, many issues, not just the social issues, much more conservative fever out there.

And yet your party has been defined by its left flank, the ACLU, the gay agenda, the feminists, etcetera. And the issue of abortion has come up inside your party that you all have to back off, for instance, parental rights. This is something you all should probably take a position on and be in favor of. Abortion on demand should be backed off. Do you think there is some room there for the Democrats to start moderating a little bit on some of these social issues?

MCMAHON: Well, I think inside the party, there's plenty of room. I mean, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, the leader in the House, is staunchly pro-choice. And Harry Reid, the leader in the Senate, is much less so. So, I mean, I think there's plenty of room in our party. The Republicans talk about a big tent. Their tent in fact is a little bit smaller than it might appear. Our tent, actually, is quite large.

And so there's plenty of room in our party for dissent. There's plenty of room for disagreement. But on the main issues that Democrats have fought for all these years, they are going to continue to fight for, you know, health care for every American. The list -- the list goes on and on.

CARVILLE: Congressman, you say you have a lot -- I'm sure you do -- a lot of contacts in the intelligence community and everything. What do your contacts on you -- how soon after these -- the January 30 elections are we going to be able to turn the Iraqi country -- over to the Iraqi people and get our troops out of there and declare...

WALKER: I hope very soon.

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: I know, but give us a date.

WALKER: Well, I can't give you a date. But...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: But you talk -- what is a good guess? You're an educated man.

WALKER: I'm not going to even try to guess on that.

What I do know is that, if we get a stable government there and if we are able to help stand up a reasonable military force and police force in that country, that they have a very good chance of making it on their own and then we can begin to move our troops out.

CARVILLE: I know, but...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But, having done that, what we will also do is have a stable democratic country in that region of the world, which will be a real plus for us in the world.

And, secondly, I think that the fact that we fought the terrorists movement inside of Iraq and if we accomplish a defeat of them with a democratic regime, that that will also stand as a testament, that what George Bush is trying to do in terms of standing up democracy around the world is the right thing to do.

CARVILLE: But you don't have a -- you don't have a -- you know, all of your sources and everything, like maybe like June the 2nd or September the 25th? Or will it be -- obviously, it will be next year sometime.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: I don't know any source that could come up with that figure for you, James.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: ... until we get the respect of the world back.

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Steve, you have been -- you have now spent -- you have not given us one idea, new, fresh approach the Democrats are going to take that might tell me that you all know -- have a means by which you're going to get back a majority, nothing. Can you give me one now? Everything you say is just old hat.

WALKER: Well, one thing we think that we're going to do in 2006 is make the Republicans stand and run on their record and defend it.

If the president really wants to dismantle Social Security and cut benefits for retirees, then he should go ahead and do that. And then his party can stand. Ronald Reagan actually mentioned, just mentioned it back in 1982 and the Republicans lost 26 seats that year. I think...

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: But nobody is talking about doing that.

MCMAHON: The Bush administration is talking about doing it, Congressman.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: What they are talking about doing is, they are talking about personalizing savings accounts for people based upon the fact that they already are putting a lot of their savings into...

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: Reducing benefits.

WALKER: No, they are not -- they are talking about not reducing any benefits for anybody who is collecting Social Security now or is going to collect Social Security in the near future. But what they are talking about is, there are a generation of Americans...

(CROSSTALK)

CARVILLE: What's the near future? That's the word. What does that -- tell me what it means. I'm -- near future. Somebody 55, 10 years from now, they are going to be 65, are they protected?

WALKER: Yes. They are going to be protected.

CARVILLE: They are going to be protected.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: They are going to be protected. My guess is that most people over age 40 will be protected.

BUCHANAN: Exactly.

MCMAHON: That's a guess, though. "The Washington Post" reported based on leaks in the administration it's going to be...

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: I've got to thank you both.

WALKER: That was later a discredited report, so...

BUCHANAN: Let me thank you, Congressman, for being with us today.

(CROSSTALK)

WALKER: OK. Thanks.

BUCHANAN: Steve, thank you very much.

Up next, why is one member of Congress answering to the name Tiger? We'll help solve that mystery next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

BUCHANAN: Have you ever pushed a computer button and immediately wished you hadn't?

TheBigA and the Prowler undoubtedly wish one particular button wasn't pushed. Those are just two of the private e-mail names of Republican members of Congress that aren't private anymore. Illinois Republican Mark Kirk uses Prowler, a type of military aircraft, for his nickname. And I'm glad he's explained that to us. And sending an e-mail to TheBigA will get you a message to Florida Representative Ander Crenshaw.

What happened? A staff member of Majority Whip Roy Blunt put several dozen House members' addresses in the "to" section of an e- mail, instead of the "blind copy" section, uncovering nicknames like Banjo Player, Smoky, Congo and Tiger. Rrrrr.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: Wow. BUCHANAN: I don't know, James. Who do you think that is?

CARVILLE: There's a lot of reasons to vote against these Republicans. Their e-mail nicknames is not one of them, I can assure you.

(LAUGHTER)

CARVILLE: From the left, I'm James Carville. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

BUCHANAN: And from the right, I'm Bay Buchanan. That's it for CROSSFIRE.

Join us again tomorrow night, same time.

(APPLAUSE)

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