Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Crossfire
Primary Fallout
Aired February 04, 2004 - 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 and Paul Begala; on the right, Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson.
In the CROSSFIRE: What a difference a day makes, especially one with seven different states voting.
SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In our country, our America, everything is possible.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: It may be possible for John Edwards or even Wesley Clark to catch John Kerry, but is it really probable?
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: For the second time in a few days, a New England patriot has won on the road.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, Paul Begala and Robert Novak.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
We're awaiting a news briefing on the ricin investigation up on Capitol Hill. We'll bring it to you live. But while we're waiting, we want to talk about the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Technically, it isn't over. But after yesterday's string of wins, can anybody stop Senator John Kerry?
In the CROSSFIRE, Kerry's strategist Mark Mellman and Congressman Chaka Fattah, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who supports John Edwards -- Paul.
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Good to see you both.
Congressman Fatah, let me begin with you, sir. I want to play you -- first, it's good to see you again. Thanks for coming on. Excuse my rudeness. Hi.
Congressman, John Edwards was on the CNN Election Express, our heavy-duty campaign vehicle, when we were out in Iowa. He was good enough to sit down with us. And I asked him a question about whether he would run a positive campaign all the way through the primaries.
Let me play you the question and then John Edwards' answer and get you to respond.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Are you pledging that, for the entirety of the campaign, you won't attack your Democratic opponents in New Hampshire and South Carolina and the rest of the campaign as well?
EDWARDS: I intend to run exactly the same kind of campaign through the whole race. That doesn't mean, if somebody attacks me, that I won't respond and respond strongly. I will.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Congressman Fattah, what John Edwards said is, he would not attack one of his opponents unless he was attacked first. And yet, last week, this week, in South Carolina, John Edwards attacked John Kerry, saying he took too much money from lobbyists. Didn't he break that pledge that he made to me on the CNN Election Express?
REP. CHAKA FATTAH (D), PENNSYLVANIA: Well, look, I think what's important here is that South Carolina, the Edwards campaign, had a major victory. Kerry had victories in a number of other places.
We got a great primary election going on. And too much I think about the process. I think what's important here is that the Democratic Party is going to have two great candidates to pick from, so that we can get a real challenge to this administration, which they deserve in the first Tuesday of November.
NOVAK: Mr. Mellman, I hope you will be more responsive to my question.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: I -- the -- "The Washington Post" had a very interesting story last week, that Senator Kerry has received more money from lobbyists than any other member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, an amazing thing.
I haven't -- unless I missed something, I have not heard a defense of him. Are you saying all this special interest stuff is just so much jazz, that it's OK to take money from lobbyists?
MARK MELLMAN, JOHN KERRY CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST: Look, the reality is, less -- only 1 percent of the money John Kerry's taken in his career has come from lobbyists. If you look at special interest money, all told, John Kerry ranks 92nd in the Senate.
NOVAK: Lobbyists No. 1, though.
MELLMAN: Well, PAC money, that's special interest money, political action committee money. You can't just single out one kind of profession and say that's the only special interest, because it's not.
NOVAK: So it's OK to take money from lobbyists?
MELLMAN: It's a small proportion of his money. What's really OK is what he's done even after taking that money.
The reality is, John Kerry stood up to the oil companies to stop drilling in ANWR. He stood up to the drug companies and the HMOs to stop George Bush from giving them $140 billion. Every day, he stands up to special interests. That's what really counts, standing up to those special interests.
BEGALA: Well, Mark, let me ask you, last night on the Larry King show, John Edwards said -- he indicated very strongly he was going to attack John Kerry for supporting NAFTA.
Now, that's a legitimate -- I think this lobbying thing is a bunch of hooey. But this is a legitimate issue distinction. Edwards says NAFTA was wrong. Kerry voted for it. How are you going to defend him?
MELLMAN: Well...
BEGALA: You're going to Michigan, a union state where they don't much like NAFTA. Is he going to back off of that or is he going to be like Bill Clinton and stand strong for free trade?
MELLMAN: Well, think what Senator Kerry's been saying very consistently is that he wants free trade, but he wants fair trade. He wants to make sure that we have worker protections, environmental protections, that we're working on a level playing field.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: ... vote for NAFTA.
MELLMAN: He certainly is not backing away from his vote for NAFTA. He's saying, as we move to future trade agreements, we need to incorporate labor standards. We need to incorporate environmental standards. And that's why, for example, he's opposed the administration's version of other trade agreements that don't incorporate those kind of standards.
(CROSSTALK)
MELLMAN: So, very important, as we move forward.
NOVAK: Congressman Fattah, Paul doesn't think that lobbyists' contributions count. But you know who does think it counts? Senator Edwards. And he said the other day: "I don't take contributions from lobbyists, and Kerry obviously does. If we want real change in Washington, we need someone who hasn't been there for 15 to 20 years."
Now, what I find very interesting is that the New American Optimist, which is Edwards' PAC, has received a $3,333.50 contribution from Ungaretti & Harris, which is a lobbying firm whose clients include AirTran and the notorious Arthur Andersen. So, are you guys so deep in hypocrisy that you -- at the same time you say you can't take contributions from lobbyists, Senator Edwards' PAC receives one from a big lobbying firm?
MELLMAN: A simple yes will suffice, no doubt, Congressman.
(LAUGHTER)
FATTAH: This is the problem -- this is the problem when we major in the minors.
See, that's why, you know, Dean was unstoppable. Now Kerry's unstoppable. What Senator Edwards is doing is focusing on talking to the American people about real issues. We have millions without jobs, without health care. We have tens of millions trapped in poverty throughout the South and other parts of the country, Appalachia, and that to sit on the air and use valuable money...
NOVAK: What about taking money from...
FATTAH: ... focusing on what is literally the most unimportant detail.
NOVAK: Well, I'm interested in -- I'm interested in hypocrisy, Congressman. How can he say...
FATTAH: No, what you need to focus on is, what is the most stable campaign that has proceeded from point A to the point we're at now? No staff shakeups, same message, same message to every audience.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: It's OK to be hypocritical if you're for poor people, is that it?
FATTAH: Same message, Bob, to every audience, and he's moving forward.
BEGALA: Congressman, let me go from the minor to the major. There's no issue, at least for me, that's more important than terrorism and national security. Senator Kerry says -- and I think I'm quoting him here -- this is no time for on-the-job training. Doesn't he have a point that Senator Edwards, wonderfully gifted, with terrific values, great on the stump, is lacking in national security expertise?
FATTAH: Well, I think what's very important here for the American people is that we should not be in a position where we try to focus political decisions based on some supposed fear of terrorism. I'm reminded that it was once said that you have nothing to fear but fear itself. (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: It's real. With respect, sir, it's -- with respect, sir, they murdered 3,000 of our brothers and sisters.
(CROSSTALK)
FATTAH: Look, if you'd like me to comment, Paul, I'd be glad to comment, in that we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
A president of the United States, neither Kerry, nor Edwards, are going to be out fighting terrorists in the middle of the night. What they're going to be doing at the highest command post of power is making sure that, like what should be happening, is that cargo coming into our ship -- shipping ports are checked, which is not happening now. They're going to be making sure that I's and the T's are crossed in terms of making sure that we don't give up our civil liberties as we deal with this problem of terrorism.
There are issues to be dealt with. But, you know, we're talking about on-the-job training. I would like you to tell me what job training George W. Bush had when he was put into this office and now is running on the basis that, because of terrorism, we shouldn't make a change.
MELLMAN: Well, you're right, Congressman. He didn't have the right training. And that's why we're in the mess we're in.
You know, the reality is...
(APPLAUSE)
MELLMAN: The reality is, if I had a lawsuit to take to a jury, I'd want John Edwards in a second. He's great at that.
John Kerry's had experience dealing with the military, dealing with foreign policy, dealing with the fight on terrorism for a very long time. We need someone who's got experience, so we don't end up in the position that George Bush put us in.
NOVAK: Mark Mellman, let me ask you this question.
(CROSSTALK)
FATTAH: I have nothing -- I have no concerns at all about John Kerry and his experience in terms of national security.
What we need to focus the country on as Democrats is that they have a choice between great candidates who position themselves on these issues in a way in which either one of them could carry our banner. I think that, at the end of the day, that John Edwards would be an extraordinary president. I say that without taking any attack on Senator Kerry.
(CROSSTALK) NOVAK: All right, Mark Mellman, maybe you can clear up something for me. It really confuses me. Why are you so upset when the -- well...
BEGALA: Sorry to interrupt, Bob.
Congressman Fattah and Mark Mellman, thank you very much, but we're going to have to go now to Judy Woodruff, who is going to bring us an update on a press briefing on the use of ricin which was found on Capitol Hill.
Take it away, Judy.
(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)
BEGALA: Thank you, Judy. I know you and the CNN team will keep us posted on all the latest on the ricin investigation.
But, in the world of politics, we're focused on General Wesley Clark. He pulled off a narrow victory in Oklahoma yesterday. So, just ahead, we'll ask the general's top man on Capitol Hill which battleground the general will advance to next.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
If the Oklahoma vote totals hold up, General Wesley Clark will have accomplished something yesterday that Governor Howard Dean has yet to do, win a Democratic presidential primary. But what are the general's post-Oklahoma battle plans?
Well, joining us from Capitol Hill to reveal them is Clark supporter, New York Congressman, and soon to be chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Charlie Rangel.
REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: How we doing, gang?
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Good to see you, sir.
NOVAK: Congressman -- Congressman Rangel, you're a major figure in American politics. And even a big man sometimes makes a mistake and is big enough to admit it. Can you say, just between us, that you really made a blooper when you jumped too quick for this little general who wasn't ready for prime-time?
(LAUGHTER)
RANGEL: Listen, I think General Clark is an exciting hero for the United States. And you have to look at the scorecard. He's everybody's No. 2 guy. So, it seems to me that, while we do have the beginning here with Kerry up front and Edwards, in the final analysis, it's who stands on their feet at the end of the race. And I think that the Democrats are going to pick the person that they think can best beat George Bush, if he doesn't beat himself in the process. And so, I'm very excited about the progress we're making.
BEGALA: Well, Congressman Rangel, first off, our viewers should also, not only are you veteran legislator; you're a veteran. You're a decorated combat veteran of the Korean War. And so I want to ask you about this issue that has popped up again about then-Lieutenant Bush of the Air National Guard being AWOL for a year.
The Associated Press has reviewed the record. And the story reads as follows: "In 2000, the Associated Press reviewed nearly 200 pages of Bush's military records released by the National Guard Bureau in Arlington, Virginia. They contained no evidence that Bush reported for drills in Alabama."
George W. Bush was AWOL from the National Guard. Why didn't General Clark raise that when Peter Jennings challenged him about it in the debate?
RANGEL: I have no idea.
I don't think the general wants to be negative. But I do think it's out there and it's going to be incumbent upon the president of the United States and his campaign people to explain this gap in services. It takes a long time for George Bush to get it. He stills thinks there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And he's just agreed to have an investigation by an outside, so-called outside, force.
So we have to wait for him to get it. But I don't really think that Wesley Clark has to be negative with all these things. We've got America charged up to see how this president, who didn't have the popular vote, got into office, got us into war, squandered $9 trillion, have the highest unemployment in history. And all we need is a candidate to stand up and to show the facts. And I think the American people are ready to move ahead.
NOVAK: Congressman Rangel, I want to...
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: I want to get back to -- to General Clark, because he keeps saying things that just blow my mind. And, in his speech last night, after he bought the election in Oklahoma. As you know...
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: ... he spent much more than anybody in all of the states. But let's listen to something that General Clark said last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) WESLEY CLARK (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And we want an America in which being patriotic means using force only, only, only as a last resort, never as a political tool for an election.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NOVAK: You know, I have heard a lot of accusations about why President Bush went into Iraq. But never before have I heard it as a -- using it, a war, shedding American blood as a political tool for election. You surely don't think that, do you, Charlie?
RANGEL: No.
But I think Secretary O'Neill thinks so. He made it abundantly clear that he went in there to talk about the economy of America before 9/11 and the president had a mission to get rid of Saddam Hussein. In addition to that, our good friend Colin Powell said that he probably would not have supported the invasion of Iraq if he had known it was faulty information.
NOVAK: But not as a political tool for an election. You don't mean -- you don't think that -- I mean, that would be crazy to go into a war to get elected.
RANGEL: I don't believe the president would had the over 530 lives that have been lost in Iraq and the 2,000 men and women that are in hospitals throughout the United States wounded, I don't think any president or any American would have these lives lost, just so that they could get reelected, no.
But I think what the general is saying is that diplomacy and victory, which he is used to, certainly when he was the supreme commander of NATO, that it's better to negotiate and win without fighting a war, than it is without making up your mind that international support is not necessarily -- not necessary -- and that you've got to unilaterally attack a country.
You know, what you ought to be talking about is Secretary Rumsfeld saying, he doesn't even know whether we're winning or losing this war, that it's a slog, and that he doesn't know whether we're creating more terrorists than we're killing. These are answers that we deserve, Bob.
NOVAK: Well, thank you very much. We're out of time, Congressman Rangel.
RANGEL: Thank you.
NOVAK: I only -- I only wish General Clark were as articulate as you are. Thank you very much.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Up next, one of our audience members wants to know who would be on the ideal Democratic ticket.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Of course, Bob and I like to shoot our mouths off. But, once in a while, we let you fire back. So, let's get some audience questions here.
Sir, you want to fire back at Mr. Novak and me?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right. hi, I'm Carson (ph) from Jackson Hole, Wyoming. And...
BEGALA: Beautiful
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, it is.
I was wondering, what do you think would be the ideal Democratic ticket?
BEGALA: Bill and Hillary Clinton.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: I would -- I would like to see a dream ticket of Al Sharpton for president and Dennis Kucinich for vice president.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, how are you doing? My name is Chuck Dee (ph) from Huntington Beach, California.
And my question is about the Democratic ticket. I'm wondering why there are so many people in the race that know they're not going to win, i.e. Lieberman, Kucinich and Sharpton. And why did they do this and how will it affect the outcome?
NOVAK: Very simple. Very simple. You get face time on television. It screws up the debates and makes the whole process more irrational.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: You know, well, here's the other side, though. These folks have something to say. They contribute to the debates. Sharpton is as funny as any of them.
Kucinich has his ideas and he gets them out there. I don't think it's the worst thing in the world. The question will be, what happens when a former front-runner like Howard Dean loses nine primaries in a row and risks looking like Dennis Kucinich with better hair?
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: All right, let's get one more question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, my name is Joe (ph) and I'm from Midland, Texas.
My question is, is Howard Dean done?
BEGALA: Yes.
NOVAK: He is -- he is done. He is -- he is -- what? What's the word we want?
BEGALA: Three words. His-to-ry.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: OK.
BEGALA: I'm sorry. Look, I could be wrong. I often am. But you can't lose nine in a row after being 32 points ahead in the first one and pretend like that's good news.
From the left, I am Paul Begala. That's it for CROSSFIRE.
NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak.
Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.
"WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" starts right now.
(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 February 4, 2004 - 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 and Paul Begala; on the right, Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson.
In the CROSSFIRE: What a difference a day makes, especially one with seven different states voting.
SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In our country, our America, everything is possible.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: It may be possible for John Edwards or even Wesley Clark to catch John Kerry, but is it really probable?
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: For the second time in a few days, a New England patriot has won on the road.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(APPLAUSE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, Paul Begala and Robert Novak.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
We're awaiting a news briefing on the ricin investigation up on Capitol Hill. We'll bring it to you live. But while we're waiting, we want to talk about the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Technically, it isn't over. But after yesterday's string of wins, can anybody stop Senator John Kerry?
In the CROSSFIRE, Kerry's strategist Mark Mellman and Congressman Chaka Fattah, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who supports John Edwards -- Paul.
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Good to see you both.
Congressman Fatah, let me begin with you, sir. I want to play you -- first, it's good to see you again. Thanks for coming on. Excuse my rudeness. Hi.
Congressman, John Edwards was on the CNN Election Express, our heavy-duty campaign vehicle, when we were out in Iowa. He was good enough to sit down with us. And I asked him a question about whether he would run a positive campaign all the way through the primaries.
Let me play you the question and then John Edwards' answer and get you to respond.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Are you pledging that, for the entirety of the campaign, you won't attack your Democratic opponents in New Hampshire and South Carolina and the rest of the campaign as well?
EDWARDS: I intend to run exactly the same kind of campaign through the whole race. That doesn't mean, if somebody attacks me, that I won't respond and respond strongly. I will.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Congressman Fattah, what John Edwards said is, he would not attack one of his opponents unless he was attacked first. And yet, last week, this week, in South Carolina, John Edwards attacked John Kerry, saying he took too much money from lobbyists. Didn't he break that pledge that he made to me on the CNN Election Express?
REP. CHAKA FATTAH (D), PENNSYLVANIA: Well, look, I think what's important here is that South Carolina, the Edwards campaign, had a major victory. Kerry had victories in a number of other places.
We got a great primary election going on. And too much I think about the process. I think what's important here is that the Democratic Party is going to have two great candidates to pick from, so that we can get a real challenge to this administration, which they deserve in the first Tuesday of November.
NOVAK: Mr. Mellman, I hope you will be more responsive to my question.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: I -- the -- "The Washington Post" had a very interesting story last week, that Senator Kerry has received more money from lobbyists than any other member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, an amazing thing.
I haven't -- unless I missed something, I have not heard a defense of him. Are you saying all this special interest stuff is just so much jazz, that it's OK to take money from lobbyists?
MARK MELLMAN, JOHN KERRY CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST: Look, the reality is, less -- only 1 percent of the money John Kerry's taken in his career has come from lobbyists. If you look at special interest money, all told, John Kerry ranks 92nd in the Senate.
NOVAK: Lobbyists No. 1, though.
MELLMAN: Well, PAC money, that's special interest money, political action committee money. You can't just single out one kind of profession and say that's the only special interest, because it's not.
NOVAK: So it's OK to take money from lobbyists?
MELLMAN: It's a small proportion of his money. What's really OK is what he's done even after taking that money.
The reality is, John Kerry stood up to the oil companies to stop drilling in ANWR. He stood up to the drug companies and the HMOs to stop George Bush from giving them $140 billion. Every day, he stands up to special interests. That's what really counts, standing up to those special interests.
BEGALA: Well, Mark, let me ask you, last night on the Larry King show, John Edwards said -- he indicated very strongly he was going to attack John Kerry for supporting NAFTA.
Now, that's a legitimate -- I think this lobbying thing is a bunch of hooey. But this is a legitimate issue distinction. Edwards says NAFTA was wrong. Kerry voted for it. How are you going to defend him?
MELLMAN: Well...
BEGALA: You're going to Michigan, a union state where they don't much like NAFTA. Is he going to back off of that or is he going to be like Bill Clinton and stand strong for free trade?
MELLMAN: Well, think what Senator Kerry's been saying very consistently is that he wants free trade, but he wants fair trade. He wants to make sure that we have worker protections, environmental protections, that we're working on a level playing field.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: ... vote for NAFTA.
MELLMAN: He certainly is not backing away from his vote for NAFTA. He's saying, as we move to future trade agreements, we need to incorporate labor standards. We need to incorporate environmental standards. And that's why, for example, he's opposed the administration's version of other trade agreements that don't incorporate those kind of standards.
(CROSSTALK)
MELLMAN: So, very important, as we move forward.
NOVAK: Congressman Fattah, Paul doesn't think that lobbyists' contributions count. But you know who does think it counts? Senator Edwards. And he said the other day: "I don't take contributions from lobbyists, and Kerry obviously does. If we want real change in Washington, we need someone who hasn't been there for 15 to 20 years."
Now, what I find very interesting is that the New American Optimist, which is Edwards' PAC, has received a $3,333.50 contribution from Ungaretti & Harris, which is a lobbying firm whose clients include AirTran and the notorious Arthur Andersen. So, are you guys so deep in hypocrisy that you -- at the same time you say you can't take contributions from lobbyists, Senator Edwards' PAC receives one from a big lobbying firm?
MELLMAN: A simple yes will suffice, no doubt, Congressman.
(LAUGHTER)
FATTAH: This is the problem -- this is the problem when we major in the minors.
See, that's why, you know, Dean was unstoppable. Now Kerry's unstoppable. What Senator Edwards is doing is focusing on talking to the American people about real issues. We have millions without jobs, without health care. We have tens of millions trapped in poverty throughout the South and other parts of the country, Appalachia, and that to sit on the air and use valuable money...
NOVAK: What about taking money from...
FATTAH: ... focusing on what is literally the most unimportant detail.
NOVAK: Well, I'm interested in -- I'm interested in hypocrisy, Congressman. How can he say...
FATTAH: No, what you need to focus on is, what is the most stable campaign that has proceeded from point A to the point we're at now? No staff shakeups, same message, same message to every audience.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: It's OK to be hypocritical if you're for poor people, is that it?
FATTAH: Same message, Bob, to every audience, and he's moving forward.
BEGALA: Congressman, let me go from the minor to the major. There's no issue, at least for me, that's more important than terrorism and national security. Senator Kerry says -- and I think I'm quoting him here -- this is no time for on-the-job training. Doesn't he have a point that Senator Edwards, wonderfully gifted, with terrific values, great on the stump, is lacking in national security expertise?
FATTAH: Well, I think what's very important here for the American people is that we should not be in a position where we try to focus political decisions based on some supposed fear of terrorism. I'm reminded that it was once said that you have nothing to fear but fear itself. (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: It's real. With respect, sir, it's -- with respect, sir, they murdered 3,000 of our brothers and sisters.
(CROSSTALK)
FATTAH: Look, if you'd like me to comment, Paul, I'd be glad to comment, in that we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
A president of the United States, neither Kerry, nor Edwards, are going to be out fighting terrorists in the middle of the night. What they're going to be doing at the highest command post of power is making sure that, like what should be happening, is that cargo coming into our ship -- shipping ports are checked, which is not happening now. They're going to be making sure that I's and the T's are crossed in terms of making sure that we don't give up our civil liberties as we deal with this problem of terrorism.
There are issues to be dealt with. But, you know, we're talking about on-the-job training. I would like you to tell me what job training George W. Bush had when he was put into this office and now is running on the basis that, because of terrorism, we shouldn't make a change.
MELLMAN: Well, you're right, Congressman. He didn't have the right training. And that's why we're in the mess we're in.
You know, the reality is...
(APPLAUSE)
MELLMAN: The reality is, if I had a lawsuit to take to a jury, I'd want John Edwards in a second. He's great at that.
John Kerry's had experience dealing with the military, dealing with foreign policy, dealing with the fight on terrorism for a very long time. We need someone who's got experience, so we don't end up in the position that George Bush put us in.
NOVAK: Mark Mellman, let me ask you this question.
(CROSSTALK)
FATTAH: I have nothing -- I have no concerns at all about John Kerry and his experience in terms of national security.
What we need to focus the country on as Democrats is that they have a choice between great candidates who position themselves on these issues in a way in which either one of them could carry our banner. I think that, at the end of the day, that John Edwards would be an extraordinary president. I say that without taking any attack on Senator Kerry.
(CROSSTALK) NOVAK: All right, Mark Mellman, maybe you can clear up something for me. It really confuses me. Why are you so upset when the -- well...
BEGALA: Sorry to interrupt, Bob.
Congressman Fattah and Mark Mellman, thank you very much, but we're going to have to go now to Judy Woodruff, who is going to bring us an update on a press briefing on the use of ricin which was found on Capitol Hill.
Take it away, Judy.
(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)
BEGALA: Thank you, Judy. I know you and the CNN team will keep us posted on all the latest on the ricin investigation.
But, in the world of politics, we're focused on General Wesley Clark. He pulled off a narrow victory in Oklahoma yesterday. So, just ahead, we'll ask the general's top man on Capitol Hill which battleground the general will advance to next.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
If the Oklahoma vote totals hold up, General Wesley Clark will have accomplished something yesterday that Governor Howard Dean has yet to do, win a Democratic presidential primary. But what are the general's post-Oklahoma battle plans?
Well, joining us from Capitol Hill to reveal them is Clark supporter, New York Congressman, and soon to be chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Charlie Rangel.
REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: How we doing, gang?
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Good to see you, sir.
NOVAK: Congressman -- Congressman Rangel, you're a major figure in American politics. And even a big man sometimes makes a mistake and is big enough to admit it. Can you say, just between us, that you really made a blooper when you jumped too quick for this little general who wasn't ready for prime-time?
(LAUGHTER)
RANGEL: Listen, I think General Clark is an exciting hero for the United States. And you have to look at the scorecard. He's everybody's No. 2 guy. So, it seems to me that, while we do have the beginning here with Kerry up front and Edwards, in the final analysis, it's who stands on their feet at the end of the race. And I think that the Democrats are going to pick the person that they think can best beat George Bush, if he doesn't beat himself in the process. And so, I'm very excited about the progress we're making.
BEGALA: Well, Congressman Rangel, first off, our viewers should also, not only are you veteran legislator; you're a veteran. You're a decorated combat veteran of the Korean War. And so I want to ask you about this issue that has popped up again about then-Lieutenant Bush of the Air National Guard being AWOL for a year.
The Associated Press has reviewed the record. And the story reads as follows: "In 2000, the Associated Press reviewed nearly 200 pages of Bush's military records released by the National Guard Bureau in Arlington, Virginia. They contained no evidence that Bush reported for drills in Alabama."
George W. Bush was AWOL from the National Guard. Why didn't General Clark raise that when Peter Jennings challenged him about it in the debate?
RANGEL: I have no idea.
I don't think the general wants to be negative. But I do think it's out there and it's going to be incumbent upon the president of the United States and his campaign people to explain this gap in services. It takes a long time for George Bush to get it. He stills thinks there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And he's just agreed to have an investigation by an outside, so-called outside, force.
So we have to wait for him to get it. But I don't really think that Wesley Clark has to be negative with all these things. We've got America charged up to see how this president, who didn't have the popular vote, got into office, got us into war, squandered $9 trillion, have the highest unemployment in history. And all we need is a candidate to stand up and to show the facts. And I think the American people are ready to move ahead.
NOVAK: Congressman Rangel, I want to...
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: I want to get back to -- to General Clark, because he keeps saying things that just blow my mind. And, in his speech last night, after he bought the election in Oklahoma. As you know...
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: ... he spent much more than anybody in all of the states. But let's listen to something that General Clark said last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) WESLEY CLARK (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And we want an America in which being patriotic means using force only, only, only as a last resort, never as a political tool for an election.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NOVAK: You know, I have heard a lot of accusations about why President Bush went into Iraq. But never before have I heard it as a -- using it, a war, shedding American blood as a political tool for election. You surely don't think that, do you, Charlie?
RANGEL: No.
But I think Secretary O'Neill thinks so. He made it abundantly clear that he went in there to talk about the economy of America before 9/11 and the president had a mission to get rid of Saddam Hussein. In addition to that, our good friend Colin Powell said that he probably would not have supported the invasion of Iraq if he had known it was faulty information.
NOVAK: But not as a political tool for an election. You don't mean -- you don't think that -- I mean, that would be crazy to go into a war to get elected.
RANGEL: I don't believe the president would had the over 530 lives that have been lost in Iraq and the 2,000 men and women that are in hospitals throughout the United States wounded, I don't think any president or any American would have these lives lost, just so that they could get reelected, no.
But I think what the general is saying is that diplomacy and victory, which he is used to, certainly when he was the supreme commander of NATO, that it's better to negotiate and win without fighting a war, than it is without making up your mind that international support is not necessarily -- not necessary -- and that you've got to unilaterally attack a country.
You know, what you ought to be talking about is Secretary Rumsfeld saying, he doesn't even know whether we're winning or losing this war, that it's a slog, and that he doesn't know whether we're creating more terrorists than we're killing. These are answers that we deserve, Bob.
NOVAK: Well, thank you very much. We're out of time, Congressman Rangel.
RANGEL: Thank you.
NOVAK: I only -- I only wish General Clark were as articulate as you are. Thank you very much.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Up next, one of our audience members wants to know who would be on the ideal Democratic ticket.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Of course, Bob and I like to shoot our mouths off. But, once in a while, we let you fire back. So, let's get some audience questions here.
Sir, you want to fire back at Mr. Novak and me?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right. hi, I'm Carson (ph) from Jackson Hole, Wyoming. And...
BEGALA: Beautiful
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, it is.
I was wondering, what do you think would be the ideal Democratic ticket?
BEGALA: Bill and Hillary Clinton.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: I would -- I would like to see a dream ticket of Al Sharpton for president and Dennis Kucinich for vice president.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, how are you doing? My name is Chuck Dee (ph) from Huntington Beach, California.
And my question is about the Democratic ticket. I'm wondering why there are so many people in the race that know they're not going to win, i.e. Lieberman, Kucinich and Sharpton. And why did they do this and how will it affect the outcome?
NOVAK: Very simple. Very simple. You get face time on television. It screws up the debates and makes the whole process more irrational.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: You know, well, here's the other side, though. These folks have something to say. They contribute to the debates. Sharpton is as funny as any of them.
Kucinich has his ideas and he gets them out there. I don't think it's the worst thing in the world. The question will be, what happens when a former front-runner like Howard Dean loses nine primaries in a row and risks looking like Dennis Kucinich with better hair?
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: All right, let's get one more question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, my name is Joe (ph) and I'm from Midland, Texas.
My question is, is Howard Dean done?
BEGALA: Yes.
NOVAK: He is -- he is done. He is -- he is -- what? What's the word we want?
BEGALA: Three words. His-to-ry.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: OK.
BEGALA: I'm sorry. Look, I could be wrong. I often am. But you can't lose nine in a row after being 32 points ahead in the first one and pretend like that's good news.
From the left, I am Paul Begala. That's it for CROSSFIRE.
NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak.
Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.
"WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" starts right now.
(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
