Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Crossfire
Admiring Hillary in 2008?
Aired December 28, 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: She tops this year's list of most admired women in America. Has Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton come into her own? And will this admiration hold up for an '08 presidential run?
And on the other side of the world, as global aid flows into the region devastated by Sunday's tsunamis, some say the U.S. could be doing much more to help. Human rights activist Bianca Jagger joins us.
Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the Georgia Washington University, Paul Begala and Robert Novak.
(APPLAUSE)
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
I'm holding in my hands the new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll. And it tells us something many of us already knew. And that is, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is the most admired woman in America. She bested such greatly admired women as first lady Laura Bush and media superstar Oprah Winfrey. I bet she even got Bob Novak's vote.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: They didn't ask me, Paul.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Now, 13 percent is what she got, and it's no mandate. And we haven't even sworn George Bush in for a second term, yet you talk about her for president. A lot of Democrats are whispering, anybody but Hillary.
For now, let's just do the best little political briefing in television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
One of those nasty little bureaucrats at the United Nations sneered at the level of taxpayers' money helping victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami. Jan Egeland, a Norwegian, who's U.N. undersecretary- general for humanitarian affairs, suggested that the U.S. and other Western nations are stingy in charitable contributions. He even outrageously said we don't pay enough taxes to help the rest of the world.
In fact, the U.S. has already committed $35 million to the disaster and much more, much more, is on the way in long-term assistance. Secretary of State Colin Powell bristled at the U.N.'s bureaucrat's insinuation. As you might guess, Mr. Egeland backed down today and said he was misinterpreted. That's really in character for the U.N.
BEGALA: Well, the United States people, the American people, are extraordinarily generous. But, as viewers of the show will recall, last week, I excoriated President Bush for breaking his word on food aid for the poor around the world. He welshed on $100 million of food aid before this disaster. So, it's a fair criticism that our government and our president don't keep their word to help the poor.
NOVAK: The U.S. is so far ahead of any other country in contributions around the world. And I'll tell you what. I don't want some little Norwegian telling me how much taxes I should pay.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: None of his business.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Well, you know, we're going to have Bianca Jagger come out. We're going to discuss this with Bianca Jagger later in the program.
But now more news from Iraq. Three young heroes from that war in Iraq are doing a rather audacious thing. They're standing up for democracy, and not just in Iraq, but here in America as well. The three soldiers, who live in Washington, D.C., have written House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, asking that D.C.'s right to vote in the House's committees as a whole be reinstated.
Washington, D.C., is, of course, the last American colony. Its citizens pay taxes. They fight our wars and they play by the rules, but D.C. has no vote in the House and no vote in the Senate, taxation without representation, indeed. Democrats have long supported voting rights and statehood for the District of Columbia.
Now let's see if the Republicans support democracy for soldiers who risk their lives in President Bush's war for Iraq.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: You know, Paul, I believe you live in Virginia. You don't even live in D.C. I happen to live in D.C., pay high taxes here. I don't want the vote here. I don't want to vote for House and Senate. I don't want the people who put in people like Marion Barry in the city council to send two more Democrats to the Senate. In fact, I don't even like home rule.
When they had the commission form of government, this was the best-run city in America.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: Too much democracy is not always a good thing.
BEGALA: Why can't we take the votes away from Utah, then, or Wyoming or Mississippi?
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Because they elect good people.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Franklin D. Raines was forced to resign as the high-paid CEO of government-backed Fannie Mae because of accounting mistakes that helped bloat his compensation to $50 million -- yes, 5-0 million dollars over three years.
But don't volunteer for a Franklin Raines relief event. Fannie Mae has announced it will pay him $1.4 million a year for the rest of his life. That's based on the theory that he resigned in good standing, was not fired for cause. As everybody knows, he was fired.
Where are the Democratic politicians who screamed about Enron and other corporate miscreants? Could they be silent because Frank Raines is a big-time Democrat who served in Bill Clinton's Cabinet?
BEGALA: I worked with Frank Raines in the Clinton White House. And I have never known anyone with higher integrity. I don't know all facts about Fannie Mae, but I know Frank Raines. I've known him for more than a decade. He has the highest integrity.
Finally, though, we have found a CEO that Bob Novak and the Republicans don't like. Could that maybe have something to do with it?
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Well, I didn't like the guy -- I didn't like the guy at Enron, either.
I just want to say, you're saying I know that -- you sound like people talking about -- Republicans talking about Enron. You say, I know the guy and he's a good guy. And I don't -- don't bother me with the facts.
BEGALA: Well, I...
NOVAK: Doesn't it bother you they're paying him, a guy who has been fired, $1.3 million a year for the rest of his life? (APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: He hasn't been fired.
NOVAK: He has been fired.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: And it's in his contract. And it's in his contract. They're honoring the contract. They don't have a choice. They would get sued if they didn't.
Well, President Bush played on people's fear of terrorist attacks to win reelection, but now we learn it appears he's done more talking about protecting us from terrorists than actually protecting us. Airport security is still too lax. Other forms of mass transit are even more vulnerable. Terrorists could smuggle weapons into our ports and immigration and customs investigators often don't even have enough gas money to chase the bad guys.
Now, these stunning allegations come from none ore than Clark Kent Ervin, President Bush's former inspector general of the Homeland Security Department. Mr. Ervin told "USA Today" that Mr. Bush's new agency does do one thing right. It throws a heck of a party, wasting $500,000 of your money on one bash alone.
As for Mr. Ervin, the whistle-blower, President Bush thanked him by refusing to reappoint him to his job.
NOVAK: Well, let's put this in perspective, Paul. This guy was not -- he is a disgruntled employee. He was not reappointed. He was not renominated for reasons that you don't know anything about and I don't know anything about.
I do know that any government agency has flaws, doesn't run well. It doesn't surprise me. I assume these things are right, but he didn't say them until after he got fired.
BEGALA: No. In fairness to Mr. Ervin, he pointed out many of these things while he was in the job.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: And that's, I think, why he doesn't have the job anymore today.
Well, it's not Oprah. It's not even Laura Bush. Next, we will debate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's enduring status as the most admired woman in America. She tops the new poll out today.
And then later, is the United States being stingy with the amount of aid it's providing the victims of the tsunamis in Asia? We'll debate that question with international activist Bianca Jagger.
ANNOUNCER: Join Carville, Begala, Carlson and Novak in the CROSSFIRE. For free tickets to CROSSFIRE at the George Washington University, call 202-994-8CNN or visit our Web site. Now you can step into the CROSSFIRE.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Bad news for Democrats who want to win another presidential election some day. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York tops this year's list of the country's most admired woman.
She was named by 13 percent of adult Americans questioned by phone in a CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll. Media maven Oprah Winfrey was No. 2 with 11 percent. First lady Laura Bush was third, secretary of state-designate Condoleezza Rice fourth. Is this the beginning of Hillary Clinton's long, long presidential campaign?
We're talking to Ann Lewis, national chairwoman of the Women's Vote Center of the Democratic National Committee and soon to be working, guess who, for Hillary Clinton's political action committee, and Republican consultant, former GOP national committee deputy communications director Cheri Jacobus.
BEGALA: Ladies, good to see you again. Happy new year.
(APPLAUSE)
ANN LEWIS, NATIONAL CHAIR, WOMEN'S VOTE CENTER: Thank you.
CHERI JACOBUS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Thank you.
BEGALA: To you both.
Cheri, the news today, Senator Clinton, for 10 years out of the last 11, sits atop the polls as the most admired woman in America. I suspect you disagree with that. Do you think the American people are stupid?
JACOBUS: No, I don't think the American people are stupid. I think there's a couple of things at play. First of all, I'd like to note that she's dropped in her numbers from last year.
BEGALA: From first to first?
JACOBUS: No, in the percentage.
(LAUGHTER)
JACOBUS: The other three people on list with her, Oprah Winfrey, Condoleezza Rice and Laura Bush, have all increased their numbers. Hillary's numbers are dropped. So, I find that just worth noting, anyway.
No, the American people aren't stupid, Paul. This has a lot to do with name I.D., the fact that Hillary Clinton has been in the national public eye 12 years. But I also suspect...
BEGALA: And yet, they love her. That galls you, doesn't it? (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: It galls Bob. I don't mind speaking for Bob.
JACOBUS: No, I don't know if 13 percent means that they love her. I think that, if you did another poll that said who is the least admired person, it's just as likely that she would be at the top of that list as well.
NOVAK: That would be a good...
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Well, I think, Paul -- maybe we'll do that.
Ann Lewis, you are one of the most powerful, influential, knowledgeable political operatives in the Democratic Party.
LEWIS: I don't know what's going to be next, but I'm already nervous.
(LAUGHTER)
LEWIS: Go ahead, Bob. This is a setup.
NOVAK: Why -- you're not moving for the Democratic National Committee to the Hillary committee just for the New York reelection. This is her beginning of a presidential campaign, is it not?
LEWIS: I'm moving to work for somebody whose Senate campaign I worked for in 2000, who is going to be running for reelection in the Senate in 2006. So it's another chance for me to go back and work for her. Oh, and it's also one of the most consistent, principled, dedicated and effective leaders I know. So I'm very excited about this opportunity.
NOVAK: I'm glad you are.
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: And I know you enjoy the -- you like the people of New York. You don't think they're stupid.
Just a couple weeks ago, the Quinnipiac poll took a poll of all New Yorkers, her own state. Would you like Hillary to run for president in 2008? Yes, 40 percent, no, 54 percent. Are they telling her something?
LEWIS: Yes, they're telling her they like the job she's doing as senator. They hope she will go on being senator.
(APPLAUSE)
LEWIS: But you know what? That's I think also the poll that showed -- that's also the poll that showed Hillary doing very well in upstate New York, doing very well in rural areas of New York. You know what? Hillary Clinton represents a lot of red counties. She represents them well. Those people are strong supporters of hers. They want her to go on working for them.
BEGALA: In fact, one of those citizens in one of those red counties is a gentleman by the name of Robert Loria. He's a specialist in the United States Army. He lost his left hand fighting for us in Iraq. He came home to Fort Hood, Texas, where he was based. And the Army confiscated his last paycheck, leaving him without enough gas money to go home when he was dismissed from the Army for his injuries.
He was being ripped off by the army bureaucracy. And he and his family reached out. And Senator Clinton rode to the rescue, along with Chuck Schumer, the other senator from New York. But CNN contacted Specialist Loria's mother. And here is what she said about how Hillary saved the day for her son.
"The only reason we're at this stage now is because she put her two cents in and got things rolling. Senator Clinton has been wonderful."
Now, surely, even you can admire somebody who steps in for our fighting men, the way Senator Clinton does, don't you?
JACOBUS: I think that any senator would have done the same thing. So, hats off to Senator Clinton for doing what a senator is supposed to do. I'm glad it got taken care of and that he...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: But isn't that what a president is supposed to do as well? How can President Bush be so callous toward men -- a man who lost his arm for our country?
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
JACOBUS: I don't think that this was -- this was clearly, clearly, as you said, a bureaucratic snafu on the part of the Army. I think it's a little easier. That's why senators and members of Congress, House members, are a little bit closer to the problem and they can get there first. And that is part of what they're supposed to do with constituent services. And they have a budget to do so and a staff to do so, Paul. So, I'm glad that she did what she's supposed to do.
NOVAK: Ann Lewis, I've been dying to know. You spend a lot of time with Hillary. You're an intimate. Have you ever asked her, Mrs. Clinton, would you really like to be president?
LEWIS: No. What I talk...
NOVAK: Did you ever ask her that?
LEWIS: What I talk to Senator Clinton about, Bob, are the kind of principles and beliefs and her working for other people. You know what? NOVAK: That boring?
(LAUGHTER)
LEWIS: We don't spend a lot of time. I know it would be boring to you.
NOVAK: Yes.
LEWIS: Because you would rather talk about the politics.
But you know what she likes to talk about? She likes to talk about getting things done for the people of New York and the people of this country.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: All right.
LEWIS: She likes to talk about children's health. She likes to talk about, yes, not just Sergeant -- Specialist Loria, right, but being on the Armed Services Committee.
NOVAK: OK.
LEWIS: Which is very exciting for her and the work she does. That's what we talk about.
NOVAK: All right. She is now working for people, taking a hard line on immigration, really closing the doors. And Dick -- you know who Dick Morris is? He's...
LEWIS: I believe I've...
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Mr. Morris, a friend of all of ours, isn't he?
BEGALA: Not mine.
NOVAK: And he used to be...
BEGALA: I've only met him once.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: He used to be Bill Clinton's guru and he's -- he now writes for a column. Here's what he said about this move by Senator Clinton.
He said: "I think she's trying to move to the right. Immigration is one of the ways she's using to do it. I think it's a particularly misguided choice on her part, however, since two-thirds of Bush's margin this time was due to his closure of the Democratic margin of victory amongst Hispanics."
That's good political sense, isn't it?
LEWIS: One, I'm glad to have a chance to clean this up. No, she's not moving to the right. She's been consistent. She's been principled. She said she welcomes this American tradition where we welcome immigrants to the country, because you know what? They come to give their families a better life, and all Americans are stronger.
We do have a question about illegal immigration, because we've got a conflict between trying to enforce the laws, which we should, and the fact that so many employers use undocumented workers. That's the conflict. That's why Hillary joined Senator Larry Craig of Idaho, who I'm sure is a friend of yours, 61 other senators. They had a bill that was supported by business, by labor, by the immigration advocates to address some of these concerns.
And you know what happened? Bill Frist wouldn't let that bill come up for a vote. We do need to do better. We need to do better by working together. But, no, that would be a model for what we ought to do. Hillary isn't changing positions.
BEGALA: Well, in fact, Cheri, let me ask you, as a strategist, who do you think is right about this issue, Senator Clinton and Senator Craig, a very conservative Republican, who want to strictly enforce our immigration laws and punish corporations that give American jobs to illegal aliens, or Senator Frist and the leadership of your party, who is trying to stop that reform? Who's right on that?
JACOBUS: Well, I don't think they're trying to stop reform.
I think this has got to play out. And I think that it will play out in these first two years before the midterms, rather than the second two years. But I do want to make a point that, listening to Ann speak, if I may, I think it's a clear sign that Hillary has her eye on the White House, because Ann is clearly articulate, clearly one of the best that you folks have in your party. And I think that the fact that she's going to work for Senator Clinton, as high profile and as brilliant as she is, means that the senator has her eye on the White House.
NOVAK: And we can all hope she's nominated, can't we?
JACOBUS: Well, as a Republican, I hope that Hillary Clinton does run.
NOVAK: That's right.
JACOBUS: Because I think it would be great to have her as the nominee.
NOVAK: I can't wait.
JACOBUS: And I think we would like to run against her.
BEGALA: That's something we all agree on.
NOVAK: Can't wait.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Ann Lewis, Cheri Jacobus.
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Is the U.S. too stingy with disaster aid? We'll debate that question with activist Bianca Jagger just ahead on CROSSFIRE.
And right after the break, a look at the growing health threat in areas devastated by tsunami.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: I'm Jeanne Meserve, reporting from Washington. Coming up at the top of the hour, the tsunami death toll passes 33,000 and it could go much higher. Relief supplies are on their way to Asia, but is there any way to stop the spread of disease?
And could a tsunami hit the U.S. West Coast? An expert says it's a matter of when, not if.
All those stories and much more are just minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
But now back to CROSSFIRE.
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Yesterday, the relief coordinator for the United Nations charged, the United States and other wealthy nations are being stingy with foreign aid. Today, he backed off a bit, saying his remark had been misconstrued.
The United States government has pledged $35 million, plus supplies, ships and soldiers to help out in the tsunami disaster in Asia. But some still think the government could be doing a lot more. Is the United States government being stingy with its disaster aid?
Joining us from Los Angeles to discuss it, longtime human rights advocate Bianca Jagger.
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Ms. Jagger, do you believe -- Ms. Jagger, do you believe that the United States is stingy?
BIANCA JAGGER, HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATE: I do.
You know that the United States only give 0.2 percent of its natural -- of per capita income. That is really a very small sum in relation to the needs around in the world. And, in fact, the United States is almost the No. 21 among industrialized nations in the amount that they give to the poor nations.
NOVAK: You know, there was an old Vaudeville joke: How is your wife? Compared to what? And this is the question, how is the United States giving? Compared to what?
I'll just put it up on the screen. The United States, in the last year, in official development assistance, gave $16.3 billion. That's twice as much as a very rich country, Japan, with $8.8 billion. France, 7.3, Germany, 6.8, United kingdom, 6.3.
I wonder, do you realize how outraged it makes American citizens to have you and some bureaucrat at the U.N. say that we're not giving enough of our tax money to foreign countries?
JAGGER: Well, let me say the following.
When you compare what the United States gives in relation to what Great Britain does and you compare the inhabitants that we have in the United States and in Great Britain, it's very different. So, we are talking, comparatively speaking, the United States is giving very little in comparison to what they should be giving.
In fact, about 30 years ago, the industrialized nations made a pledge that they were going to give 0.7 percent of their per capita income to poor nations. And the United States is very far away from that number. In fact, the United States gives 29, I think, dollars per person in aid to poor nations. Don't you think that we could do much better than that?
BEGALA: Well, in fact, now, the government today announces that we will have a total of $35 million -- with an M -- million dollars -- so far going to help victims of the tsunami in Asia. Now, Ms. Jagger, $35 million is a lot of money. It's pretty much about a year's salary for Dick Cheney at Halliburton. Isn't that a lot of money?
(LAUGHTER)
JAGGER: Well, they are giving now -- they are pledging to give $35 million because of what the undersecretary of the United Nations said and the criticism that he made.
But do you think that perhaps that number would have stayed at $10 million, $15 million if he had not made that comment before?
BEGALA: Well, let me come back to this question about the pledge that the American government has made, though. I raised this earlier in our program. Last week, there was a report that the Bush administration has informed Christian charity groups like Catholic Relief Services and Save the Children that they are going to welsh on about $100 million of food aid for poor people. What does that do for America's reputation as a donor nation?
JAGGER: Well, it is exactly what I'm saying.
If the United States want to continue to be the indispensable nation, as Madeleine Albright said, or the shining city in the hill, regarded and loved by people throughout the world, you have to do more. I mean, you must face the fact that, at the moment, the United States is not a very popular nation in the world and that we need to be much more generous to the rest of the world, especially when the gap between the very rich and the very poor is only increasing and that we're seeing...
(CROSSTALK)
JAGGER: Sorry. Forgive me.
NOVAK: Are you aware, Ms. Jagger, that the United States' individual citizens are so far ahead of the rest of the world in charitable contributions whenever there's a disaster any place in the world? They should love us instead of hate us.
(APPLAUSE)
JAGGER: But that is the individual -- that is the American people, Robert. That is not the government. We are talking about two different things. Of course, the American people are extremely generous and, of course, the organizations and humanitarian organizations in the United States are very generous. And they are doing the role that the United States government should be doing.
BEGALA: Amen. I agree I that.
Ms. Jagger, thank you very much, human rights advocate Bianca Jagger joining us -- thank you very much -- via satellite.
And next, Michael Moore has a new target. We will tell you who's in his crosshairs next in the CROSSFIRE.
Stay with us.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
It looks like some of the biggest pharmaceutical corporations in America are next on Michael Moore's movie hit list. Several pharmaceutical companies, Wyeth, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer among them...
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: ... sent out memos in recent months warning their employees to be on the lookout for the scruffy filmmaker.
But, look, with all the bad news from pharmaceutical firms lately, you would think they would have bigger things to worry about than Michael Moore. My advice, guys, take a Valium.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: You know, I think the Democrats ought to be very concerned about Michael Moore being the face of the Democratic Party. That's a good way to lose elections.
BEGALA: 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 December 28, 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: She tops this year's list of most admired women in America. Has Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton come into her own? And will this admiration hold up for an '08 presidential run?
And on the other side of the world, as global aid flows into the region devastated by Sunday's tsunamis, some say the U.S. could be doing much more to help. Human rights activist Bianca Jagger joins us.
Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the Georgia Washington University, Paul Begala and Robert Novak.
(APPLAUSE)
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
I'm holding in my hands the new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll. And it tells us something many of us already knew. And that is, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is the most admired woman in America. She bested such greatly admired women as first lady Laura Bush and media superstar Oprah Winfrey. I bet she even got Bob Novak's vote.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: They didn't ask me, Paul.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Now, 13 percent is what she got, and it's no mandate. And we haven't even sworn George Bush in for a second term, yet you talk about her for president. A lot of Democrats are whispering, anybody but Hillary.
For now, let's just do the best little political briefing in television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
One of those nasty little bureaucrats at the United Nations sneered at the level of taxpayers' money helping victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami. Jan Egeland, a Norwegian, who's U.N. undersecretary- general for humanitarian affairs, suggested that the U.S. and other Western nations are stingy in charitable contributions. He even outrageously said we don't pay enough taxes to help the rest of the world.
In fact, the U.S. has already committed $35 million to the disaster and much more, much more, is on the way in long-term assistance. Secretary of State Colin Powell bristled at the U.N.'s bureaucrat's insinuation. As you might guess, Mr. Egeland backed down today and said he was misinterpreted. That's really in character for the U.N.
BEGALA: Well, the United States people, the American people, are extraordinarily generous. But, as viewers of the show will recall, last week, I excoriated President Bush for breaking his word on food aid for the poor around the world. He welshed on $100 million of food aid before this disaster. So, it's a fair criticism that our government and our president don't keep their word to help the poor.
NOVAK: The U.S. is so far ahead of any other country in contributions around the world. And I'll tell you what. I don't want some little Norwegian telling me how much taxes I should pay.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: None of his business.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Well, you know, we're going to have Bianca Jagger come out. We're going to discuss this with Bianca Jagger later in the program.
But now more news from Iraq. Three young heroes from that war in Iraq are doing a rather audacious thing. They're standing up for democracy, and not just in Iraq, but here in America as well. The three soldiers, who live in Washington, D.C., have written House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, asking that D.C.'s right to vote in the House's committees as a whole be reinstated.
Washington, D.C., is, of course, the last American colony. Its citizens pay taxes. They fight our wars and they play by the rules, but D.C. has no vote in the House and no vote in the Senate, taxation without representation, indeed. Democrats have long supported voting rights and statehood for the District of Columbia.
Now let's see if the Republicans support democracy for soldiers who risk their lives in President Bush's war for Iraq.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: You know, Paul, I believe you live in Virginia. You don't even live in D.C. I happen to live in D.C., pay high taxes here. I don't want the vote here. I don't want to vote for House and Senate. I don't want the people who put in people like Marion Barry in the city council to send two more Democrats to the Senate. In fact, I don't even like home rule.
When they had the commission form of government, this was the best-run city in America.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: Too much democracy is not always a good thing.
BEGALA: Why can't we take the votes away from Utah, then, or Wyoming or Mississippi?
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Because they elect good people.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: Franklin D. Raines was forced to resign as the high-paid CEO of government-backed Fannie Mae because of accounting mistakes that helped bloat his compensation to $50 million -- yes, 5-0 million dollars over three years.
But don't volunteer for a Franklin Raines relief event. Fannie Mae has announced it will pay him $1.4 million a year for the rest of his life. That's based on the theory that he resigned in good standing, was not fired for cause. As everybody knows, he was fired.
Where are the Democratic politicians who screamed about Enron and other corporate miscreants? Could they be silent because Frank Raines is a big-time Democrat who served in Bill Clinton's Cabinet?
BEGALA: I worked with Frank Raines in the Clinton White House. And I have never known anyone with higher integrity. I don't know all facts about Fannie Mae, but I know Frank Raines. I've known him for more than a decade. He has the highest integrity.
Finally, though, we have found a CEO that Bob Novak and the Republicans don't like. Could that maybe have something to do with it?
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Well, I didn't like the guy -- I didn't like the guy at Enron, either.
I just want to say, you're saying I know that -- you sound like people talking about -- Republicans talking about Enron. You say, I know the guy and he's a good guy. And I don't -- don't bother me with the facts.
BEGALA: Well, I...
NOVAK: Doesn't it bother you they're paying him, a guy who has been fired, $1.3 million a year for the rest of his life? (APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: He hasn't been fired.
NOVAK: He has been fired.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: And it's in his contract. And it's in his contract. They're honoring the contract. They don't have a choice. They would get sued if they didn't.
Well, President Bush played on people's fear of terrorist attacks to win reelection, but now we learn it appears he's done more talking about protecting us from terrorists than actually protecting us. Airport security is still too lax. Other forms of mass transit are even more vulnerable. Terrorists could smuggle weapons into our ports and immigration and customs investigators often don't even have enough gas money to chase the bad guys.
Now, these stunning allegations come from none ore than Clark Kent Ervin, President Bush's former inspector general of the Homeland Security Department. Mr. Ervin told "USA Today" that Mr. Bush's new agency does do one thing right. It throws a heck of a party, wasting $500,000 of your money on one bash alone.
As for Mr. Ervin, the whistle-blower, President Bush thanked him by refusing to reappoint him to his job.
NOVAK: Well, let's put this in perspective, Paul. This guy was not -- he is a disgruntled employee. He was not reappointed. He was not renominated for reasons that you don't know anything about and I don't know anything about.
I do know that any government agency has flaws, doesn't run well. It doesn't surprise me. I assume these things are right, but he didn't say them until after he got fired.
BEGALA: No. In fairness to Mr. Ervin, he pointed out many of these things while he was in the job.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: And that's, I think, why he doesn't have the job anymore today.
Well, it's not Oprah. It's not even Laura Bush. Next, we will debate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's enduring status as the most admired woman in America. She tops the new poll out today.
And then later, is the United States being stingy with the amount of aid it's providing the victims of the tsunamis in Asia? We'll debate that question with international activist Bianca Jagger.
ANNOUNCER: Join Carville, Begala, Carlson and Novak in the CROSSFIRE. For free tickets to CROSSFIRE at the George Washington University, call 202-994-8CNN or visit our Web site. Now you can step into the CROSSFIRE.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Bad news for Democrats who want to win another presidential election some day. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York tops this year's list of the country's most admired woman.
She was named by 13 percent of adult Americans questioned by phone in a CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll. Media maven Oprah Winfrey was No. 2 with 11 percent. First lady Laura Bush was third, secretary of state-designate Condoleezza Rice fourth. Is this the beginning of Hillary Clinton's long, long presidential campaign?
We're talking to Ann Lewis, national chairwoman of the Women's Vote Center of the Democratic National Committee and soon to be working, guess who, for Hillary Clinton's political action committee, and Republican consultant, former GOP national committee deputy communications director Cheri Jacobus.
BEGALA: Ladies, good to see you again. Happy new year.
(APPLAUSE)
ANN LEWIS, NATIONAL CHAIR, WOMEN'S VOTE CENTER: Thank you.
CHERI JACOBUS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Thank you.
BEGALA: To you both.
Cheri, the news today, Senator Clinton, for 10 years out of the last 11, sits atop the polls as the most admired woman in America. I suspect you disagree with that. Do you think the American people are stupid?
JACOBUS: No, I don't think the American people are stupid. I think there's a couple of things at play. First of all, I'd like to note that she's dropped in her numbers from last year.
BEGALA: From first to first?
JACOBUS: No, in the percentage.
(LAUGHTER)
JACOBUS: The other three people on list with her, Oprah Winfrey, Condoleezza Rice and Laura Bush, have all increased their numbers. Hillary's numbers are dropped. So, I find that just worth noting, anyway.
No, the American people aren't stupid, Paul. This has a lot to do with name I.D., the fact that Hillary Clinton has been in the national public eye 12 years. But I also suspect...
BEGALA: And yet, they love her. That galls you, doesn't it? (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: It galls Bob. I don't mind speaking for Bob.
JACOBUS: No, I don't know if 13 percent means that they love her. I think that, if you did another poll that said who is the least admired person, it's just as likely that she would be at the top of that list as well.
NOVAK: That would be a good...
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Well, I think, Paul -- maybe we'll do that.
Ann Lewis, you are one of the most powerful, influential, knowledgeable political operatives in the Democratic Party.
LEWIS: I don't know what's going to be next, but I'm already nervous.
(LAUGHTER)
LEWIS: Go ahead, Bob. This is a setup.
NOVAK: Why -- you're not moving for the Democratic National Committee to the Hillary committee just for the New York reelection. This is her beginning of a presidential campaign, is it not?
LEWIS: I'm moving to work for somebody whose Senate campaign I worked for in 2000, who is going to be running for reelection in the Senate in 2006. So it's another chance for me to go back and work for her. Oh, and it's also one of the most consistent, principled, dedicated and effective leaders I know. So I'm very excited about this opportunity.
NOVAK: I'm glad you are.
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: And I know you enjoy the -- you like the people of New York. You don't think they're stupid.
Just a couple weeks ago, the Quinnipiac poll took a poll of all New Yorkers, her own state. Would you like Hillary to run for president in 2008? Yes, 40 percent, no, 54 percent. Are they telling her something?
LEWIS: Yes, they're telling her they like the job she's doing as senator. They hope she will go on being senator.
(APPLAUSE)
LEWIS: But you know what? That's I think also the poll that showed -- that's also the poll that showed Hillary doing very well in upstate New York, doing very well in rural areas of New York. You know what? Hillary Clinton represents a lot of red counties. She represents them well. Those people are strong supporters of hers. They want her to go on working for them.
BEGALA: In fact, one of those citizens in one of those red counties is a gentleman by the name of Robert Loria. He's a specialist in the United States Army. He lost his left hand fighting for us in Iraq. He came home to Fort Hood, Texas, where he was based. And the Army confiscated his last paycheck, leaving him without enough gas money to go home when he was dismissed from the Army for his injuries.
He was being ripped off by the army bureaucracy. And he and his family reached out. And Senator Clinton rode to the rescue, along with Chuck Schumer, the other senator from New York. But CNN contacted Specialist Loria's mother. And here is what she said about how Hillary saved the day for her son.
"The only reason we're at this stage now is because she put her two cents in and got things rolling. Senator Clinton has been wonderful."
Now, surely, even you can admire somebody who steps in for our fighting men, the way Senator Clinton does, don't you?
JACOBUS: I think that any senator would have done the same thing. So, hats off to Senator Clinton for doing what a senator is supposed to do. I'm glad it got taken care of and that he...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: But isn't that what a president is supposed to do as well? How can President Bush be so callous toward men -- a man who lost his arm for our country?
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
JACOBUS: I don't think that this was -- this was clearly, clearly, as you said, a bureaucratic snafu on the part of the Army. I think it's a little easier. That's why senators and members of Congress, House members, are a little bit closer to the problem and they can get there first. And that is part of what they're supposed to do with constituent services. And they have a budget to do so and a staff to do so, Paul. So, I'm glad that she did what she's supposed to do.
NOVAK: Ann Lewis, I've been dying to know. You spend a lot of time with Hillary. You're an intimate. Have you ever asked her, Mrs. Clinton, would you really like to be president?
LEWIS: No. What I talk...
NOVAK: Did you ever ask her that?
LEWIS: What I talk to Senator Clinton about, Bob, are the kind of principles and beliefs and her working for other people. You know what? NOVAK: That boring?
(LAUGHTER)
LEWIS: We don't spend a lot of time. I know it would be boring to you.
NOVAK: Yes.
LEWIS: Because you would rather talk about the politics.
But you know what she likes to talk about? She likes to talk about getting things done for the people of New York and the people of this country.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: All right.
LEWIS: She likes to talk about children's health. She likes to talk about, yes, not just Sergeant -- Specialist Loria, right, but being on the Armed Services Committee.
NOVAK: OK.
LEWIS: Which is very exciting for her and the work she does. That's what we talk about.
NOVAK: All right. She is now working for people, taking a hard line on immigration, really closing the doors. And Dick -- you know who Dick Morris is? He's...
LEWIS: I believe I've...
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Mr. Morris, a friend of all of ours, isn't he?
BEGALA: Not mine.
NOVAK: And he used to be...
BEGALA: I've only met him once.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: He used to be Bill Clinton's guru and he's -- he now writes for a column. Here's what he said about this move by Senator Clinton.
He said: "I think she's trying to move to the right. Immigration is one of the ways she's using to do it. I think it's a particularly misguided choice on her part, however, since two-thirds of Bush's margin this time was due to his closure of the Democratic margin of victory amongst Hispanics."
That's good political sense, isn't it?
LEWIS: One, I'm glad to have a chance to clean this up. No, she's not moving to the right. She's been consistent. She's been principled. She said she welcomes this American tradition where we welcome immigrants to the country, because you know what? They come to give their families a better life, and all Americans are stronger.
We do have a question about illegal immigration, because we've got a conflict between trying to enforce the laws, which we should, and the fact that so many employers use undocumented workers. That's the conflict. That's why Hillary joined Senator Larry Craig of Idaho, who I'm sure is a friend of yours, 61 other senators. They had a bill that was supported by business, by labor, by the immigration advocates to address some of these concerns.
And you know what happened? Bill Frist wouldn't let that bill come up for a vote. We do need to do better. We need to do better by working together. But, no, that would be a model for what we ought to do. Hillary isn't changing positions.
BEGALA: Well, in fact, Cheri, let me ask you, as a strategist, who do you think is right about this issue, Senator Clinton and Senator Craig, a very conservative Republican, who want to strictly enforce our immigration laws and punish corporations that give American jobs to illegal aliens, or Senator Frist and the leadership of your party, who is trying to stop that reform? Who's right on that?
JACOBUS: Well, I don't think they're trying to stop reform.
I think this has got to play out. And I think that it will play out in these first two years before the midterms, rather than the second two years. But I do want to make a point that, listening to Ann speak, if I may, I think it's a clear sign that Hillary has her eye on the White House, because Ann is clearly articulate, clearly one of the best that you folks have in your party. And I think that the fact that she's going to work for Senator Clinton, as high profile and as brilliant as she is, means that the senator has her eye on the White House.
NOVAK: And we can all hope she's nominated, can't we?
JACOBUS: Well, as a Republican, I hope that Hillary Clinton does run.
NOVAK: That's right.
JACOBUS: Because I think it would be great to have her as the nominee.
NOVAK: I can't wait.
JACOBUS: And I think we would like to run against her.
BEGALA: That's something we all agree on.
NOVAK: Can't wait.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Ann Lewis, Cheri Jacobus.
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Is the U.S. too stingy with disaster aid? We'll debate that question with activist Bianca Jagger just ahead on CROSSFIRE.
And right after the break, a look at the growing health threat in areas devastated by tsunami.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: I'm Jeanne Meserve, reporting from Washington. Coming up at the top of the hour, the tsunami death toll passes 33,000 and it could go much higher. Relief supplies are on their way to Asia, but is there any way to stop the spread of disease?
And could a tsunami hit the U.S. West Coast? An expert says it's a matter of when, not if.
All those stories and much more are just minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
But now back to CROSSFIRE.
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Yesterday, the relief coordinator for the United Nations charged, the United States and other wealthy nations are being stingy with foreign aid. Today, he backed off a bit, saying his remark had been misconstrued.
The United States government has pledged $35 million, plus supplies, ships and soldiers to help out in the tsunami disaster in Asia. But some still think the government could be doing a lot more. Is the United States government being stingy with its disaster aid?
Joining us from Los Angeles to discuss it, longtime human rights advocate Bianca Jagger.
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: Ms. Jagger, do you believe -- Ms. Jagger, do you believe that the United States is stingy?
BIANCA JAGGER, HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATE: I do.
You know that the United States only give 0.2 percent of its natural -- of per capita income. That is really a very small sum in relation to the needs around in the world. And, in fact, the United States is almost the No. 21 among industrialized nations in the amount that they give to the poor nations.
NOVAK: You know, there was an old Vaudeville joke: How is your wife? Compared to what? And this is the question, how is the United States giving? Compared to what?
I'll just put it up on the screen. The United States, in the last year, in official development assistance, gave $16.3 billion. That's twice as much as a very rich country, Japan, with $8.8 billion. France, 7.3, Germany, 6.8, United kingdom, 6.3.
I wonder, do you realize how outraged it makes American citizens to have you and some bureaucrat at the U.N. say that we're not giving enough of our tax money to foreign countries?
JAGGER: Well, let me say the following.
When you compare what the United States gives in relation to what Great Britain does and you compare the inhabitants that we have in the United States and in Great Britain, it's very different. So, we are talking, comparatively speaking, the United States is giving very little in comparison to what they should be giving.
In fact, about 30 years ago, the industrialized nations made a pledge that they were going to give 0.7 percent of their per capita income to poor nations. And the United States is very far away from that number. In fact, the United States gives 29, I think, dollars per person in aid to poor nations. Don't you think that we could do much better than that?
BEGALA: Well, in fact, now, the government today announces that we will have a total of $35 million -- with an M -- million dollars -- so far going to help victims of the tsunami in Asia. Now, Ms. Jagger, $35 million is a lot of money. It's pretty much about a year's salary for Dick Cheney at Halliburton. Isn't that a lot of money?
(LAUGHTER)
JAGGER: Well, they are giving now -- they are pledging to give $35 million because of what the undersecretary of the United Nations said and the criticism that he made.
But do you think that perhaps that number would have stayed at $10 million, $15 million if he had not made that comment before?
BEGALA: Well, let me come back to this question about the pledge that the American government has made, though. I raised this earlier in our program. Last week, there was a report that the Bush administration has informed Christian charity groups like Catholic Relief Services and Save the Children that they are going to welsh on about $100 million of food aid for poor people. What does that do for America's reputation as a donor nation?
JAGGER: Well, it is exactly what I'm saying.
If the United States want to continue to be the indispensable nation, as Madeleine Albright said, or the shining city in the hill, regarded and loved by people throughout the world, you have to do more. I mean, you must face the fact that, at the moment, the United States is not a very popular nation in the world and that we need to be much more generous to the rest of the world, especially when the gap between the very rich and the very poor is only increasing and that we're seeing...
(CROSSTALK)
JAGGER: Sorry. Forgive me.
NOVAK: Are you aware, Ms. Jagger, that the United States' individual citizens are so far ahead of the rest of the world in charitable contributions whenever there's a disaster any place in the world? They should love us instead of hate us.
(APPLAUSE)
JAGGER: But that is the individual -- that is the American people, Robert. That is not the government. We are talking about two different things. Of course, the American people are extremely generous and, of course, the organizations and humanitarian organizations in the United States are very generous. And they are doing the role that the United States government should be doing.
BEGALA: Amen. I agree I that.
Ms. Jagger, thank you very much, human rights advocate Bianca Jagger joining us -- thank you very much -- via satellite.
And next, Michael Moore has a new target. We will tell you who's in his crosshairs next in the CROSSFIRE.
Stay with us.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
It looks like some of the biggest pharmaceutical corporations in America are next on Michael Moore's movie hit list. Several pharmaceutical companies, Wyeth, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer among them...
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: ... sent out memos in recent months warning their employees to be on the lookout for the scruffy filmmaker.
But, look, with all the bad news from pharmaceutical firms lately, you would think they would have bigger things to worry about than Michael Moore. My advice, guys, take a Valium.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
NOVAK: You know, I think the Democrats ought to be very concerned about Michael Moore being the face of the Democratic Party. That's a good way to lose elections.
BEGALA: 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
