Return to Transcripts main page
Campbell Brown
Analysis of President Obama's Address to the Muslim World; Is Affirmative Action Racism?; Bill Clinton's Life Outside the Spotlight
Aired June 06, 2009 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: CNN PRIME TIME begins right now.
CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, here are the questions we want answered. President Obama extends a hand to the Muslim world.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Assalamu Alaikum.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: But did he make the U.S. look stronger or weaker?
Another big question: Is affirmative action racism? With an African-American president and the Latino nominee to the Supreme Court, hear why some people say it's time to move on.
Does Bill Clinton still count? He was down and out a year ago. How he's adjusting to life out of the big spotlight.
ANNOUNCER: This is your only source for news, CNN PRIME TIME begins now. Here's Campbell Brown.
BROWN: Hi, everybody. We spent a lot of this week talking about President Obama's trip to the Middle East. Tonight, highlights of our coverage along with some of the other stories we liked this week.
We're going to start tonight, like we do every night, with the matchup. Our look at the must-see moments from this past week. We're watching it all so you don't have to.
Thursday in Cairo; a landmark speech, the stakes incredibly high. In case you missed it, here's the seven-point Cliff Notes version of the president's 55-minute address to the Muslim world.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
OBAMA: Assalamu Alaikum.
(APPLAUSE)
I've come here, to Cairo, to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world. One based on mutual interests and mutual respect.
The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.
The second major source of tension we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians, and the Arab world. Palestinians must abandon violence, just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.
The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons. It's about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other. And he will welcome all elected peaceful governments, provided they govern with respect for all their people.
The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. People in every country should be free to choose and live their face based upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul.
The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights. Our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity, men and women, to reach their full potential.
Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.
The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you. Thank you very much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Three thousand people were in the audience for the president's speech. It was translated into 13 languages and composed of almost 6,000 words. Some of the most used are the ones you'd expect. People, Muslim, America, each got double-digit mentioned. Others underscored the president's message, peace, progress, together. But perhaps the most important word is the one the president did not say, terrorism. Not one mention in the speech. Clear sign you can say America's approach to the Muslim world has changed. Around the globe, the president's message did seem to break through.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: "A new beginning", the words of President Obama speaking today in Cairo, as he took his first steps toward building a new relationship between America and the Islamic world.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The overall view here from the Lebanese capital is that Obama took huge strides, especially in shredding off the old Bush administration by traveling to Cairo and giving this speech to the Arab world. But people here want concrete steps taken by this new American administration.
RICHARD ENGEL, NBC NEWS: In Afghanistan and across the Islamic world, there's been a very positive reaction. People were describing it as historic, honest, respectful.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: For the most part, those we spoke to in the capital said they were hopeful, they believed him, they trusted him, they thought he was serious about trying to make peace. But they need more details.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: Here at home, well, the right went right, the left went left, and Candy Crowley cut to the chase.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So he's dumping on Bush again, he's blaming his predecessor, and he's siding with Islam and with Muslims, that they are justified in their attitudes of anger toward the United States.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think he is on the playground of the world and just like kids need to apologize when they hit somebody else -
(CROSS TALK)
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Great speech. It will please a lot of people. But, OK, what's your next act?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: We're going to dig into the president's speech tonight; the ripples sure to be felt for years to come. To Capitol Hill, now, though, where Judge Sonia Sotomayor spent the week in the midst of what looked like a bipartisan love fest. Swarmed by cameras, the judge kept quiet as the senators gushed. Here is a mini recap.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've been very impressed with learning everything I have about you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a delight to talk with her. I enjoyed the conversation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a great meeting. I think the president just made and extraordinarily good choice.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Meanwhile, two conservatives who rarely back down, did back drown. Rush Limbaugh had branded the judge a reverse racist. But this week he reversed course saying he could end up backing Sotomayor after all. Limbaugh told his radio listeners it will come down to her position on one issue, abortion. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I can see a possibility of supporting this nomination, if I could be convinced that she does have a sensibility toward life, in a legal sense, of course, in a real sense.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: Limbaugh wasn't the week's only about-face. Newt Gingrich backed off his statement calling Sotomayor a racist. He now says he was, perhaps, too strong and direct. The judge was asked about it during her meet-and-greet photo ops, but her handlers weren't about to let her answer. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Newt Gingrich has retracted his statement since calling the judge a racist.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, guys. Don't answer any questions.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: You heard it. Don't answer that one. As one Democratic senator said, we are not going to let loose lips sink this ship. That is tonight's match up.
Now, tonight's first big question. Did president Obama's speech in Cairo make the U.S. look stronger or weaker? Here to answer that, CNN Contributor Bill Bennett, host of the national radio talk show "Morning In America." Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN's "Fareed Zakaria, GPS". CNN National Security Contributor Fran Townsend, who was President Bush's Homeland Security Advisor, and NPR Contributor John Ridley, who has been joining us all week.
Guys, thanks very much for being here. Before we start, listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger it provoked was understandable. In some cases, it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: So, 9/11 made us act contrary to our ideals. Bill Bennett, what do you think?
BILL BENNETT, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I think that's the wrong emphasis for 9/11. 9/11 was a slaughter, a slaughter of innocents. I think for the most part we did very well in terms of our response. He didn't apologize as much on this trap as he did the last time he left the United States.
There are still some echoes of it, but I think the bottom line is, what's the net result of it? I was checking out what Osama bin Laden had to say, that was the day before yesterday. He didn't seem much -anticipating the speech at all, unlike the rest of us. And he still seems pretty upset that we're helping Pakistan, we're going into Afghanistan, we're on the Arabian Peninsula. I don't think this will make much difference at all.
BROWN: Do you agree?
FAREED ZAKARIA, HOST, FAREED ZAKARIA GPS: No, and I actually think Bill nicely encapsulates why, because I think he missed the point of the speech. The point of the speech was not to convert Osama bin Laden. I think that we both would agree that will have absolutely no effect, not just on bin Laden, but on the thousands and thousands of people who follow him.
The point of the speech was to win over majority, the mainstream communities in the Muslim world, who, while not agreeing with bin Laden - and they've shown this in 100 different ways whether in polls or in elections - are still uneasy about the fact that places them in a kind of tacit alliance with the United States.
They're trying to find some middle ground and he's trying to make it safer for them to feel that the United States respects them, honors them. The little things, the symbols, the speaking of fewer Arabic words with the correct pronunciation.
Bill is, again, right, that Bush did say some of these things. And it's fascinating to notice how much for what Obama is saying is resonating as your own reaction suggested. The audience here is really the mainstream Muslim communities who he asked, as item number one, to expel and isolate the extremists within your midst.
BROWN: Fran, what did you think?
FRAN TOWNSEND, HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISOR: I do think the speech was an important one. I do have a problem with - I mean, you know, you can call it anything you want, the president in his speech calls it violent extremists. These are terrorists and they are meant to terrorize populations, they are meant to intimidate governments. That's what they are. It doesn't really matter, but it is important that we label them and call them for what they are. I was troubled by the fact he didn't use the word "terrorism".
ZAKARIA: But, Fran, may I ask a question, wasn't it the right insistence for the last four or eight years that the problem with calling these people terrorists were you were talking about a tactic? What you needed to describe them as was extremists, or Islamic extremists, because that's whom we are against. We are fighting a battle against people who are -
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
ZAKARIA: Who use terror as a tactic. BENNETT: Islamic terrorist would be more accurate.
ZAKARIA: It was entirely appropriate. Terror is a tactic, we're not fighting a tactic. We're fighting the people who represent a perverted ideology.
TOWNSEND: That's right.
ZAKARIA: He kept the focus front and center on that.
TOWNSEND: That's right, but we do have a problem with the tactic and those who use it, those who use terrorism are terrorists. We do have a problem with that. We shouldn't shy away from calling it.
BROWN: John, was his emphasis in the right place?
JOHN RIDLEY, NPR CONTRIBUTOR: I think it was. I think, first of all, we can have an argument about semantics, about what these individuals should or shouldn't be called. They don't care. The extremists are going to do what they're going to do.
I think, more importantly, is what is achieved? And that is trying to get a coalition of people together. Interestingly, the three most important issues in that region are how we deal with Iraq, the Palestinian issue, and how Muslims and Arabs are viewed in the rest of the world. And you can see it by the response, when the president talked about we're got going to let these stereotypes go forward, that there was a real resonance with these individuals. That is going to get these people together.
More importantly, what President Obama can do, that no other president could do, he can personify non-violent resistance and what it means. And when he talked about what happened in America, also in South Africa, and how violence is nothing but a dead end, it really means something. I think being able to carry that message, as an African-American, not just a black American, but as an African- American really makes the difference.
BENNETT: What is the non-violent message? How does that resonate with sending troops into Afghanistan?
RIDLEY: I think it resonates with the moderates.
BENNETT: Backing the Pakistani government.
RIDLEY: If it is being said, I think it resonates with the moderates, that if you want to change something, you're not going to do it by blowing up - as he said - old women on buses and things like that. That makes the difference.
ZAKARIA: And that was actually -
RIDLEY: And, it has worked and has been effective. So, the extremists are not going to be swayed. We all know that. But the moderates can be swayed.
ZAKARIA: Bill, I think it's a good question.
BENNETT: Thank you. I got something right.
ZAKARIA: Think about the place he says it. He says it when talking about the Palestinians. And I think what he was doing there, that was important. He was not just doing the ritual denunciation of Palestinian terrorism, which everybody does and every president has done. What I thought he was trying to do was to explain to the Palestinian people why it is totally ineffective. That's where the point is, he says this doesn't work. Look at what worked in India. Look at what happened in South Africa.
BROWN: Right.
ZAKARIA: Look at what worked in the United States.
BROWN: Guys, stand by. Because you're staying with me. We're going to talk a lot more about this, and specifically what translates from here, when we go beyond words into actions, which a lot of people have questions about.
We'll be talking about that more. Also, I should mention, Fareed is going to have a lot more of this, this weekend on his show, "Fareed Zakaria, GPS" that's Sunday afternoon, 1:00 and 5:00 Eastern Time.
Tonight's news maker, former Secretary of State James Baker, he's a Republican, so you'd expect him to criticize the president. But you'll be surprised by where they agree.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Welcome back. Our newsmaker, James Baker, served as secretary of State under President Bush and both Treasury secretary and White House chief of staff under Ronald Reagan. On Wednesday in the Capital Rotunda, he sat next to Nancy Reagan for the unveiling of a statute honoring the late president.
James Baker was also here this week to offer a surprising assessment of the current commander in chief and talk about the lessons he learned in the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN (on camera): You were so instrumental in building the coalition for first Gulf war. As you say, that's a key goal, helping to increase pressure on Iran during this trip, to get many of these countries to help us fight terrorism. Right now we have no capital with these countries or these people. How do we get there?
JAMES BAKER, FMR. SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, you get there by doing what the president is doing. Show these people that we value the relationship that has existed for many years between their countries and our country. Pay them attention, which he's certainly doing. Meet with them, listen to their concerns, and explain to them the importance of U.S. policy goals. That's the way you get there. I think it's very healthy that he's doing this. BROWN: Former Vice President Dick Cheney has been very critical of how the president has been handling the war on terror, specifically, and you certainly worked with Dick Cheney. You know him well. Do you think he's been out of line with his criticism?
BAKER: I don't think -- look, I don't think a former vice president of the United States is out of line when he feels strongly about something and wants to speak out about it. I think the more open debate we have in this country the stronger country we'll have. No, I wouldn't say that.
Now, having said that, Dick and I are very close friends. He and I have never totally agreed on everything. There are some things in this area that we don't agree on. But I wouldn't characterize it as being out of line.
BROWN: Let me switch gears with you here. Nancy Reagan on Capitol Hill, you were there with her. It was an incredibly moving picture. Lot of Reagan's policies, though, have been undone. Are being undone currently. What do you think will be former President Reagan's lasting legacy?
BAKER: I think the lasting legacy is what you saw up there in the Rotunda of the Capitol. What Ronald Reagan did for this country is really beyond dispute. Nobody can dispute the fact that when he came into office we were in really bad shape, both economically and from a strong defense posture. With his focus on lowering margin tax rates, turning our economy around, and re-strengthening our defenses, he was -- he promoted the collapse of Communism, the end of the Cold War, the peaceful end, by the way, of the Cold War.
And economic recovery and for 18 or 20 years after Ronald Reagan left office we had only the mildest of recessions. We had, I think something like 22 -- let's see, 18 to 20 years of uninterrupted noninflationary growth. Now you can't argue with that. That was there and it's still there. We now have some serious problems and we have to deal with them.
And having said what I said about the foreign policy of the Obama administration, with which I find myself in agreement - not total agreement, there are some areas where I would differ. But I like the realism and pragmatism that I see in his foreign policy I do not feel the same way about the domestic policy of this administration. I have some serious problems with that.
BROWN: James Baker, Mr. Secretary, so appreciate your time tonight. Good seeing you. Thanks for joining us.
BAKER: Thank you, thank you, Campbell.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Monday, our news maker, the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, to talk about why gun sales are up since Barack Obama became president; that's Monday 8:00 p.m. Eastern, on CAMPBELL BROWN. After we check this hour's headlines, tonight's "Great Debate" Is affirmative action racist? We're going to talk to two people with very different points of view.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Welcome back, everybody. Every night at this time the "Great Debate". Tonight, we take on race and equal opportunity in America. We have elected a black president. A Latina is nominated for the Supreme Court and that has a lot of people wondering whether we even need affirm action anymore.
Here's a Quinnipiac University poll out today: 55 percent say abolish it, 36 percent say no. Tonight's premise, affirmative action is racist. Here to debate, Cathy Areu, a contributing editor for "The Washington Post Magazine". She says she landed her first job thanks to affirmative action. And with us from Los Angeles, Joe R. Hicks, he is vice president of the civil rights group Community Advocates, Inc. He once supported affirmative action, now he fights against it.
And we want to know what you think. Cast your vote by calling the number on the bottom of the screen. First, we're going to have an opening statement from each; 30 seconds on the clock.
Mr. Hicks, you believe affirmative action is racist. Make the case.
JOE R. HICKS, V.P., COMMUNITY ADVOCATES, INC.: Well, I think racist is kind of a harsh term here. We often associate the word racism and racist with really insidious kinds of things, lynchings, those sorts of things. My premise is that we live in a world that I argue is the post-racial world; a world in which things like racial preferences, which is really what we're talking about here, as opposed to affirmative action are simply unneeded.
The whole idea that they were going to make up for past issues, discrimination against women, discrimination against minorities really doesn't make a lot of sense. It's unneeded in today's world.
BROWN: All right, Cathy, go ahead.
CATHY AREU, "WASHINGTON POST MAGAZINE": How is it unneeded when 95 percent to 97 percent of corporate jobs are held by one group? When the majority of the Supreme Court is one group, when you have -- you have such a discrepancy in employment, and college admissions, when you have women making 74 cents to every dollar that a man makes. This is today, this is not our past.
When a Latina is making 58 cents to every white man's dollar, when an African-American woman is making 63 cents to every white man's dollar, how is affirmative action not needed? Affirmative action opens the doors to different groups so we can knock down these barriers.
BROWN: Joe, let me let you respond to that. HICKS: It's quite interesting that she uses all these terms about differential pay. Those are very controversial figures she's talking about here. The real question is, they are differential differences in pay. The question is, why does that exist? For Cathy to subscribe that racism in modern America, I think, simply, doesn't account for, oh, a think like we've got a black president. A man, by the way, who was voted into office, not affirmative action vote. People viewed this man, white voters, viewed this man as the right person for the job. He got that because white voters -- we're just going to talk about white people now, voted him into office because they thought he was the best leader, had the best leadership qualities and would lead this country where they'd like to see it go.
So, this notion that you can use racial preferences to somehow right the world and go against, in fact, what the 1964 Civil Right's Act said, that you could not, in fact, use race in these kinds of determinations, I think takes us back to another world. We don't live in a world where women or men of any color face that kind of discrimination that was once visited upon us in this country. It just doesn't exist.
BROWN: Let me ask Cathy to respond to that.
I mean, Cathy, we have a elected a black president.
AREU: Right.
BROWN: And when affirmative action was first implemented it was intended to be temporary. At what point - I mean, what has to happen before you see a time when there isn't a need for it?
AREU: What has to happen is the equal pay. These things do exist. These aren't controversial figures. These are real figures. I mean, as you mentioned earlier, I did receive my first job through affirmative action. I had a master's degree in English education. The job was a public school English teacher. The person I was up against was a non-Hispanic with a bachelor's degree. That person was actually supposed to get the job. But because they had to fill the quota with a Hispanic, I was given the job. I would say the most qualified person received that job. That person was friends with someone else, which is an affirmative action of the good old days when a friend knows a friend and gives them a job. I didn't have friends in that school system. I simply had affirmative action forcing them to do the right thing. They had to hire a more qualified person.
BROWN: Joe, let me ask you to address the point that Cathy was making a moment ago. Because, she's right, there are numbers - we have our own numbers from the Labor Department that do show these pretty extraordinary pay discrepancies. Why don't you believe that to be a real issue?
HICKS: If you, or anyone, is going to tell me that employer in contemporary America is going to hire someone of one color, pay them a one-level of pay, then bring somebody else in of a different color and pay them -- for the exact same job, the exact kind of qualifications, for the exact same job, and pay them at a different level. That's not going on in America.
People are paid different based on their experiences, their background, their education. There are a number of things that impact on the different kind of levels of pay that's happening in America today. My question isn't that there aren't -- isn't some disparity. The question is, why is it taking place?
Cathy seems to say it's because we've got a bunch of bigots out there hiring people. That isn't the kind of America we live in today. She is basically arguing from the kind of America that existed in 1952 that doesn't exist in 2009. That's the problem here. It's squaring our vision of the world with what really exists and then figure how you elevate others in pay based on the real kinds of things going on.
BROWN: Cathy, quickly, let me give you a chance to respond.
AREU: My experience didn't happen in the '50s. I wasn't looking for my job in the '50s. It happened recently. Unfortunately, I know firsthand - and unfortunately, when we work besides others we actually don't know what they're actually getting paid. But there are many cases when women find out what a colleague is getting paid. They do find out there is a discrepancy. This isn't the '50s. This is happening right now. It's not just women. We're talking minorities, all people of color, disabled people, veterans. Affirmative action helps so many people. It's not just a certain group.
BROWN: OK. I know you two have completely different points of view on this. Every night we do try to find common ground in these debates. So, think about. When we come back after the break, I want to hear where it is you can actually agree.
We'll be back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Don Lemon live at the CNN world headquarters.
We'll get back to Campbell Brown in a moment, but first I want to tell you what's making news right now. We're following a breaking story this hour out of Iraq.
Five American security contractors have been detained in the killing of another American contractor. It happened last month inside Baghdad's green zone.
The names of the five and their employer have not been released. Tonight at sock eastern, we'll go live to Baghdad.
More breaking news tonight on the mysterious disappearance of Air France flight 447. Brazilian officials say the bodies of two men have been recovered from the Atlantic Ocean near where the plane is believed to have crashed six days ago. Tonight, one of them has been confirmed as a passenger aboard the doomed flight.
The plane was headed from Rio to Paris with 228 people onboard. The horrible cries of children burned in a daycare fire in Mexico. It is disturbing. The images are heartbreaking as well.
Flames engulfed the ABC daycare center in northwestern Mexico. At least 35 children are now confirmed dead, and more than 40 in the hospital, along with teachers and neighbors who ran into the fire trying to get the kids out. No word on the cause.
We will also go to Mexico tonight.
President Barack Obama is praising the troops who stormed the beaches at Normandy, France. The allied invasion turned the tide in World War II. It happened 65 years ago today.
Mr. Obama called D-Day a time where the bravery and selflessness of a few was able to change the course of an entire century.
All those stories coming up at 10:00 p.m. eastern on CNN. I'm Don Lemon. More of Campbell Brown right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Welcome back to our great debate. Tonight's premise -- "Affirmative Action is racist."
Civil rights activist Joe Hick says yes, Cathie Areu from "The "Washington Post" magazine says no. What we're going to do right now is try to find some common ground between the two of you. And Cathy, was there anything Joe said that resonated with you?
AREU: I don't think everyone's bigot, so I would have to say I don't believe that, so I have to agree with him that not everyone in the world right now is a bigot.
And I do believe that the most qualified people should get the job. I don't believe in under qualified people getting the jobs and filling quotas, which I don't think that happens with Affirmative Action. But I guess that's something we could agree on?
BROWN: Joe, what about Cathy's arguments? Anything persuasive to you at all?
HICKS: Yes. I would like to expand it a bit to say, you know, I think Cathy and I, while we certainly have disagreements over the kinds of things that we need to do to make the nation the kind of nation that we'd like to see it be.
But I think our agreement would be on, I think we would probably agree our aim, the kind of America that we both want to see exist, is the same.
Bob Marley -- I'm a big reggae fan -- once said there will be conflict until the color of a man or woman's skin is of no more significance than the color of their eyes.
Now, that's the kind of world I'm fighting for, the same kind of vision Dr. King had, that the content of your character is more important than the color of our skin, which is why, in fact, I argue against the concept of racial preferences.
BROWN: All right, to Joe and Cathy, Cathy Areu, Joe Hicks, an excellent debate. Thank you both for your time tonight. Really appreciate it.
AREU: Thank you for having us.
BROWN: So let's see how you voted in tonight's great debate. Pretty evenly split, actually -- 49 percent agree affirmative action is racist, 51 percent disagree. Not a scientific poll, we should say, just a snap shot from our viewers who called in tonight. Thanks very much to everybody who called.
Another big question tonight, should Al Qaeda be more afraid of President Obama than President Bush? Our discussion of the battle for hearts and minds turns into a war of words between Bill Bennett and Michael Ware. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Now it's time for another big question for this week. Should Al Qaeda be more afraid of Obama than Bush? Back to talk about that, John Ridley and Bill Bennett once again. I'm also joined by CNN International Correspondent Michael Ware, and Fran Townsend, also back with us as well.
Michael, let me start with you. No coincidence, probably, that bin Laden releases a tape just as he's heading toward the region.
(Inaudible)
BROWN: Whose message do you think is resonating right now more with the Arab street this week?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I certainly think that, without doubt, President Obama has the ball in his court right now. I mean, the Arab street is hungry for something new.
Now, whether this is going to be enough, only time will tell.
As we've been saying, this was a landmark speech. It was -- it was telling in its oratory and in its format. But is it going to be backed up by action? That's what the Arab street is waiting for. If it's not, we're going to be left with what we are.
We need to see President Obama take real action, for example, in the Arab mind, on Israel. If there is no action there, then there's no difference for them between a President Bush and a President Obama.
And don't forget, in the Arab mind, President Obama may be the good guy that he is. But to many on the ground, it's still the military and the CIA that runs the show. So we need to see real action before we determine who wins this debate. BROWN: So to that point, we all analyzed his speech earlier. Talk about the action part of it. What has to happen, now, Fran, in your view to go to the next level?
TOWNSEND: Well, we have heard President Obama, again, talk about changing interrogation techniques and changing Guantanamo, closing it. But he hasn't even told his own party, he hasn't told Congress, the details of that. We're still waiting for the details.
And to Michael's point, we don't understand how he's going to implement that.
The fascinating thing you asked about Bin Laden's statement, the fascinating thing about that is he's angry and accuses President Obama of following the policies of the prior administration. And that's really a reference to the predator strikes and the support of Pakistan in the tribal areas.
That ought to be good news to the American people. We're talking about the reaction in the Arab world. The American people ought to feel pretty good that we have maintained an aggressive posture, and that, frankly, makes Osama bin Laden mad.
BROWN: Bill?
BENNETT: I don't know who -- George Bush can't do much to him right now. We doesn't have Fran Townsend anymore, and he isn't in office.
But, you know, Osama bin Laden declares war on the United States no matter who's president. He did so twice when Bill Clinton was in office.
Sandra Day O'Connor said once -- I hate to say I find tedious what's giving so much exhilaration. I found the speech tedious. I don't know how you say it's landmark until we see what comes of it.
It's a speech George Bush could have given in all its particulars.
WARE: But he never did.
BENNETT: He sure did except --
WARE: Could have, should have, would have.
BENNETT: He did. He gave the speech in Egypt.
By the way, there's still interrogation going on in Egypt, which this administration supports.
WARE: It's not rendition.
BROWN: So what policies are you looking for?
BENNETT: First of all, I'm basically pleased with what he's doing. Despite this rhetoric, he is carrying on the war in Iraq, he is upping the troops in Afghanistan, he is supporting the Pakistanis against the Taliban. Good stuff.
If George Bush does it, it's terrible. When he does it, they love it. Fine with me.
BROWN: Explain the difference --
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: Is it about more than tone?
RIDLEY: I disagree a little bit. I don't think it was a glib speech. I do agree that it was very short on specifics. I don't think that's unusual for President Obama. It's a first state speech.
But I will say this, the question is, should they fear former President Bush when he was in office or Obama? The reality is they're fearing a united front.
And that's what has got to happen here is, is the president now, with all that he's facing, can he get not just American, not just the world, but specifically the Arabs behind him? I think he said some things that can more the moderates in that direction. I don't think it's an either/or opposition. Can he get the united front --
BENNETT: If he can get more people behind him because they like him better and they like his name better and like his approach better, even though he's saying essentially the same thing as George Bush --
TOWNSEND: But why -- the fact that here's a guy who looks like them, who has a name like them, I mean, that means something. I mean --
BENNETT: That's good, but what will it come to? That is, will all of a sudden people say, by gosh, you're right, and I do hope you stay in Iraq until things are safe, and we support you sending more troops into Afghanistan.
If they say that, then fine. Otherwise it's just a feel good. Let's wait and see.
BROWN: I think it can't be lost on people, including in the Arab world. He did make much of his middle name, Barack Hussein Obama in the speech today. Do you think the Arab name, it was lost on him, that he refused to use his middle made during his inauguration, he refused to use it during the campaign?
(CROSSTALK)
WARE: -- living in the now.
(CROSSTALK)
RIDLEY: I don't know if he could use his middle name. I think he was put into a place -- (CROSSTALK)
WARE: After President Bush, I'm sorry, in the Middle East, America's name was less than mud. I'm sorry. Loathed and despised even by the moderates who were desperate to support you. And to give them anything to cling on to --
(CROSSTALK)
BENNETT: You were there. But it had to make some difference to people in Iraq and Afghanistan. George Bush liberated 40 million or 50 million.
TOWNSEND: Thank you.
BENNETT: Barack Obama has liberated none of them.
WARE: That's not how they see it.
(CROSSTALK)
WARE: He brought Abu Ghraib.
(CROSSTALK)
BENNETT: They want to go back.
WARE: That's what he brought.
BENNETT: They don't want to go back. They don't want --
(CROSSTALK)
WARE: I think it's going to take some deft footwork by a new administration to reshape that thinking. But at the end of the day, they need to deliver what previous administrations haven't. And that's in Israel and Palestine.
And that's -- we still have seen any real movement in Afghanistan. What's happening in Pakistan? There's the answer. Therein lies a solution.
BROWN: I've got 30 seconds.
(CROSSTALK)
BENNETT: Again, we shall see what he does.
WARE: Exactly. I have yet to believe --
BENNETT: But, again, the basic outlines of the policy have not changed, have they? If you talk about U.S. policy toward Iraq, toward Afghanistan, toward Pakistan, it hasn't changed.
(CROSSTALK)
WARE: To Iran it certainly has.
BROWN: To be continued. To be continued. A great panel, guys. Thanks very much, appreciate it.
And China clamping down on the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square. Our own reporter had to battle secret agents and umbrellas to get the story. You're going to want to see this. This is tonight's "Breakout."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN VAUSE, SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, CNN: I'm John Vause near Tiananmen Square. This is about as close as we can get to the square because these plain clothes officers are using their umbrellas to try and stop our view so we cannot actually do any videotaping here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Every night at this time we want to bring you a breakout story from around the globe, the kind that breaks through all the noise.
And tonight that takes us to Beijing and the 20th anniversary of the crackdown in Tiananmen Square.
Few of us can forget the image of one anonymous man literally taking on an entire communist army. This bold stand followed a few days after the deadly, crushing crackdown against students.
CNN sent John Vause to cover the anniversary Wednesday. What happened next is pretty remarkable. That's why it's the "Breakout." Let's check it out.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VAUSE: I'm John Vause near Tiananmen Square. This is about as close as we can get to the square because these plain clothes officers are using their umbrellas to try and stop our view so we cannot actually do any videotaping here.
There is an incredible security presence here on the eve of the 20th anniversary. There is so many police and soldiers. These plain clothes officials are using these umbrellas here to block our view whenever we try to do any videotaping anywhere near the square.
They're also carrying these walkie-talkies right here. This gentleman has a walkie-talkie. So does this gentleman here.
Authorities are also rounding up dissidents, many, they say, according to some reports, in fact, have been sent out of town. Others have been detained.
University students too have also been warned to watch what they say. And there is also heavy security around many of the schools at some of the bigger campuses here in Beijing.
And right now, as you can see, these officials continually blocking our view to try and stop us from filing any kind of report from Tiananmen Square.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: John Vause, as you say there in Tiananmen Square.
Our next big question, does Bill Clinton still count? Here how the former president is handling life out of the spotlight while his wife takes center stage.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Time now for our third big question of the night. Does Bill Clinton still count? You wouldn't have thought so a year ago when Barack Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, crushing the Clinton's hopes of getting back into the White House.
Well, what a difference a year makes. And here to talk about the former president's second act, Peter Baker, White House Correspondent for "The New York Times."
And he wrote this week's cover story about Clinton in the "Time's" Sunday magazine. The panel is also back with me here, Mary Matalin along with writer P.J. O'Rourke. His latest book is "Driving like Crazy." He is also a contributor to the conservative weekly magazine "The Weekly Standard." And also back with us, John Ridley.
So, Peter, you spent a lot of time with Bill Clinton for this piece, I know. How is he dealing with not being the top dog in the Democratic Party anymore?
PETER BAKER, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, "NEW YORK TIMES": Well, it's a little bit of an adjustment, obviously. You know, this is an unusual situation. In the last 140 years there have only been two Democratic presidents who live long enough to see another Democrat in the White House.
So he's trying to adjust. But he's got a lot of things on his plate. He got his foundation. He's still traveling the world. He's going to South America and Europe and Asia all the time.
And he's got a certain vested interest in this administration being successful, obviously, as a certain contact from the cabinet he keeps in touch with.
BROWN: Yes, clearly. And you also say that despite, I think, one Obama aide telling you that he is irrelevant, he also talks to Joe Biden weekly?
BAKER: He does. Actually, he talks with Joe Biden much more frequently than he does with President Obama.
When I went to see him at his office in Harlem in April, I said, well, how often have you talked to the president since the inauguration? He said, oh, I think only about once.
But Biden he talks to about once a week. They have a relationship, obviously, that goes back a ways. And President Clinton said, I don't want to bother President Obama. He has got a lot of things on his plate.
But he keeps in touch. He sends memos to Jim Jones, the National Security Advisor. He talks to Larry Summers and Carol Brown, people who worked for him in his administration from time to time.
BROWN: Has he been effectively marginalized by Obama? Can you marginalize Bill Clinton ever?
MARY MATALIN, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: No. And one would hope that at 62-you're your priorities and your aspirations are different than they were at 42. Peter's piece is beautiful. He watches "24," he loves to shop.
(LAUGHTER)
Who can resist a man like that?
And we've had the occasion to see him. He launched the college version of CGI at Tulane. And he is happy, loves what he's doing. You know, that's -- he's not marginalized to himself.
BROWN: What do you think?
P.J. O'ROURKE, AUTHOR: Marginalized on the national stage, definitely. And I'm thinking -- I thought it was a great piece. I really enjoyed the piece. But I'm thinking, you know, bright pink tie on the cover of "The New York Times" Sunday magazine, this is like slightly a strange way to let the spotlight shine on your wife.
BROWN: If you're supposed to be playing second fiddle.
O'ROURKE: Yes.
RIDLEY: Again, I thought it also was a great piece.
One of the things I found interesting, talking about finding peace. And in the article talking about how he has found peace with a lot his enemies, Newt Gingrich, Christopher Ruddy, people who were very, let's just say evil to him in a sense, and doing what he did in the administration, finding that third way.
But with people that were close to him, Bill Richardson, the Kennedys, he hasn't really found that peace with those individuals. These personal slights -- it's almost -- Fredo, you were my brother, how could you?
BROWN: What is it about him, Peter, that makes him still want to win people over -- certain people, at least, as you pointed out the discrepancies in your piece?
BAKER: Yes. He definitely seems to be the kind of person who wants to find that one person in the room who is most resistant to him and focus in like a laser beam, to coin a phrase, until he's convinced that person he's right with something.
Sometimes he will just wear him down. Sometimes people come around to the idea that maybe he isn't the caricature that some people saw him as.
Christopher Ruddy will say -- he was a journalist in the 1990s who wrote a lot of tough things about Clintons, explored a lot of cover-up theories when it came to things like Vince Foster's death.
He says he believes now that Clinton wasn't as liberal as he thought at the time, and he has come to really admire what he's doing with the foundation in terms of fighting AIDS around the world, climate change, and things like that.
BROWN: Do you agree with that, Mary?
MATALIN: Yes. We tent to attribute political motives to everything. Bill Clinton is just one of those naturally gregarious people.
He always found the person in the room, whether or not he could persuade them, he always tried to -- me, when I came into the White House, they would go, shh. Nobody would talk to me or look at me. Shun her, shun.
That is part of his personality. We don't get to see political people as they are, really.
RIDLEY: I would be curious -- I would love to know Peter's thinking of this new book about Obama that came out that Obama says he was lying, Bill Clinton was lying during the campaign.
BROWN: "Renegade."
RIDLEY: "Renegade," the new book. And knowing, or at least from Peter's pieces, what he's saying about Clinton not forgiving some of those kind of slights. How does he feel about Obama? And will those two ever reconcile down the road?
O'ROURKE: When they're both out of work. They all get together on a foundation when they get out of work.
BROWN: Peter, go ahead.
BAKER: There is something to this idea of a former president's club. Just the other day you had Bill Clinton and George W. Bush on a stage, right in Toronto, and best of friends.
And they actually had a very rough relationship. Clinton talks about this in the piece about the early days of Bush's presidency when they really didn't get along. And Clinton says "I had to sit down with him and we began to sort of bury the hatchet."
I think with Obama, I think they've got a friendly relationship. But they're not, like, close. I don't think that you would find them getting together at this point for a beer.
That may change over time. But Clinton understands that it's in his interest to hope for Obama's success. Obviously, again, he has a vested interest in the administration through his wife. And so he's doing his best to be quiet.
I asked one of the White House officials, I said, you know, does Clinton's name come up in the senior staff meeting as a problem to be dealt with from time to time? They said, no, not at all. We expected that might be the case, hasn't been the case.
Jimmy Carter has come up a couple times so far, but not Bill Clinton.
BROWN: All right, we've got to end it there, guys. Many thanks, Peter Baker, and congratulations again on a great piece. Appreciate it, everybody.
That's all for now. Be sure to watch us every weeknight an 8:00 eastern time. Have a great weekend, everybody. Good night.
