Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Liberian Capital Under Siege
Aired July 21, 2003 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, July 21. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone.
Under siege and under fire. Tonight, the U.S. Embassy in Liberia is caught in the midst of a civil war; 21 U.S. Marines today arrived to reinforce the troops around the embassy. The Pentagon also ordered a task force of 2,000 other Marines to move closer to Liberia.
Jeff Koinange joins me live from the Liberian capital of Monrovia.
Jeff, has the fighting subsided tonight?
JEFF KOINANGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It looks like it's subsided, Lou.
But we're hearing reports of scores dead, many more injured, as mortar shells rained all over this war-ravaged capital. And it began right here in the heavily fortified U.S. Embassy compound. Earlier on today, an elite Marine corps unit known as the Fleet Anti-terrorist Security Team flew from Rota, Spain, on to neighboring Sierra Leone. And then they got onto Black Hawk helicopters and came here.
As soon as they landed and took off, half-an-hour later, mortar shells all around this compound, in fact, one landing in the commissary area, although no injuries reported, mortar shells around the capital. We understand one landed on a building. And up to 18 people were killed in that. Liberians angry at the U.S. for not intervening sooner in this war-ravaged country started displaying the dead bodies of relatives and friends right outside the embassy compound, even as fighting continued.
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Liberians picking up their personal belongings and moving as far away from the fighting as possible -- as you know, Lou, they had been moving from the outer parts of the country into the city seeking refuge and safe haven. That's no longer the case, as the battleground is now Monrovia and they have to get up and leave. We understand there's no food, no running water, no sanitation, no medication in the city of Monrovia.
So now, as the fighting continues, Lou, nobody knows when it's going to abate.
DOBBS: Jeff, can you give us your best assessment? Conflicting reports throughout the day as to the government taking advantage over the rebel forces, the rebel forces pushing back the government forces. Is there any clarity at all as to who is prevailing right now?
KOINANGE: None whatsoever, Lou, because the situation on the ground is so fluid, government forces claiming they had pushed the rebels back about three, four miles from where I'm standing, although those mortar shells can be launched from as far away as about 5 to 7 kilometers, so no telling who's got the upper hand right now. What we can tell you is that fighting is raging in the streets of Monrovia, Lou.
DOBBS: Jeff, thank you very much. And you and your crew take care of yourselves, Jeff Koinange, reporting from Monrovia.
President Bush said the United States is watching the Liberian crisis very closely, but he still has not decided whether or not to send in peacekeepers.
White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux joins me now with the report -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, President Bush just arriving back here at the White House just moments ago.
I've been speaking with White House officials throughout the day, who express a great deal of frustration with what's happening on the ground, with the rebel forces, as well as the Liberian regime. I spoke with one very senior administration official, who said that the main concern here, the main priority, is maintaining security, but, at the same time, President Bush has not signed off, has not decided on whether or not to send U.S. troops to Liberia, despite the pressure, growing international pressure, to act urgently, that coming from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, as well as the European Union.
Why this assessment, why this process that is unfolding, they say, first of all, they had to figure out what was going on, on the ground, whether or not the U.S. Embassy was hit directly, whether it was targeted or if it was accidental, also trying to figure out just when are the Nigerian battalions going to be ready to shuttle out Charles Taylor when it's time for him to leave.
And finally, of course, Lou, when will Charles Taylor leave? That is a big question, President Bush today at his Crawford ranch hosting Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, saying that, yes, that they're willing to help out with trying to enforce the cease- fire, the big question, how and when.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We just sent a group of troops in to protect our interests. And we're concerned about our people in Liberia. We're continuing to monitor the situation very closely. We're working with the United Nations to effect policy necessary to get the cease-fire back in place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And, Lou, just to illustrate the level of frustration from this administration, State Department spokesman Phil Reeker squarely putting the blame today on the rebels, saying that they were firing indiscriminately, that there was -- creating chaos on the ground. This is something that the administration sees as an uncontrollable situation. They are waiting for calm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHIL REEKER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: We are strongly condemning the rebel group, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy, for their continued reckless and indiscriminate shelling of Monrovia. They need to think about the plight of the civilian population and the humanitarian workers who are there to alleviate suffering. And this breaking of the cease-fire is something we call on them to end.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Now, Lou, it's a tough decision for the president. And, of course, they are waiting for calm on the ground. They do not want to put U.S. troops in harm's way -- Lou.
DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux reporting from the White House.
The possibility that U.S. peacekeepers might be sent to Liberia is another example of a growing strain upon the U.S. military. The Pentagon is now considering a number of options to ease the burden, at least in part, by increasing the size of the Army, among other options.
Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre has more on the story for us -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Pentagon this week is hoping to announce that rotation plan that will provide some relief for war-weary troops in Iraq, particularly the 3rd Infantry Division.
Sources say that the units to replace those units have been selected and should be announced this week. But the fact that they had to scramble around to find troops to replace others in Iraq just illustrates the fact that the U.S. military is stretched thin. And it has some in Congress pushing the Pentagon to increase the size of the U.S. military.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JACK REED (D), RHODE ISLAND: That we have to be prepared to increase our Army, the number of brigades in our Army, or to activate National Guard divisions. And we have to make that decision soon, because the training of these troops we'll need before they're deployed.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: If we believe that's the case, obviously, we would come to the Congress and make that request.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Rumsfeld insists, though, the Army is plenty big enough. He says there's two parts to the problem.
One is that too many military people, 300,000, by one Pentagon estimate, are doing jobs that should be done or could be done by civilians. The other half of the equation, Rumsfeld says, is that too many combat-critical jobs, everything from medical personnel to cooks and supply clerks, are in the reserves. So, earlier this month, Rumsfeld ordered a sweeping restructure of the U.S. military, so the U.S. can go to war without relying so much on the Guard and reserves.
A memo he sent to his military chiefs gave them just three weeks to respond. He said -- quote -- "I consider this a matter of the utmost urgency." Currently, there are about 200,000 reservists called to active duty, including about 40,000 supporting operations in Iraq. But after a decade of downsizing, Lou, the Pentagon is not anxious to do an about-face. For one thing, adding military personnel to the end strength is a very expensive proposition.
And for the other, it flies in the face of Rumsfeld's vision of a smaller military that takes advantage of new technology and new tactics to pack more of a punch -- Lou.
DOBBS: Jamie, that vision of Rumsfeld's is being sorely tested already in these circumstances. The capacity that the Pentagon has maintained that they could carry out a two-front war, it looks like that is a highly dubious possibility right now, does it not?
MCINTYRE: Well, it's clear that they can do this in the short term. For instance, they will find troops to replace the ones in Iraq. What's really -- the real problem is long term. How do you maintain this over time and how do you retain troops in the military if they're working at this pace?
So, if you look down the road, it could be a problem. The answer really depends on how successful Rumsfeld can be in freeing up those military jobs and relieving the stress on the reserves. Otherwise, there's going to be increasing pressure to increase the size of the military.
DOBBS: Secretary Rumsfeld, Jamie, has prided himself on his management skills and talent, which he's demonstrated in the private sector, as well as the government. But, for example, the 3rd Infantry, now with three delays in returning home, this is becoming a very complex problem and a political embarrassment, is it not?
MCINTYRE: Well, Rumsfeld is looking for legislative relief. He says he's done a lot of the things that he can do in his power, but now he needs the Congress, he says, to pass a law that will give him much more freedom to move people around.
He says part of the problem with a civilian work force is that it's too hard to manage them. Unlike the military, they can't simply be ordered around and told how to do things. And they don't have the flexibility. So he's asking Congress to give the Pentagon wide powers, including relief from some environmental laws, which he says will give him the flexibility to manage the problem.
DOBBS: Jamie, thank you very much -- Jamie McIntyre, reporting from the Pentagon.
The Pentagon today said troops in Afghanistan fought a major battle with Taliban forces over the weekend. They killed at least 22 Taliban soldiers. The fighting began when Taliban troops ambushed a special forces convoy in southeastern Afghanistan. It was one of the largest battles since the end of the war in Afghanistan a year and a half ago. There were no U.S. casualties. About 9,000 U.S. troops remain based in Afghanistan.
President Bush maintains strong public support for his decision to go to war with Iraq. The latest CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll shows 63 percent of those surveyed believe the situation in Iraq was worth going to war. The poll also says 59 percent of the public approve of the way the president is handling his job, that approval rating slightly higher than in March before the war against Saddam Hussein.
President Bush today repeated his call for a diplomatic solution to the nuclear crisis with North Korea. The president's remarks came one day after a senior U.S. official said North Korea may have a second secret nuclear weapons facility.
Kitty Pilgrim has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Yongbyon, seen in these satellite photos, is thought to be North Korea's main nuclear plant. Now some reports over the weekend come to the conclusion that North Korea has another secret plant to make plutonium.
Less than two weeks ago, North Korea itself claimed to have extracted plutonium from 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods, experts say enough for several nuclear weapons.
Today, President Bush called on countries in the region to stand up to North Korea.
BUSH: A decision to develop a nuclear arsenal is one that will alienate you from the rest of the world.
PILGRIM: British Prime Minister Tony Blair in China today said cooperation, particularly Chinese cooperation, was necessary.
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: The key thing that has changed in respect to North Korea is, there's now pressure here in this region.
PILGRIM: The Chinese participation is critical. They hosted talks last April. And the Chinese foreign minister came to Washington last week to discuss the issue. Because China supplies 70 percent of North Korea's energy, it has considerable leverage.
JAMES LILLEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SOUTH KOREA: If you bring this cohesion together, which the North Koreans absolutely detest and are frightened of, it seems to me, then we have a chance of really pulling this one off.
PILGRIM: Nevertheless, some say there is little room to maneuver for North Korea or the United States.
IAN BREMMER, EURASIA GROUP: We have incompatible negotiating positions. I don't see the United States amending their position or softening their position particularly much. I don't see the North Koreans softening their position. So you add the pieces up and we are poised for escalation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Last week, International Atomic Energy director Mohamed ElBaradei called North Korea the most immediate and the most serious threat. Now, time is on North Korea's side to continue their program if they choose to drag out the discussion -- Lou.
DOBBS: What kind of talks are expected? The United States has been adamant about no bilateral talks.
PILGRIM: That's exactly right. They're hoping for three-way talks, U.S., China, and North Korea. They may go to five, including Japan and South Korea, but there's no definite word on that yet.
DOBBS: And no suggestion here that talks will be successful, in any case.
Kitty, thank you very much -- Kitty Pilgrim.
Well, tonight, still ahead here; the longest weekend. Hundreds of thousands of Army reservists put their lives on hold to fight the war against Saddam Hussein. What awaits them when they return from Iraq? Also ahead here, we begin our series of special reports this week on those American brands so enduring, so highly valued, they can only be called classics. Peter Viles reports tonight on John Deere.
And author Ann Coulter will join us with her new book, "Treason." She'll tell us why she says liberals don't love this country.
And a controversial political cartoon has invoked a famous photo from the days of the Vietnam War. But the target this time is the president of the United States. And a controversy has ensued. Bill Tucker will have the report.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Stocks today moved lower on Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrials fell 91 points. The Nasdaq dropped 27, the S&P 500 down 14 1/2 points on the day.
Christine Romans, as always -- well, nearly always -- has the market for us. Good to see you, Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Welcome back. I thought, by the time both of us were back from our summer vacations, we would have seen the market have some sort of sell-off. It really just hasn't kicked in here yet.
DOBBS: Thank goodness.
(LAUGHTER)
ROMANS: At least for now.
Well, today, three stocks fell for each that rose, volume, though, a light 1.2 billion shares at the Big Board. And, Lou, only four Dow stocks closed higher. One of those was 3M. Its second- quarter profit rose. And it raised full-year forecasts. But look at Merck. It cut sales estimates for its top-selling drug and posted disappointing profit growth. And Texas Instruments fell 4 percent. Now, after the bell, it reported higher sales and profit for the second quarter. And a lot of folks are zeroing in on its revenue target, pretty much in line. But some are worried it might be a little bit lighter, in the mid range. We'll see what investors say about that tomorrow.
Now, 172 companies in the S&P 500 have reported earnings. And they've shown profit growth of almost 10 percent, revenue growth near 5 percent. Now, a third of the S&P companies report this week. And when it's all said and done, earnings are expected up 6.6 percent year over year. That compares with 11.7 percent in the first quarter, and hopes for earnings growth of more than 13 percent in the third and 21 percent in the fourth quarters.
Now, the same optimism that's feeding those earnings hopes in the second half is also feeding a wild sell-off in the bonds. The 10-year note yield rose to 4.2 percent today, the highest since last December, the catalyst today, a third straight month of gains for the index of leading economic indicators.
DOBBS: And how much did that index go up, Christine?
ROMANS: Oh, one-tenth of a percent. But it's three in a row. It's the trend that counts, right?
(LAUGHTER)
DOBBS: Oh, that's frightening, frightening. It doesn't take much some days to frighten the bond market, does it?
ROMANS: Well, there were a lot of people long in that market for a very long time. You can imagine how nervous some of them must be.
DOBBS: Well, as they say, it's been quite a ride in the bond market.
ROMANS: It certainly has. DOBBS: Christine, thank you very much -- Christine Romans.
ROMANS: You're welcome.
DOBBS: Martha Stewart's defense team today asked a federal judge to order an investigation into how details of her indictment were leaked to the press before the grand jury returned formal charges against her. Stewart's attorneys said the leaks may have influenced the grand jury's decision. The U.S. district judge said she would consider the request. Stewart's charges stem from her sale of 4,000 shares of ImClone stock.
ImClone's founder and former CEO, Sam Waksal, pleaded guilty to insider trading and other charges last fall. He is due to begin serving his seven-year sentence later this week.
Out of the 79 executives who have been criminally charged, Waksal is the only executive who's been sentenced to jail; 16 Enron executives have also been charged in the 595 days since Enron filed for bankruptcy.
Still ahead here tonight: an extended tour of duty for hundreds of thousands of U.S. Army reservists in Iraq. Lisa Sylvester will report on one soldier and the small business he left behind.
And your thoughts on the Kobe Bryant case and more. We'll share some of your e-mails tonight.
And drawing fire, a political cartoon that caught the attention of the Secret Service. Is it free speech? Is it provocative, a deadly threat against the president of the United States?
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Still to come tonight: "American Classics." We begin our series of special reports on this country's most enduring brands and what sets them apart from all the others. Peter Viles reports tonight on John Deere when we continue.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: It's an extended tour of duty for the 200,000 members of the National Guard and reserves who are serving in Iraq and fighting the war against terror. The so-called weekend warriors are not the only ones feeling the strain. So are many of the small businesses they own and run.
Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Steve Brozak has been doing double duty since last November. He's the co-owner and president of a small securities brokerage firm and a Marine Corps reservist mobilized for the Iraq war, working out of Arlington, Virginia.
LT. COL. STEPHEN BROZAK, U.S. MARINE CORPS: Everybody expects everything yesterday. So it's always a series of juggling, not balls, but meat cleavers sometimes.
SYLVESTER: Brozak's active-duty stint has been extended twice. He's lost a significant amount of business and, according to him, thousands of dollars. Federal officials say small businesses are hurt the most by reserve call-ups. Since 9/11, the Small Business Administration has approved more than $9 million in loans to companies struggling from the loss of key employees.
HECTOR BARRETO, SMALL BUSINESS ASSOCIATION: Sometimes, it's a key employee. Sometimes, it's the business owner themselves. And so, for all of those expenses that keep going, even while they're gone, the fixed costs, the payroll, other operating expenses, we wanted to provide them with access to this capital.
SYLVESTER: Many large companies actively support the reserves by paying the difference in employees' salaries. But it's different for smaller companies.
TODD MCCRACKEN, SMALL BUSINESS ASSOCIATION: A large company, they may have, oh, one of our software developers is gone, one of our 100 software developers. In a small company, it's, our one I.T. person is gone, the only one we have.
SYLVESTER: This is a trend that's not likely to change any time soon; 46 percent of the total military force are reservists. And the reservists' role is greater now than at any time since World War II.
BOB HOLLINGSWORTH, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: We want to make sure that the employers clearly understand that, even though they don't go and put on a uniform and go to work every day, that they are inextricably linked to the national defense of our country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The terms of the SBA loans are attractive: an interest rate no higher than 4 percent and a length as long as 30 years. But many small companies don't want the added debt. They say what would really help them out is some kind of a tax break from Congress -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, tax breaks are something that seem to be very popular these days, and no one can be more deserving.
Thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester. And welcome aboard.
SYLVESTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: That brings us to tonight's quote on the subject of rebuilding Iraq: "I'm enormously optimistic about our opportunity for success, as long as we don't lose our nerve," that from General John Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command.
Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts. Many of you wrote in about Friday's poll question, in which we asked about who is most responsible for the weapons of mass destruction intelligence controversy.
David Holmstrom of Fridley, Minnesota, said: "I believe that President Bush is exhibiting one of the clear shortcomings in Americans today: lack of personal responsibility. It is much easier to blame someone else for our failures and actions."
Joy Miller of Auburn, Washington, said we forgot one category in our poll. She said: "The correct answer is the liberal media, who refuses to let it go."
Many of you wrote also about the media's coverage of the charges against Kobe Bryant. Lawrence of Missouri wrote: "By the time the media, the lawyers, the courts have finished with Kobe Bryant's accuser, it won't matter whether or not she is telling the truth. She will have been thoroughly trashed, vilified, and discredited."
And Hugh Gray of Madison, Alabama, wrote about one of our guests tonight before she appears: "Ann Coulter is an American patriot and should be a must-read in our schools and colleges."
We always love hearing from you. Please send us your thoughts at LouDobbs@CNN.com.
Coming up next: "Treason," Ann Coulter's new book, says liberal policies, from the Cold War era to the current war against terror, have been utterly wrong. She is our guest.
Also ahead: the BBC under fire following the death of a highly regarded weapons expert. Robin Oakley will have that story for us from London.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Tonight, the BBC faces an unprecedented crisis, as it is fighting to protect its reputation of journalistic integrity, at issue, the way it handled the story about the British government's case for the war against Saddam Hussein. The source for that story, a government expert on weapons of mass destruction, committed suicide.
I'm joined now from London by CNN's European political editor, Robin Oakley -- Robin.
ROBIN OAKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the government has been under flak for some days now over the death of David Kelly.
Opinion polls have shown 68 percent saying that they do not trust Tony Blair and his ministers, 39 percent saying that Tony Blair should resign. But now, suddenly, the heat is being applied to the BBC as well, because the British Broadcasting Corporation has been at war with the government over one key story. It was a BBC reporter, Andrew Gilligan of the "Today" program, who alleged that the government had -- quote -- "sexed up" a dossier of its case against Saddam Hussein by inserting, on the insistence of ministers and the spin chief in Downing Street, the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction he could unleash within 45 minutes.
The government was furious that the BBC was pushing this story, said it was completely untrue, said that the BBC was running an anti- war vendetta. The BBC refused to acknowledge its source for the story. The government pushed forward David Kelly, this weapons expert, and said they thought he was the source for the story. Then David Kelly was found dead, apparently by his own hand, after he'd been exposed by the Ministry of Defense as the likely source of the story, grilled by a parliamentary committee.
And, finally, after his death, the BBC has come forward and said, yes, he was their source. The problem with that is that Dr. Kelly, when quizzed by the parliamentary investigatory committee, had said he couldn't possibly have been the source for the story because the things that he had said to the BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan, simply would not have allowed him to make this claim. And the BBC is under further attack from the way, before it had identified Dr. David Kelly as the source for this key story, it had talked about him being a senior source in the intelligence services.
Dr. Kelly didn't work for the intelligence services. And Gavin Davis, the chairman of the BBC governors, had said that the BBC was able to make an exception in this case and allow a story to get on air on the basis of a single informant, an anonymous informant, because sometimes you had to do that with stories from intelligence sources. But this was not a story, Lou, from the intelligence services.
DOBBS: Robin, it's remarkable that there's some irony in that. It sounds like the BBC is using some of the same rationalization on sources as some of the intelligence agencies that are being criticized, saying it was a very difficult situation. The BBC, its director general, they're under -- they're under considerable pressure to resign, are they not?
OAKLEY: Yes. There is pressure for them to resign from certain quarters. The constituency MP for David Kelly where he lived, Robert Jackson, he said he holds the BBC to blame for their death, and he says that Gavin Davis, the chairman, should resign, so should Greg Dike, the director general. And we're seeing a lot of people calling for a reform of the whole BBC way and style of journalism.
Gerald Kaufman, who heads the House of Commons Committee on Culture and Media, has said that the BBC is to blame for what has happened here. He wants the BBC reformed. He wants the BBC and its standards brought under the new offcom regulatory body that is going to look after other parts of the communications industry instead of the BBC being run by its own independent board of governors and them being responsible for its standards. So there's a lot of pressure coming on the BBC from different quarters -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, the BBC, as you well know, Robin, is unique. It is state funded. It is a government enterprise. It is anti-government by demeanor. Why was there not a stronger investigation, greater reaction when the state of Israel, for example, said point blank we don't want the BBC covering our press conferences, we're not going to give them favor because they simply are pro Palestinian?
OAKLEY: The BBC, like many institutions, Lou, I think when it faces that kind of criticism from outside tends to circle the wagons and pull in and say we do everything right and we've done nothing wrong. But there is certain disquiet among some BBC journalists that I know that they've chosen to defend themselves so heavily on the case of this particular story by this journalist, Andrew Gilligan. And there's a lot of discomfort in the BBC now that Andrew Gilligan and the BBC are having to come forward and effectively say that David Kelly the man who has died after finding himself at the center of the spotlight over this affair, they're basically saying we stick by our story, which means they're saying that Dr. Kelly, when he was before the Commons Investigative Committee and said he couldn't have been the source must have been telling a lie -- Lou.
DOBBS: And it would not be the only, if you will, misconstruction of the truth. As the BBC -- as you reported, identified him as a senior intelligence official. We're at a juncture, are we not? The BBC, state funded, trying to operate as an independent news organization, we're on a definite collision course. A very venerable institution in real trouble.
OAKLEY: I think we're starting to see a new culture within the BBC, Lou. I worked there for eight years myself. And I've seen this new fashion of reporters like Andrew Gilligan who are employed by particular programs not so much to report the news as to make the news. And I think that is a change in the BBC culture. And it's something that not everybody within the BBC feels comfortable with, and that is one reason why they're starting to get an extra degree of criticism from the parliamentarians.
It's true that the BBC as a public service broadcaster often tends to become the whipping boy for the whole of the media as far as government is concerned. And I think there's a lot of applause across the journalistic community for the BBC initially defending its source because all of us as journalists depend on defending our sources and protecting them -- Lou.
DOBBS: Robin, thank you very much. Robin Oakley, from London.
Tonight, we begin our series of special reports on those products in this country that have proven so unique, so successful, and so lasting that we call them American classics. They are the products so unique to this country, to American life, to the American way of doing things that nobody in the world does it better. Tonight a company that helped harvest the richest soil in America and became a partner to generations of American farmers, John Deere.
Peter Viles now on this American classic.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) PETER VILES, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The sound of an American Classic. The two-cylinder John Deere tractor. Pete Lau has been driving this one since Eisenhower was president.
PETER LAU, IOWA FARMER: That John Deere B right there was the first tractor I ever drove. I was 7-years-old. And I felt kind of bad because I think my brother started driving when he was about five years old but the number two son never does catch up.
VILES: In rural America it's a rite of passage, the day your father finally lets you drive the John Deere tractor.
DICK RUPP: He turned me loose in the field on my sixth birthday.
VILES: Ever since a blacksmith named John Deere invented a self- cleaning steel plow in the 1830s the Deere name has meant quality, durability, and to farmers something more.
LUANN HAYDON, JOHN DEERE: It's pride. It's -- they are very proud to have been a partner to Deere, a friend of Deere, an owner of the John Deere product.
VILES: When Hollywood wants to tell you a character is honest and hardworking, they give him the John Deere hat, the same one Ken Buckman wears.
KEN BUCKMAN: That's just -- I don't know. That's the way I was raised. So -- raised on a small country farm. That's a part of our livelihood, wearing the old baseball hats.
VILES: And when the president wants the world to buy American, he has no problem selling John Deere.
BUSH: I'm confident we've got to get my friend Putin to be buying John Deere products. I'm confident.
VILES (on camera): To truly be considered a classic you've got to stand the test of time. It's safe to say that John Deere tractors and equipment have stood the test of time on the Lau family farm in Iowa. For 124 years at least the's been buying John Deere tractors and equipment. This is the John Deere Ledger dated 1879 that Pete's great grandfather used. Here's his dad standing on a Deere tractor in the '30s and later using a Deere combine. The Deere history is a legend of sorts in the Midwest. The famous team of Deere engineers in Moline always retooling and innovating, here testing the life-saving roll guard. Always building bigger and safer green machines. As farms themselves grew bigger.
LEON PERRY: Well, I think they met the farmers' needs. One of the big things, when they come out with the air-conditioned soundproof cabs, and that was, oh, a big improvement, where you set on a tractor and eat dust all day, where you with the air-conditioning cabs you could just set in there hour after hour and you can't believe the difference it makes unless you've been through something like that.
VILES (voice-over): So what makes John Deere a classic? Madison Avenue would tell you it's the lasting power of the brand. A Missouri farmer will tell you the truth.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What does you a good job you stay with.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VILES: The record shows that the Deere company made one brilliant strategic decision 85 years ago. There was a heated boardroom debate and after that Deere decided to purchase the Waterloo Gasoline Traction Engine company and then this plow company got into the risky and untested tractor business -- Lou.
DOBBS: You've got to love happy endings. And those big John Deeres, they look pretty good rolling there behind you, Pete.
VILES: They are very large vehicles.
DOBBS: What is that, a 9300 tractor?
VILES: It was a 9300 series. These bigger newer tractors cost you anywhere to $100,000 to $185,000. But these farmers tell us it's a great investment.
DOBBS: And it's nice to see reporting on something made in America.
VILES: Made in America. Nice to go someplace where the big corporation town is very highly regarded.
DOBBS: Absolutely. Pete, thank you very much for sharing that.
Peter Viles.
DOBBS: Tomorrow we take a look at another American classic, this one 150 years old. From the days of the San Francisco gold rush to the malls of America today, Levi Strauss has helped keep America comfortable in those blue jeans.
Jan Hopkins will have our special report on another venerable brand, the American classic Levi's.
Still ahead here, drawing fire. Political satire or a criminal threat?
A political cartoon in the "Los Angeles Times" puts the president in harm's way and draws not only the attention of the world but that of the secret service.
And later here, the editors of the nation's top business magazines join us for our weekly editors' circle. From Kobe Bryant to Martha Stewart, the markets, and the future of this economy, we'll have their insight. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: A "Los Angeles Times" cartoon published over the weekend is drawing a lot of attention and criticism. The political cartoon, modeled after a famous photograph of the Vietnam War, shows the president of the United States about to be assassinated.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Is this satire, or is this threatening? This cartoon by Mike Ramirez appeared this Sunday in "The Los Angeles Times." It's a reference to this photograph from the Vietnam War, raising the question, is comedy, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder?
MIKE LUCKOVICH, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: I'm not a huge fan of bush, but I find it very jarring to see a gun at his head. He's our president.
TUCKER: Threatening the president and his or her successors is against federal law. Earlier this month, the man who threw a water balloon at a parade fire truck driven by the speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, ended up in jail, charged with a felony, aggravated assault. He left jail on a $25,000 bail and a judge's admonishment to remember the speaker's place in the line of succession.
Some people seem confused about the law, like this professor, who assigned his college class the task of writing, but not sending, an e- mail with the words "Kill the president."
MICHAEL BALLOU, PROF., SANTA ROSA JR. COLLEGE: I guess the legal question here is does the president or does the presidency own the words "kill the president." I mean, if it's kill a president, then maybe it's the word "the" that we're talking about here.
TUCKER: But the professor did understand why the Secret Service paid him a visit. Late Monday, the cartoonist Michael Ramirez issued a statement defending the cartoon as pro-President Bush, saying that the cartoon represents his opinion that the president is the target of political assassination because of 16 words in the State of the Union regarding Iraq and uranium.
The Secret Service will only say that the cartoon has been brought to their attention and that the agency is deciding what, if any, action needs to be taken.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: Now, the editorial merit of the cartoon may be debatable, but consider this -- according to one security expert, if an individual drew that cartoon and sent it to the White House, a full-scale investigation would be launched into the person who sent it -- Lou.
DOBBS: It is without question -- and one does not have to take a position to say provocative. Obviously, that's what Ramirez wanted to do. Is there any likelihood here that the editors who approved the cartoon will respond?
TUCKER: No. "The L.A. Times" today, when they issued Ramirez's statement, said he's an editorial cartoonist, his opinion, his cartoon appeared on the op-ed page and they let it go at that and then they let Mr. Ramirez speak for himself.
DOBBS: The matter of responsibility, I assume. All right. Bill, thanks. Fascinating story, and perhaps an unfortunate one. Bill Tucker.
Well, that is the topic of tonight's poll -- "How do you regard the 'Los Angeles Times' political cartoon? Do you consider it to be fair commentary, tasteless, or vicious?" We ask you to cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the preliminary results later in the show.
And all of that brings us to tonight's thought. "My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its office-holders." Those words from one of my favorite writers and thinkers if not outright favorite, Mark Twain.
And my next guest is a pretty good writer herself, the author of a new book titled "Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terror." Ann Coulter joins me now.
Good to have you with us, Ann.
ANN COULTER, AUTHOR: Thank you. Good to be here.
DOBBS: Congratulations on the book.
COULTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: It is No. 2 on the list? Now why do you grimace when I ask you that?
COULTER: Because of the book that's No. 1
DOBBS: What book is that?
You have in this book, again, on the liberals. And basically accusing them of treason, not loving their country. Do you really believe that? I know that you're -- obviously, we all know that you're a very successful author and writer, a provocative one. You don't really believe that, do you?
COULTER: No, I do. But I am talking about a party and not specific individuals, though I'm talking about the actions of individuals that make up a party. But it is a 50-year history of a party that became a refuge for Soviet spies in the 50's, went on to lose wars, lose continents to communism, lose embassies. Throughout the '80s to naysay every reasonable response to the Soviet Union, as Ronald Reagan was defeating the Soviet Union. At every stage, the left's response was no, we need detente, and they're a paranoid regime. Let's retreat, be nice to our enemies.
Reagan called the ball the shot in the pocket and he won the game and now they're back to the same old naysaying.
DOBBS: Detente was also, if you will, a device of Republican administrations as well and some fairly prominent secretaries of state, including one Henry Kissinger.
COULTER: There are a lot of bad Republicans. There are no good Democrats.
DOBBS: Henry Kissinger is a bad Republican?
COULTER: Ronald Reagan had a completely different philosophy from Henry Kissinger, as I describe in my book. Henry Kissinger says so himself. Ronald Reagan had a conservative approach, his was of crusade and conversion. And he won, despite all of the qatarwalling saying this is the wrong direction, and Oh, you're going to scare them and you got the world blown up. Well, we saw what the results of his policy was and we're getting the same kind of retreat in the face of enemies, don't upset them, you'll just encourage the hard-liners right now in the war on terrorism.
DOBBS: You obviously focus on the fact that the media is liberal. You focus on the fact that there has been a, if you will, an atmosphere, a universe created that would include universities and academics providing liberals comfort and haven. But then you go to the point and the principal point of your book, and that is that Senator Joseph McCarthy was misunderstood and the victim of a, if you will, a conspiracy, a reflex at least on the part of the liberal establishment.
COULTER: Right. "The Times" claims I said McCarthy was misunderstood, though I tried to correct the fact checking. They have a new institution at "The New York Times, " fact checking. But they don't actually follow through on it.
I don't think McCarthy was misunderstood. I think liberals understood him just fine. I think they lied about him and created an enormous myth to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis. They were sheltering Soviet Spies. We know that now with the release of decrypted Soviet cables. All of the left's favorite Red Scare victims, Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, we know they were guilty, and they were defended by the Democratic party elites. Not by the Susan Sarandon of the day -- by the president, by the vice president, by Supreme Court justices. The Democratic party became a refuge for traitors. And it's gone from bad to worse.
DOBBS: Well, there are instances where I think that certainly -- and you do make the case. But -- of issues that are valid. But you take this -- you take this extrapolation to some rather broad and extreme conclusions, it seems to me. Just one reporter's view. And this is a time of broad and extreme extrapolations on both sides of the political spectrum in this country, whether you're Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal.
Do you at any point -- you're a very bright lady writing on controversial subjects. Do you think there is any, any opportunity in this country in the next, say, three to five years that we can recede from these broad polemical discussion, these extreme polarizing positions taken, whether by authors, by commentators, by political hacks, whether they be Democratic candidates or Republicans, and start talking about issues without worrying about whether you come down as conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat?
COULTER: Well, I don't think my position is extreme. I mean, these -- I am responding to a 50-year myth describing a great American patriot, Joe McCarthy, as John F. Kennedy called him, the very year of his censure, as a virtual Nazi. He has been defamed. His name made a malediction. I come in and provide a few true facts about McCarthy and now all of a sudden liberals say let's tone things down a little. OK, I'll be for the armistice. But I get the last punch.
DOBBS: Well, first of all, I'm a conservative. I'm not a liberal saying, do you not think...
COULTER: Well, I'm talking about the people who created this myth, and they have created a hideous myth about Joe McCarthy that bears no relation to the facts. And people do find the truth about McCarthy shocking because it's been a major goal of the left to make it sound shocking. A lot of graduate student theses have been deployed in the effort to create a monster out of a great American patriot.
DOBBS: As they say, opinions make it all worthwhile, and they do make markets. And "Treason" certainly making a market for itself. We wish you continued success. Ann, thanks for being here. Come back soon.
COULTER: Thank you. I'd love to.
DOBBS: And we'll discuss polemics and the recapturing of civility at the center of the country soon. Thanks a lot. Ann Coulter.
COULTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: When we continue, the editors of the nation's leading business magazines will join us for their thoughts on the week's developments and give us their best prognostication about what we can expect in the week ahead.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Joining me now, the editors of the leading business magazines in this country, the latest edition of "Business Week" looks at Citigroup's next act after CEO Sanford Weill steps down, if he's really stepping down. We'll find out from Robert Lenzner. "Fortune" profiles the ten greatest CEOs of all time. And "Forbes" looks at the millionaire mullahs running Iran.
Joining me now, Robert Lenzner, the national editor of "Forbes," Steve Shepard, the editor in chief of "Business Week, " and Cliff Leaf, the executive editor of "Fortune." gentlemen, good to have you here.
Citigroup, Sandy Weill has stepped down.
ROBERT LENZNER, "FORBES": I think that's an overstatement, that he's stepping down. He's stepping up to being chairman. And he is staying around to make sure that things will work out right. He's chosen a very able man who, by the way, I think the press hasn't realized that he's been chief operating officer of Citigroup for the last year. So Sandy Weill will be there to make sure that everything goes right.
DOBBS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE). But put this in contrast, again, as you do, to one of the fellows that I really respect in all of business, and that is Walter Riston, from whom I've heard a couple of things. He stepped off the board at Citigroup right away. Sandy stays, that ought to create some interesting dynamics.
STEVE SHEPARD, "BUSINESSWEEK": Well, generally speaking, it's a good idea for the outgoing CEO to leave. Otherwise, you get the problem of what people call the lingering CEO looking over the shoulder of the new guy. So I think it's not a good idea. On the other hand, he didn't have to leave. He could have just designated his successor and kept his CEO title for the time being.
DOBBS: You know, this is not a day in which -- and a period of time in which CEOs often linger. They sort of move very quickly out of the way. Sandy runs the show, and this is his chosen path -- Cliff.
CLIFF LEAF, "FORTUNE": Yes. I think that prince is such an unknown quantity still that I think that it was a comfort for investors that Sandy was sticking around, and they know what kind of manager he's going to be. He's a meddler. He's going to be around for a while. And he'll be able to put his stamp on Prince and also step back in if there's a problem. So...
LENZNER: Exactly. And I think it was very shrewd to do it when there wasn't pressure and at the same time put Prince in, who's got a clean unembellished -- his record, he has -- he's been the person that straightened out all the problems of the company rather than being involved -- tainted by any of the scandal. So I think the combination, actually, is he's a team player...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: ... Prince has throughout it all, and there have been a number of issues, managed to be the fixer.
Let's turn to this investor comfort that you just raised.
Should investors be looking upon this as the bull market?
Where are we?
Steve, you have to make that decision.
SHEPARD: Where are we in the market?
LENZER: Better you than me, Steve.
SHEPARD: I think we're probably in a sideways period of consolidation after the gains of earlier in the year, which I think has nothing to do with Sandy Weill and Citibank. I think what's interesting is what's going on in the bond market rather than the stock market.
DOBBS: Steve, you would have preferred I'd asked you about the bond market, OK.
LENZNER: I don't what the bond market has to do with the stock market.
DOBBS: There's a relationship?
SHEPARD: The bond rally is over. I mean, interest rates -- long-term rates have backed up half a point in the last few days, and Mr. Greenspan didn't help matters with what he said last time. Having said that, I don't think it's the end of the world. I don't think interest rates are all that high. I don't think it's going to derail the recovery.
DOBBS: 4.2 percent.
SHEPARD: Yes, 10-year bond. I mean, it's not that bad.
DOBBS: It's not going to hurt us too badly.
LENZNER: Starting back up, though. And it has affected the housing stocks because of the rise in the mortgage rates.
DOBBS: Well, it's a market still. And this could have a mitigating influence on what some people consider to be a bubble that is building if not outright here, in housing.
LENZNER: Well, I think the surprising thing is that Greenspan's predicting the economy's going to come back after worrying us about the fact that the economy might be too soft only a few weeks ago. So I think that's...
DOBBS: But reserving, reserving the interest in cutting interest rates.
LENZNER: Right.
LEAF: There was no way to have a recovery with long-term interest rates at 3 percent. I mean, they had to come up. The fact that they've spiked as much as they have I think is something that's gotten people's notice, but I don't think it's quite a level of concern yet. I think what would be of concern is if we saw a continuing spike in the long-term rate with a continuing jobless recovery. And so that's I think...
DOBBS: And that is a big question. Are jobs going to be coming back?
The president being -- moving out on the campaign trail, if you will, to push that issue as the Democrats have been attacking it.
SHEPARD: Jobs won't come back until we see economic growth exceeding 3 1/2 percent. And that won't happen much before the end of the year.
LENZNER: Jobs won't come back until we see capital expenditures rising, and that's not going to happen for quite some time because there's not enough demand for it.
DOBBS: Bob, Steve, Cliff, thank you very much. Gentlemen, appreciate you being here.
When we continue, we'll have the preliminary results of "Tonight's Poll." Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The preliminary results of "Tonight's Poll" question.
How do you regard the "Los Angeles Times" political cartoon?
Sixty-five percent of you said fair commentary, 21 percent said tasteless, 15 percent said vicious.
That's our show tonight. Thanks for being with us. Tomorrow we'll be joined by Treasury Secretary John Snow. For all of us here, good night from New York.
ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired July 21, 2003 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, July 21. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone.
Under siege and under fire. Tonight, the U.S. Embassy in Liberia is caught in the midst of a civil war; 21 U.S. Marines today arrived to reinforce the troops around the embassy. The Pentagon also ordered a task force of 2,000 other Marines to move closer to Liberia.
Jeff Koinange joins me live from the Liberian capital of Monrovia.
Jeff, has the fighting subsided tonight?
JEFF KOINANGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It looks like it's subsided, Lou.
But we're hearing reports of scores dead, many more injured, as mortar shells rained all over this war-ravaged capital. And it began right here in the heavily fortified U.S. Embassy compound. Earlier on today, an elite Marine corps unit known as the Fleet Anti-terrorist Security Team flew from Rota, Spain, on to neighboring Sierra Leone. And then they got onto Black Hawk helicopters and came here.
As soon as they landed and took off, half-an-hour later, mortar shells all around this compound, in fact, one landing in the commissary area, although no injuries reported, mortar shells around the capital. We understand one landed on a building. And up to 18 people were killed in that. Liberians angry at the U.S. for not intervening sooner in this war-ravaged country started displaying the dead bodies of relatives and friends right outside the embassy compound, even as fighting continued.
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Liberians picking up their personal belongings and moving as far away from the fighting as possible -- as you know, Lou, they had been moving from the outer parts of the country into the city seeking refuge and safe haven. That's no longer the case, as the battleground is now Monrovia and they have to get up and leave. We understand there's no food, no running water, no sanitation, no medication in the city of Monrovia.
So now, as the fighting continues, Lou, nobody knows when it's going to abate.
DOBBS: Jeff, can you give us your best assessment? Conflicting reports throughout the day as to the government taking advantage over the rebel forces, the rebel forces pushing back the government forces. Is there any clarity at all as to who is prevailing right now?
KOINANGE: None whatsoever, Lou, because the situation on the ground is so fluid, government forces claiming they had pushed the rebels back about three, four miles from where I'm standing, although those mortar shells can be launched from as far away as about 5 to 7 kilometers, so no telling who's got the upper hand right now. What we can tell you is that fighting is raging in the streets of Monrovia, Lou.
DOBBS: Jeff, thank you very much. And you and your crew take care of yourselves, Jeff Koinange, reporting from Monrovia.
President Bush said the United States is watching the Liberian crisis very closely, but he still has not decided whether or not to send in peacekeepers.
White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux joins me now with the report -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, President Bush just arriving back here at the White House just moments ago.
I've been speaking with White House officials throughout the day, who express a great deal of frustration with what's happening on the ground, with the rebel forces, as well as the Liberian regime. I spoke with one very senior administration official, who said that the main concern here, the main priority, is maintaining security, but, at the same time, President Bush has not signed off, has not decided on whether or not to send U.S. troops to Liberia, despite the pressure, growing international pressure, to act urgently, that coming from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, as well as the European Union.
Why this assessment, why this process that is unfolding, they say, first of all, they had to figure out what was going on, on the ground, whether or not the U.S. Embassy was hit directly, whether it was targeted or if it was accidental, also trying to figure out just when are the Nigerian battalions going to be ready to shuttle out Charles Taylor when it's time for him to leave.
And finally, of course, Lou, when will Charles Taylor leave? That is a big question, President Bush today at his Crawford ranch hosting Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, saying that, yes, that they're willing to help out with trying to enforce the cease- fire, the big question, how and when.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We just sent a group of troops in to protect our interests. And we're concerned about our people in Liberia. We're continuing to monitor the situation very closely. We're working with the United Nations to effect policy necessary to get the cease-fire back in place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And, Lou, just to illustrate the level of frustration from this administration, State Department spokesman Phil Reeker squarely putting the blame today on the rebels, saying that they were firing indiscriminately, that there was -- creating chaos on the ground. This is something that the administration sees as an uncontrollable situation. They are waiting for calm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHIL REEKER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: We are strongly condemning the rebel group, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy, for their continued reckless and indiscriminate shelling of Monrovia. They need to think about the plight of the civilian population and the humanitarian workers who are there to alleviate suffering. And this breaking of the cease-fire is something we call on them to end.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Now, Lou, it's a tough decision for the president. And, of course, they are waiting for calm on the ground. They do not want to put U.S. troops in harm's way -- Lou.
DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux reporting from the White House.
The possibility that U.S. peacekeepers might be sent to Liberia is another example of a growing strain upon the U.S. military. The Pentagon is now considering a number of options to ease the burden, at least in part, by increasing the size of the Army, among other options.
Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre has more on the story for us -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Pentagon this week is hoping to announce that rotation plan that will provide some relief for war-weary troops in Iraq, particularly the 3rd Infantry Division.
Sources say that the units to replace those units have been selected and should be announced this week. But the fact that they had to scramble around to find troops to replace others in Iraq just illustrates the fact that the U.S. military is stretched thin. And it has some in Congress pushing the Pentagon to increase the size of the U.S. military.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JACK REED (D), RHODE ISLAND: That we have to be prepared to increase our Army, the number of brigades in our Army, or to activate National Guard divisions. And we have to make that decision soon, because the training of these troops we'll need before they're deployed.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: If we believe that's the case, obviously, we would come to the Congress and make that request.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Rumsfeld insists, though, the Army is plenty big enough. He says there's two parts to the problem.
One is that too many military people, 300,000, by one Pentagon estimate, are doing jobs that should be done or could be done by civilians. The other half of the equation, Rumsfeld says, is that too many combat-critical jobs, everything from medical personnel to cooks and supply clerks, are in the reserves. So, earlier this month, Rumsfeld ordered a sweeping restructure of the U.S. military, so the U.S. can go to war without relying so much on the Guard and reserves.
A memo he sent to his military chiefs gave them just three weeks to respond. He said -- quote -- "I consider this a matter of the utmost urgency." Currently, there are about 200,000 reservists called to active duty, including about 40,000 supporting operations in Iraq. But after a decade of downsizing, Lou, the Pentagon is not anxious to do an about-face. For one thing, adding military personnel to the end strength is a very expensive proposition.
And for the other, it flies in the face of Rumsfeld's vision of a smaller military that takes advantage of new technology and new tactics to pack more of a punch -- Lou.
DOBBS: Jamie, that vision of Rumsfeld's is being sorely tested already in these circumstances. The capacity that the Pentagon has maintained that they could carry out a two-front war, it looks like that is a highly dubious possibility right now, does it not?
MCINTYRE: Well, it's clear that they can do this in the short term. For instance, they will find troops to replace the ones in Iraq. What's really -- the real problem is long term. How do you maintain this over time and how do you retain troops in the military if they're working at this pace?
So, if you look down the road, it could be a problem. The answer really depends on how successful Rumsfeld can be in freeing up those military jobs and relieving the stress on the reserves. Otherwise, there's going to be increasing pressure to increase the size of the military.
DOBBS: Secretary Rumsfeld, Jamie, has prided himself on his management skills and talent, which he's demonstrated in the private sector, as well as the government. But, for example, the 3rd Infantry, now with three delays in returning home, this is becoming a very complex problem and a political embarrassment, is it not?
MCINTYRE: Well, Rumsfeld is looking for legislative relief. He says he's done a lot of the things that he can do in his power, but now he needs the Congress, he says, to pass a law that will give him much more freedom to move people around.
He says part of the problem with a civilian work force is that it's too hard to manage them. Unlike the military, they can't simply be ordered around and told how to do things. And they don't have the flexibility. So he's asking Congress to give the Pentagon wide powers, including relief from some environmental laws, which he says will give him the flexibility to manage the problem.
DOBBS: Jamie, thank you very much -- Jamie McIntyre, reporting from the Pentagon.
The Pentagon today said troops in Afghanistan fought a major battle with Taliban forces over the weekend. They killed at least 22 Taliban soldiers. The fighting began when Taliban troops ambushed a special forces convoy in southeastern Afghanistan. It was one of the largest battles since the end of the war in Afghanistan a year and a half ago. There were no U.S. casualties. About 9,000 U.S. troops remain based in Afghanistan.
President Bush maintains strong public support for his decision to go to war with Iraq. The latest CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll shows 63 percent of those surveyed believe the situation in Iraq was worth going to war. The poll also says 59 percent of the public approve of the way the president is handling his job, that approval rating slightly higher than in March before the war against Saddam Hussein.
President Bush today repeated his call for a diplomatic solution to the nuclear crisis with North Korea. The president's remarks came one day after a senior U.S. official said North Korea may have a second secret nuclear weapons facility.
Kitty Pilgrim has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Yongbyon, seen in these satellite photos, is thought to be North Korea's main nuclear plant. Now some reports over the weekend come to the conclusion that North Korea has another secret plant to make plutonium.
Less than two weeks ago, North Korea itself claimed to have extracted plutonium from 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods, experts say enough for several nuclear weapons.
Today, President Bush called on countries in the region to stand up to North Korea.
BUSH: A decision to develop a nuclear arsenal is one that will alienate you from the rest of the world.
PILGRIM: British Prime Minister Tony Blair in China today said cooperation, particularly Chinese cooperation, was necessary.
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: The key thing that has changed in respect to North Korea is, there's now pressure here in this region.
PILGRIM: The Chinese participation is critical. They hosted talks last April. And the Chinese foreign minister came to Washington last week to discuss the issue. Because China supplies 70 percent of North Korea's energy, it has considerable leverage.
JAMES LILLEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SOUTH KOREA: If you bring this cohesion together, which the North Koreans absolutely detest and are frightened of, it seems to me, then we have a chance of really pulling this one off.
PILGRIM: Nevertheless, some say there is little room to maneuver for North Korea or the United States.
IAN BREMMER, EURASIA GROUP: We have incompatible negotiating positions. I don't see the United States amending their position or softening their position particularly much. I don't see the North Koreans softening their position. So you add the pieces up and we are poised for escalation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Last week, International Atomic Energy director Mohamed ElBaradei called North Korea the most immediate and the most serious threat. Now, time is on North Korea's side to continue their program if they choose to drag out the discussion -- Lou.
DOBBS: What kind of talks are expected? The United States has been adamant about no bilateral talks.
PILGRIM: That's exactly right. They're hoping for three-way talks, U.S., China, and North Korea. They may go to five, including Japan and South Korea, but there's no definite word on that yet.
DOBBS: And no suggestion here that talks will be successful, in any case.
Kitty, thank you very much -- Kitty Pilgrim.
Well, tonight, still ahead here; the longest weekend. Hundreds of thousands of Army reservists put their lives on hold to fight the war against Saddam Hussein. What awaits them when they return from Iraq? Also ahead here, we begin our series of special reports this week on those American brands so enduring, so highly valued, they can only be called classics. Peter Viles reports tonight on John Deere.
And author Ann Coulter will join us with her new book, "Treason." She'll tell us why she says liberals don't love this country.
And a controversial political cartoon has invoked a famous photo from the days of the Vietnam War. But the target this time is the president of the United States. And a controversy has ensued. Bill Tucker will have the report.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Stocks today moved lower on Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrials fell 91 points. The Nasdaq dropped 27, the S&P 500 down 14 1/2 points on the day.
Christine Romans, as always -- well, nearly always -- has the market for us. Good to see you, Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Welcome back. I thought, by the time both of us were back from our summer vacations, we would have seen the market have some sort of sell-off. It really just hasn't kicked in here yet.
DOBBS: Thank goodness.
(LAUGHTER)
ROMANS: At least for now.
Well, today, three stocks fell for each that rose, volume, though, a light 1.2 billion shares at the Big Board. And, Lou, only four Dow stocks closed higher. One of those was 3M. Its second- quarter profit rose. And it raised full-year forecasts. But look at Merck. It cut sales estimates for its top-selling drug and posted disappointing profit growth. And Texas Instruments fell 4 percent. Now, after the bell, it reported higher sales and profit for the second quarter. And a lot of folks are zeroing in on its revenue target, pretty much in line. But some are worried it might be a little bit lighter, in the mid range. We'll see what investors say about that tomorrow.
Now, 172 companies in the S&P 500 have reported earnings. And they've shown profit growth of almost 10 percent, revenue growth near 5 percent. Now, a third of the S&P companies report this week. And when it's all said and done, earnings are expected up 6.6 percent year over year. That compares with 11.7 percent in the first quarter, and hopes for earnings growth of more than 13 percent in the third and 21 percent in the fourth quarters.
Now, the same optimism that's feeding those earnings hopes in the second half is also feeding a wild sell-off in the bonds. The 10-year note yield rose to 4.2 percent today, the highest since last December, the catalyst today, a third straight month of gains for the index of leading economic indicators.
DOBBS: And how much did that index go up, Christine?
ROMANS: Oh, one-tenth of a percent. But it's three in a row. It's the trend that counts, right?
(LAUGHTER)
DOBBS: Oh, that's frightening, frightening. It doesn't take much some days to frighten the bond market, does it?
ROMANS: Well, there were a lot of people long in that market for a very long time. You can imagine how nervous some of them must be.
DOBBS: Well, as they say, it's been quite a ride in the bond market.
ROMANS: It certainly has. DOBBS: Christine, thank you very much -- Christine Romans.
ROMANS: You're welcome.
DOBBS: Martha Stewart's defense team today asked a federal judge to order an investigation into how details of her indictment were leaked to the press before the grand jury returned formal charges against her. Stewart's attorneys said the leaks may have influenced the grand jury's decision. The U.S. district judge said she would consider the request. Stewart's charges stem from her sale of 4,000 shares of ImClone stock.
ImClone's founder and former CEO, Sam Waksal, pleaded guilty to insider trading and other charges last fall. He is due to begin serving his seven-year sentence later this week.
Out of the 79 executives who have been criminally charged, Waksal is the only executive who's been sentenced to jail; 16 Enron executives have also been charged in the 595 days since Enron filed for bankruptcy.
Still ahead here tonight: an extended tour of duty for hundreds of thousands of U.S. Army reservists in Iraq. Lisa Sylvester will report on one soldier and the small business he left behind.
And your thoughts on the Kobe Bryant case and more. We'll share some of your e-mails tonight.
And drawing fire, a political cartoon that caught the attention of the Secret Service. Is it free speech? Is it provocative, a deadly threat against the president of the United States?
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Still to come tonight: "American Classics." We begin our series of special reports on this country's most enduring brands and what sets them apart from all the others. Peter Viles reports tonight on John Deere when we continue.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: It's an extended tour of duty for the 200,000 members of the National Guard and reserves who are serving in Iraq and fighting the war against terror. The so-called weekend warriors are not the only ones feeling the strain. So are many of the small businesses they own and run.
Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Steve Brozak has been doing double duty since last November. He's the co-owner and president of a small securities brokerage firm and a Marine Corps reservist mobilized for the Iraq war, working out of Arlington, Virginia.
LT. COL. STEPHEN BROZAK, U.S. MARINE CORPS: Everybody expects everything yesterday. So it's always a series of juggling, not balls, but meat cleavers sometimes.
SYLVESTER: Brozak's active-duty stint has been extended twice. He's lost a significant amount of business and, according to him, thousands of dollars. Federal officials say small businesses are hurt the most by reserve call-ups. Since 9/11, the Small Business Administration has approved more than $9 million in loans to companies struggling from the loss of key employees.
HECTOR BARRETO, SMALL BUSINESS ASSOCIATION: Sometimes, it's a key employee. Sometimes, it's the business owner themselves. And so, for all of those expenses that keep going, even while they're gone, the fixed costs, the payroll, other operating expenses, we wanted to provide them with access to this capital.
SYLVESTER: Many large companies actively support the reserves by paying the difference in employees' salaries. But it's different for smaller companies.
TODD MCCRACKEN, SMALL BUSINESS ASSOCIATION: A large company, they may have, oh, one of our software developers is gone, one of our 100 software developers. In a small company, it's, our one I.T. person is gone, the only one we have.
SYLVESTER: This is a trend that's not likely to change any time soon; 46 percent of the total military force are reservists. And the reservists' role is greater now than at any time since World War II.
BOB HOLLINGSWORTH, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: We want to make sure that the employers clearly understand that, even though they don't go and put on a uniform and go to work every day, that they are inextricably linked to the national defense of our country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The terms of the SBA loans are attractive: an interest rate no higher than 4 percent and a length as long as 30 years. But many small companies don't want the added debt. They say what would really help them out is some kind of a tax break from Congress -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, tax breaks are something that seem to be very popular these days, and no one can be more deserving.
Thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester. And welcome aboard.
SYLVESTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: That brings us to tonight's quote on the subject of rebuilding Iraq: "I'm enormously optimistic about our opportunity for success, as long as we don't lose our nerve," that from General John Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command.
Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts. Many of you wrote in about Friday's poll question, in which we asked about who is most responsible for the weapons of mass destruction intelligence controversy.
David Holmstrom of Fridley, Minnesota, said: "I believe that President Bush is exhibiting one of the clear shortcomings in Americans today: lack of personal responsibility. It is much easier to blame someone else for our failures and actions."
Joy Miller of Auburn, Washington, said we forgot one category in our poll. She said: "The correct answer is the liberal media, who refuses to let it go."
Many of you wrote also about the media's coverage of the charges against Kobe Bryant. Lawrence of Missouri wrote: "By the time the media, the lawyers, the courts have finished with Kobe Bryant's accuser, it won't matter whether or not she is telling the truth. She will have been thoroughly trashed, vilified, and discredited."
And Hugh Gray of Madison, Alabama, wrote about one of our guests tonight before she appears: "Ann Coulter is an American patriot and should be a must-read in our schools and colleges."
We always love hearing from you. Please send us your thoughts at LouDobbs@CNN.com.
Coming up next: "Treason," Ann Coulter's new book, says liberal policies, from the Cold War era to the current war against terror, have been utterly wrong. She is our guest.
Also ahead: the BBC under fire following the death of a highly regarded weapons expert. Robin Oakley will have that story for us from London.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Tonight, the BBC faces an unprecedented crisis, as it is fighting to protect its reputation of journalistic integrity, at issue, the way it handled the story about the British government's case for the war against Saddam Hussein. The source for that story, a government expert on weapons of mass destruction, committed suicide.
I'm joined now from London by CNN's European political editor, Robin Oakley -- Robin.
ROBIN OAKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the government has been under flak for some days now over the death of David Kelly.
Opinion polls have shown 68 percent saying that they do not trust Tony Blair and his ministers, 39 percent saying that Tony Blair should resign. But now, suddenly, the heat is being applied to the BBC as well, because the British Broadcasting Corporation has been at war with the government over one key story. It was a BBC reporter, Andrew Gilligan of the "Today" program, who alleged that the government had -- quote -- "sexed up" a dossier of its case against Saddam Hussein by inserting, on the insistence of ministers and the spin chief in Downing Street, the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction he could unleash within 45 minutes.
The government was furious that the BBC was pushing this story, said it was completely untrue, said that the BBC was running an anti- war vendetta. The BBC refused to acknowledge its source for the story. The government pushed forward David Kelly, this weapons expert, and said they thought he was the source for the story. Then David Kelly was found dead, apparently by his own hand, after he'd been exposed by the Ministry of Defense as the likely source of the story, grilled by a parliamentary committee.
And, finally, after his death, the BBC has come forward and said, yes, he was their source. The problem with that is that Dr. Kelly, when quizzed by the parliamentary investigatory committee, had said he couldn't possibly have been the source for the story because the things that he had said to the BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan, simply would not have allowed him to make this claim. And the BBC is under further attack from the way, before it had identified Dr. David Kelly as the source for this key story, it had talked about him being a senior source in the intelligence services.
Dr. Kelly didn't work for the intelligence services. And Gavin Davis, the chairman of the BBC governors, had said that the BBC was able to make an exception in this case and allow a story to get on air on the basis of a single informant, an anonymous informant, because sometimes you had to do that with stories from intelligence sources. But this was not a story, Lou, from the intelligence services.
DOBBS: Robin, it's remarkable that there's some irony in that. It sounds like the BBC is using some of the same rationalization on sources as some of the intelligence agencies that are being criticized, saying it was a very difficult situation. The BBC, its director general, they're under -- they're under considerable pressure to resign, are they not?
OAKLEY: Yes. There is pressure for them to resign from certain quarters. The constituency MP for David Kelly where he lived, Robert Jackson, he said he holds the BBC to blame for their death, and he says that Gavin Davis, the chairman, should resign, so should Greg Dike, the director general. And we're seeing a lot of people calling for a reform of the whole BBC way and style of journalism.
Gerald Kaufman, who heads the House of Commons Committee on Culture and Media, has said that the BBC is to blame for what has happened here. He wants the BBC reformed. He wants the BBC and its standards brought under the new offcom regulatory body that is going to look after other parts of the communications industry instead of the BBC being run by its own independent board of governors and them being responsible for its standards. So there's a lot of pressure coming on the BBC from different quarters -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, the BBC, as you well know, Robin, is unique. It is state funded. It is a government enterprise. It is anti-government by demeanor. Why was there not a stronger investigation, greater reaction when the state of Israel, for example, said point blank we don't want the BBC covering our press conferences, we're not going to give them favor because they simply are pro Palestinian?
OAKLEY: The BBC, like many institutions, Lou, I think when it faces that kind of criticism from outside tends to circle the wagons and pull in and say we do everything right and we've done nothing wrong. But there is certain disquiet among some BBC journalists that I know that they've chosen to defend themselves so heavily on the case of this particular story by this journalist, Andrew Gilligan. And there's a lot of discomfort in the BBC now that Andrew Gilligan and the BBC are having to come forward and effectively say that David Kelly the man who has died after finding himself at the center of the spotlight over this affair, they're basically saying we stick by our story, which means they're saying that Dr. Kelly, when he was before the Commons Investigative Committee and said he couldn't have been the source must have been telling a lie -- Lou.
DOBBS: And it would not be the only, if you will, misconstruction of the truth. As the BBC -- as you reported, identified him as a senior intelligence official. We're at a juncture, are we not? The BBC, state funded, trying to operate as an independent news organization, we're on a definite collision course. A very venerable institution in real trouble.
OAKLEY: I think we're starting to see a new culture within the BBC, Lou. I worked there for eight years myself. And I've seen this new fashion of reporters like Andrew Gilligan who are employed by particular programs not so much to report the news as to make the news. And I think that is a change in the BBC culture. And it's something that not everybody within the BBC feels comfortable with, and that is one reason why they're starting to get an extra degree of criticism from the parliamentarians.
It's true that the BBC as a public service broadcaster often tends to become the whipping boy for the whole of the media as far as government is concerned. And I think there's a lot of applause across the journalistic community for the BBC initially defending its source because all of us as journalists depend on defending our sources and protecting them -- Lou.
DOBBS: Robin, thank you very much. Robin Oakley, from London.
Tonight, we begin our series of special reports on those products in this country that have proven so unique, so successful, and so lasting that we call them American classics. They are the products so unique to this country, to American life, to the American way of doing things that nobody in the world does it better. Tonight a company that helped harvest the richest soil in America and became a partner to generations of American farmers, John Deere.
Peter Viles now on this American classic.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) PETER VILES, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The sound of an American Classic. The two-cylinder John Deere tractor. Pete Lau has been driving this one since Eisenhower was president.
PETER LAU, IOWA FARMER: That John Deere B right there was the first tractor I ever drove. I was 7-years-old. And I felt kind of bad because I think my brother started driving when he was about five years old but the number two son never does catch up.
VILES: In rural America it's a rite of passage, the day your father finally lets you drive the John Deere tractor.
DICK RUPP: He turned me loose in the field on my sixth birthday.
VILES: Ever since a blacksmith named John Deere invented a self- cleaning steel plow in the 1830s the Deere name has meant quality, durability, and to farmers something more.
LUANN HAYDON, JOHN DEERE: It's pride. It's -- they are very proud to have been a partner to Deere, a friend of Deere, an owner of the John Deere product.
VILES: When Hollywood wants to tell you a character is honest and hardworking, they give him the John Deere hat, the same one Ken Buckman wears.
KEN BUCKMAN: That's just -- I don't know. That's the way I was raised. So -- raised on a small country farm. That's a part of our livelihood, wearing the old baseball hats.
VILES: And when the president wants the world to buy American, he has no problem selling John Deere.
BUSH: I'm confident we've got to get my friend Putin to be buying John Deere products. I'm confident.
VILES (on camera): To truly be considered a classic you've got to stand the test of time. It's safe to say that John Deere tractors and equipment have stood the test of time on the Lau family farm in Iowa. For 124 years at least the's been buying John Deere tractors and equipment. This is the John Deere Ledger dated 1879 that Pete's great grandfather used. Here's his dad standing on a Deere tractor in the '30s and later using a Deere combine. The Deere history is a legend of sorts in the Midwest. The famous team of Deere engineers in Moline always retooling and innovating, here testing the life-saving roll guard. Always building bigger and safer green machines. As farms themselves grew bigger.
LEON PERRY: Well, I think they met the farmers' needs. One of the big things, when they come out with the air-conditioned soundproof cabs, and that was, oh, a big improvement, where you set on a tractor and eat dust all day, where you with the air-conditioning cabs you could just set in there hour after hour and you can't believe the difference it makes unless you've been through something like that.
VILES (voice-over): So what makes John Deere a classic? Madison Avenue would tell you it's the lasting power of the brand. A Missouri farmer will tell you the truth.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What does you a good job you stay with.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VILES: The record shows that the Deere company made one brilliant strategic decision 85 years ago. There was a heated boardroom debate and after that Deere decided to purchase the Waterloo Gasoline Traction Engine company and then this plow company got into the risky and untested tractor business -- Lou.
DOBBS: You've got to love happy endings. And those big John Deeres, they look pretty good rolling there behind you, Pete.
VILES: They are very large vehicles.
DOBBS: What is that, a 9300 tractor?
VILES: It was a 9300 series. These bigger newer tractors cost you anywhere to $100,000 to $185,000. But these farmers tell us it's a great investment.
DOBBS: And it's nice to see reporting on something made in America.
VILES: Made in America. Nice to go someplace where the big corporation town is very highly regarded.
DOBBS: Absolutely. Pete, thank you very much for sharing that.
Peter Viles.
DOBBS: Tomorrow we take a look at another American classic, this one 150 years old. From the days of the San Francisco gold rush to the malls of America today, Levi Strauss has helped keep America comfortable in those blue jeans.
Jan Hopkins will have our special report on another venerable brand, the American classic Levi's.
Still ahead here, drawing fire. Political satire or a criminal threat?
A political cartoon in the "Los Angeles Times" puts the president in harm's way and draws not only the attention of the world but that of the secret service.
And later here, the editors of the nation's top business magazines join us for our weekly editors' circle. From Kobe Bryant to Martha Stewart, the markets, and the future of this economy, we'll have their insight. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: A "Los Angeles Times" cartoon published over the weekend is drawing a lot of attention and criticism. The political cartoon, modeled after a famous photograph of the Vietnam War, shows the president of the United States about to be assassinated.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Is this satire, or is this threatening? This cartoon by Mike Ramirez appeared this Sunday in "The Los Angeles Times." It's a reference to this photograph from the Vietnam War, raising the question, is comedy, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder?
MIKE LUCKOVICH, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: I'm not a huge fan of bush, but I find it very jarring to see a gun at his head. He's our president.
TUCKER: Threatening the president and his or her successors is against federal law. Earlier this month, the man who threw a water balloon at a parade fire truck driven by the speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, ended up in jail, charged with a felony, aggravated assault. He left jail on a $25,000 bail and a judge's admonishment to remember the speaker's place in the line of succession.
Some people seem confused about the law, like this professor, who assigned his college class the task of writing, but not sending, an e- mail with the words "Kill the president."
MICHAEL BALLOU, PROF., SANTA ROSA JR. COLLEGE: I guess the legal question here is does the president or does the presidency own the words "kill the president." I mean, if it's kill a president, then maybe it's the word "the" that we're talking about here.
TUCKER: But the professor did understand why the Secret Service paid him a visit. Late Monday, the cartoonist Michael Ramirez issued a statement defending the cartoon as pro-President Bush, saying that the cartoon represents his opinion that the president is the target of political assassination because of 16 words in the State of the Union regarding Iraq and uranium.
The Secret Service will only say that the cartoon has been brought to their attention and that the agency is deciding what, if any, action needs to be taken.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: Now, the editorial merit of the cartoon may be debatable, but consider this -- according to one security expert, if an individual drew that cartoon and sent it to the White House, a full-scale investigation would be launched into the person who sent it -- Lou.
DOBBS: It is without question -- and one does not have to take a position to say provocative. Obviously, that's what Ramirez wanted to do. Is there any likelihood here that the editors who approved the cartoon will respond?
TUCKER: No. "The L.A. Times" today, when they issued Ramirez's statement, said he's an editorial cartoonist, his opinion, his cartoon appeared on the op-ed page and they let it go at that and then they let Mr. Ramirez speak for himself.
DOBBS: The matter of responsibility, I assume. All right. Bill, thanks. Fascinating story, and perhaps an unfortunate one. Bill Tucker.
Well, that is the topic of tonight's poll -- "How do you regard the 'Los Angeles Times' political cartoon? Do you consider it to be fair commentary, tasteless, or vicious?" We ask you to cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the preliminary results later in the show.
And all of that brings us to tonight's thought. "My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its office-holders." Those words from one of my favorite writers and thinkers if not outright favorite, Mark Twain.
And my next guest is a pretty good writer herself, the author of a new book titled "Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terror." Ann Coulter joins me now.
Good to have you with us, Ann.
ANN COULTER, AUTHOR: Thank you. Good to be here.
DOBBS: Congratulations on the book.
COULTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: It is No. 2 on the list? Now why do you grimace when I ask you that?
COULTER: Because of the book that's No. 1
DOBBS: What book is that?
You have in this book, again, on the liberals. And basically accusing them of treason, not loving their country. Do you really believe that? I know that you're -- obviously, we all know that you're a very successful author and writer, a provocative one. You don't really believe that, do you?
COULTER: No, I do. But I am talking about a party and not specific individuals, though I'm talking about the actions of individuals that make up a party. But it is a 50-year history of a party that became a refuge for Soviet spies in the 50's, went on to lose wars, lose continents to communism, lose embassies. Throughout the '80s to naysay every reasonable response to the Soviet Union, as Ronald Reagan was defeating the Soviet Union. At every stage, the left's response was no, we need detente, and they're a paranoid regime. Let's retreat, be nice to our enemies.
Reagan called the ball the shot in the pocket and he won the game and now they're back to the same old naysaying.
DOBBS: Detente was also, if you will, a device of Republican administrations as well and some fairly prominent secretaries of state, including one Henry Kissinger.
COULTER: There are a lot of bad Republicans. There are no good Democrats.
DOBBS: Henry Kissinger is a bad Republican?
COULTER: Ronald Reagan had a completely different philosophy from Henry Kissinger, as I describe in my book. Henry Kissinger says so himself. Ronald Reagan had a conservative approach, his was of crusade and conversion. And he won, despite all of the qatarwalling saying this is the wrong direction, and Oh, you're going to scare them and you got the world blown up. Well, we saw what the results of his policy was and we're getting the same kind of retreat in the face of enemies, don't upset them, you'll just encourage the hard-liners right now in the war on terrorism.
DOBBS: You obviously focus on the fact that the media is liberal. You focus on the fact that there has been a, if you will, an atmosphere, a universe created that would include universities and academics providing liberals comfort and haven. But then you go to the point and the principal point of your book, and that is that Senator Joseph McCarthy was misunderstood and the victim of a, if you will, a conspiracy, a reflex at least on the part of the liberal establishment.
COULTER: Right. "The Times" claims I said McCarthy was misunderstood, though I tried to correct the fact checking. They have a new institution at "The New York Times, " fact checking. But they don't actually follow through on it.
I don't think McCarthy was misunderstood. I think liberals understood him just fine. I think they lied about him and created an enormous myth to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis. They were sheltering Soviet Spies. We know that now with the release of decrypted Soviet cables. All of the left's favorite Red Scare victims, Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, we know they were guilty, and they were defended by the Democratic party elites. Not by the Susan Sarandon of the day -- by the president, by the vice president, by Supreme Court justices. The Democratic party became a refuge for traitors. And it's gone from bad to worse.
DOBBS: Well, there are instances where I think that certainly -- and you do make the case. But -- of issues that are valid. But you take this -- you take this extrapolation to some rather broad and extreme conclusions, it seems to me. Just one reporter's view. And this is a time of broad and extreme extrapolations on both sides of the political spectrum in this country, whether you're Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal.
Do you at any point -- you're a very bright lady writing on controversial subjects. Do you think there is any, any opportunity in this country in the next, say, three to five years that we can recede from these broad polemical discussion, these extreme polarizing positions taken, whether by authors, by commentators, by political hacks, whether they be Democratic candidates or Republicans, and start talking about issues without worrying about whether you come down as conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat?
COULTER: Well, I don't think my position is extreme. I mean, these -- I am responding to a 50-year myth describing a great American patriot, Joe McCarthy, as John F. Kennedy called him, the very year of his censure, as a virtual Nazi. He has been defamed. His name made a malediction. I come in and provide a few true facts about McCarthy and now all of a sudden liberals say let's tone things down a little. OK, I'll be for the armistice. But I get the last punch.
DOBBS: Well, first of all, I'm a conservative. I'm not a liberal saying, do you not think...
COULTER: Well, I'm talking about the people who created this myth, and they have created a hideous myth about Joe McCarthy that bears no relation to the facts. And people do find the truth about McCarthy shocking because it's been a major goal of the left to make it sound shocking. A lot of graduate student theses have been deployed in the effort to create a monster out of a great American patriot.
DOBBS: As they say, opinions make it all worthwhile, and they do make markets. And "Treason" certainly making a market for itself. We wish you continued success. Ann, thanks for being here. Come back soon.
COULTER: Thank you. I'd love to.
DOBBS: And we'll discuss polemics and the recapturing of civility at the center of the country soon. Thanks a lot. Ann Coulter.
COULTER: Thank you.
DOBBS: When we continue, the editors of the nation's leading business magazines will join us for their thoughts on the week's developments and give us their best prognostication about what we can expect in the week ahead.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Joining me now, the editors of the leading business magazines in this country, the latest edition of "Business Week" looks at Citigroup's next act after CEO Sanford Weill steps down, if he's really stepping down. We'll find out from Robert Lenzner. "Fortune" profiles the ten greatest CEOs of all time. And "Forbes" looks at the millionaire mullahs running Iran.
Joining me now, Robert Lenzner, the national editor of "Forbes," Steve Shepard, the editor in chief of "Business Week, " and Cliff Leaf, the executive editor of "Fortune." gentlemen, good to have you here.
Citigroup, Sandy Weill has stepped down.
ROBERT LENZNER, "FORBES": I think that's an overstatement, that he's stepping down. He's stepping up to being chairman. And he is staying around to make sure that things will work out right. He's chosen a very able man who, by the way, I think the press hasn't realized that he's been chief operating officer of Citigroup for the last year. So Sandy Weill will be there to make sure that everything goes right.
DOBBS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE). But put this in contrast, again, as you do, to one of the fellows that I really respect in all of business, and that is Walter Riston, from whom I've heard a couple of things. He stepped off the board at Citigroup right away. Sandy stays, that ought to create some interesting dynamics.
STEVE SHEPARD, "BUSINESSWEEK": Well, generally speaking, it's a good idea for the outgoing CEO to leave. Otherwise, you get the problem of what people call the lingering CEO looking over the shoulder of the new guy. So I think it's not a good idea. On the other hand, he didn't have to leave. He could have just designated his successor and kept his CEO title for the time being.
DOBBS: You know, this is not a day in which -- and a period of time in which CEOs often linger. They sort of move very quickly out of the way. Sandy runs the show, and this is his chosen path -- Cliff.
CLIFF LEAF, "FORTUNE": Yes. I think that prince is such an unknown quantity still that I think that it was a comfort for investors that Sandy was sticking around, and they know what kind of manager he's going to be. He's a meddler. He's going to be around for a while. And he'll be able to put his stamp on Prince and also step back in if there's a problem. So...
LENZNER: Exactly. And I think it was very shrewd to do it when there wasn't pressure and at the same time put Prince in, who's got a clean unembellished -- his record, he has -- he's been the person that straightened out all the problems of the company rather than being involved -- tainted by any of the scandal. So I think the combination, actually, is he's a team player...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: ... Prince has throughout it all, and there have been a number of issues, managed to be the fixer.
Let's turn to this investor comfort that you just raised.
Should investors be looking upon this as the bull market?
Where are we?
Steve, you have to make that decision.
SHEPARD: Where are we in the market?
LENZER: Better you than me, Steve.
SHEPARD: I think we're probably in a sideways period of consolidation after the gains of earlier in the year, which I think has nothing to do with Sandy Weill and Citibank. I think what's interesting is what's going on in the bond market rather than the stock market.
DOBBS: Steve, you would have preferred I'd asked you about the bond market, OK.
LENZNER: I don't what the bond market has to do with the stock market.
DOBBS: There's a relationship?
SHEPARD: The bond rally is over. I mean, interest rates -- long-term rates have backed up half a point in the last few days, and Mr. Greenspan didn't help matters with what he said last time. Having said that, I don't think it's the end of the world. I don't think interest rates are all that high. I don't think it's going to derail the recovery.
DOBBS: 4.2 percent.
SHEPARD: Yes, 10-year bond. I mean, it's not that bad.
DOBBS: It's not going to hurt us too badly.
LENZNER: Starting back up, though. And it has affected the housing stocks because of the rise in the mortgage rates.
DOBBS: Well, it's a market still. And this could have a mitigating influence on what some people consider to be a bubble that is building if not outright here, in housing.
LENZNER: Well, I think the surprising thing is that Greenspan's predicting the economy's going to come back after worrying us about the fact that the economy might be too soft only a few weeks ago. So I think that's...
DOBBS: But reserving, reserving the interest in cutting interest rates.
LENZNER: Right.
LEAF: There was no way to have a recovery with long-term interest rates at 3 percent. I mean, they had to come up. The fact that they've spiked as much as they have I think is something that's gotten people's notice, but I don't think it's quite a level of concern yet. I think what would be of concern is if we saw a continuing spike in the long-term rate with a continuing jobless recovery. And so that's I think...
DOBBS: And that is a big question. Are jobs going to be coming back?
The president being -- moving out on the campaign trail, if you will, to push that issue as the Democrats have been attacking it.
SHEPARD: Jobs won't come back until we see economic growth exceeding 3 1/2 percent. And that won't happen much before the end of the year.
LENZNER: Jobs won't come back until we see capital expenditures rising, and that's not going to happen for quite some time because there's not enough demand for it.
DOBBS: Bob, Steve, Cliff, thank you very much. Gentlemen, appreciate you being here.
When we continue, we'll have the preliminary results of "Tonight's Poll." Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The preliminary results of "Tonight's Poll" question.
How do you regard the "Los Angeles Times" political cartoon?
Sixty-five percent of you said fair commentary, 21 percent said tasteless, 15 percent said vicious.
That's our show tonight. Thanks for being with us. Tomorrow we'll be joined by Treasury Secretary John Snow. For all of us here, good night from New York.
ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
