Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Clinton and Obama in Firestorm over Iraq Vote; Democrats Accuse White House of Ignoring Prewar Intelligence; Immigration Bill Drafted in Back Room Talks?; U.S. Legal Immigration Polices More Liberal Than Other Countries; Airman Helps Repel Insurgent Ambush
Aired May 25, 2007 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Lots more news coming up tonight. Until then, thanks for watch. In the meantime, let's go to "LOU DOBBS" tonight. That starts right now. Christine Romans filling in.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN GUEST HOST: Thanks, Wolf.
Tonight, Republicans accuse Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama of betraying our troops by voting against the new war funding bill. Have Senators Clinton and Obama reversed course. We'll have complete coverage.
Also, President Bush faces new charges his administration ignored warnings about chaos in Iraq before the U.S. invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein. We'll have a special report.
And the pro-illegal alien lobby launches an aggressive new campaign to stop federal agents from enforcing immigration laws. We'll have that story.
We'll have all of that and much more straight ahead here tonight.
Good evening, everybody. Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are at the center of a political firestorm after voting against the new war funding bill. Republicans are accusing the presidential candidates of being weak on national security. Senators Clinton and Obama tonight are strongly defending their votes.
Meanwhile, congressional Democrats are accusing the Bush White House of ignoring pre-war intelligence warnings about possible chaos in Iraq. A new Senate report says agencies predicted that al Qaeda and Iran would try to exploit the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Bill Schneider reports on the political battle over the war funding vote. Elaine Quijano reports from the White House on President Bush's next challenge on his conduct of the war in Iraq. And Andrea Koppel reports on the explosive new report on pre-war intelligence on Iraq.
We start first with Bill Schneider. Bill?
BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Christine, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced risks no matter which way they voted on the war funding bill. But for the near future, their concern is with Democrats.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER (voice-over): The height of irresponsibility, that's what John McCain called Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton's vote against the Iraq war-funding bill.
Mitt Romney said, "Their votes render them undependable in the eyes of men and women of the United States military and the American people."
Ask whether she was concerned that her vote would hurt her, Clinton sold CNN, "I don't see that at all. The American people have been living with the war for five years. I want to de-authorize it."
For the near future, Obama and Clinton's concern is with Democrats who are overwhelmingly opposed to the war, even the Democratic candidate who voted for the funding bill, did so with an explanation.
SEN. JOE BIDEN, (D), DELAWARE: I don't like the bill we just voted on. The one I voted for denies the American people for a responsible way out of Iraq.
SCHNEIDER: Obama and Clinton would have faced a firestorm of criticism from Democrats if they had votes yes.
Could the vote hurt them in the general election? That's a long way away. Everything could change.
Right now, the trend in public opinion is strongly against the war. Opposition is over 60 percent, an all-time high, according to a "New York Times"/CBS News poll.
More than two-thirds said Congress should allow funding for the war on the condition that the Iraqi government meets benchmarks for progress.
But more than 60 percent also favor a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2008.
The public wants the troops funded, but they also want a deadline for the war to end, which is the bill Senators voted for last month and president Bush vetoed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER: One more thing, the bill passed, the troops are being funded. That's likely to limit any negative repercussions for those who voted no. Those who voted yes are going to have to deal with the fact that the war goes on -- Christine?
ROMANS: All right. Bill Schneider reporting. Thank you, Bill.
Senators Clinton and Obama are two of three Senate Democrats who voted against the bill. Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut also opposed the legislation.
As Bill Schneider just reported, Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware voted for the measure.
On the House side, Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio voted against the bill.
The voting went as expect in the GOP presidential field. Most the candidates voting in favor of the bill. Senator John McCain of Arizona, Congressman Duncan Hunter of California and Tom Tancredo of Colorado all supported the measure. Only Congressman Ron Paul of Texas voted against it. Kansas Senator Sam Brownback did not vote yesterday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi voted against the new war funding bill.
Today, Congresswoman Pelosi issued a new warning to President Bush about the war in Iraq. Congresswoman Pelosi predicted that the president's policy on Iraq is likely to unravel in the weeks and months ahead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PELOSI: We are going to bring an end to this war. And we have to take the steps necessary to do them. Some of them will be more unifying in terms of the vote that is there. But all of us have that goal, that at the end of the day, the American people are very wise on this, and their wisdom will be reflected in the actions of Congress in a bipartisan way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROMANS: Congresswoman Pelosi said the war funding vote is what she called a small step in the direction of accountability on Iraq.
President Bush today praised the new war funding bill. The president saying it's a good bill that does not tell the military how to do its job.
President Bush, in public at least, not celebrating what is a rare political victory for the White House.
Elaine Quijano reports.
Elaine?
ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Christine, that's exactly right. Despite winning that hard-fought victory over Democrats, who had wanted to put into that bill timetables for troop withdrawals in Iraq, President Bush, instead, as you noted praised the bipartisan efforts that went into the crafting the bill.
The president made a point, talking to reporters outside of National Naval Medical Center in suburban Washington, to note that the top two Democrats, House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, both kept their pledge to get him that war funding bill by the Memorial Day weekend.
The president also reiterating, though, that the bill sends a strong message to the Iraqi government.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, this effort shows what can happen when people work together. We set a good bill that didn't have timetables or tell the military how to do its job, but also sent a clear signal to the Iraqis that there's expectations here in America, expectations about how to move forward. I look forward to continue to work with the prime minister and his government in meeting those expectations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUIJANO: Now earlier today, the president met with about two dozen wounded military personnel at the medical center. He awarded five Purple Hearts and said that it was an honor to be their commander in chief.
As for the funding bill itself, we are told by a senior administration official, it has left the White House. It's on its way to Camp David for President Bush's signature. That's expected to happen away from the cameras tonight.
Why not a public signing ceremony, Christine? Well, Bush aides say that they fully expect, when it comes to funding the wars again through fiscal year '08, they're going to have a tough fight on their hands once more -- Christine?
ROMANS: All right, Elaine Quijano at the White House. Thank you, Elaine.
The Bush administration tonight facing new charges it ignored critically important pre-war intelligence about Iraq.
Senate investigators say U.S. intelligence analysts predicted that al Qaeda would try to increase its operations in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Republican lawmakers though say the Senate investigation was too embroiled in politics to be accurate.
Andrea Koppel reports from Capitol Hill.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Iraq, torn apart by violence, warring factions, terrorist attacks. But even before the war, intelligence officials were already predicting the worst.
Still two months away from invading Iraq, the U.S. intelligence community sends top secret reports to dozens of policy makers, including key people responsible for briefing President Bush.
The reports include dire warnings about challenges the U.S. could face in post-war Iraq. John McLaughlin, now a CNN contributor, was then the deputy CIA director who approved the reports.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: It says: This is a highly divided society. There will be a lot of score-settling. Al Qaeda will have the opportunity to take advantage of any situation that involves chaos and discontent on the part of the Iraqi population.
KOPPEL: The reports also warned that U.S. occupation of Iraq would boost proponents of political Islam and would prompt calls from Islamists to unite against the West.
CNN's Ed Henry asked President Bush about the reports Thursday and why he didn't heed the warnings.
BUSH: Ed, going into Iraq, we were warned about a lot of things, some of which happened, some of which didn't happen. And, obviously, I made a decision, as consequential as that, I weighed the risks and rewards of any decision.
KOPPEL: But John Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which unveiled the reports today, said the president's refusal to listen to these warnings had led to tragic consequences for which the nation is paying a terrible price.
But Missouri's Kit Bond, the committee's ranking Republican, directed his opinion at Democrats, accusing them of partisanship and failing to present a balanced picture.
SEN. KIT BOND, (R), MISSOURI: And the reports conclusions highlight the benefit of hindsight, only issues from the intelligence assessments that seem to be important now, which distorts the picture of what was actually presented to policy makers in 2003.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KOPPEL: But two other Republicans on the committee, Maine's Olympia Snowe and Nebraska's Chuck Hagel, supported the Democrat's conclusions. Chuck Hagel called the report, quote, "fair and objective" -- Christine?
ROMANS: All right, Andrea Koppel. Thank you, Andrea.
In Iraq, insurgents have killed six more of our troops, all but one of them in roadside bomb attacks. Ninety of our troops have been killed so far this month; 3,341 of our troops have been killed since this war began; 29,549 have been wounded, 11,476 seriously.
The anti-American cleric Muqtada al Sadr has returned to Iraq after apparently spending months in exile in Iran. Al Sadr delivered a fiery sermon demanding the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Al Sadr has been in hiding since the beginning of the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq in February.
The United States today, again, accused Iran of helping insurgents to kill our troops in Iraq. A top U.S. commander, Major General William Caldwell, told troops that Tehran built a training facility in Iran for Iraqi insurgents.
Meanwhile, Iran is continuing to defy the rest of the world with its nuclear weapons program. The United States is stepping up the military and financial pressure on Iran to stop that program.
Barbara Starr reports from the Pentagon.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The picture the Bush administration wants Tehran to see. A U.S. naval exercise in the Persian Gulf this week. The message -- fire power that could be used against Iran's nuclear program.
But in the quiet hallways of the Treasury Department, the weapon against Iran is money or lack of it.
Treasury officials are now asking bankers, from Europe to Asia to the Middle East, to stop doing business with the Iranian regime.
STUART LEVEY, TREASURY DEPARTMENT: Being treated as a normal commercial actor was a big part of how they were pursuing their nuclear program.
STARR: Levey says the financial pressure of being cut off is being felt in Iran.
LEVEY: They're having surprise by how they're getting shut out of what they considered legitimate banking around the world.
STARR: U.S. officials say some blue chip banks, including Barclays, HSBC, and Credit Lyonnais, have dropped some or all of their business with Iran.
In the face of sanctions, Iran has increasingly turned to secret front companies and middlemen to finance weapons programs in terrorist activities, making it harder for those legitimate bankers to even know they are doing business with Iran.
LEVEY: We're starting to see a real impact within Iran that no one wants to deal with their banks, no one wants to deal with their companies.
STARR: The U.S. already had moved against Iran's state-owned banks, banning access to the U.S. financial system. The U.S. says one bank, Bank Saderat, had sent money to Hezbollah. And another bank, Bank Sepah, has been directly involved in Iran's weapons program.
STARR (on camera): The Treasury Department says it's been successful because bankers, a conservative lot by nature, simply don't want to get caught up in Iran's weapons or terrorist programs.
But nobody thinks this alone will be enough to make Iran give up its nuclear ambitions, something the U.S. military continues to watch closely.
Barbara Starr, CNN, the Pentagon.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Israel today carried out more air strikes against Palestinian targets in Gaza. Those strikes killed at least one Palestinian and wounded eight others. The air strikes coming after Palestinian terrorists fired at least six rockets the Israel. Three Israelis were wounded.
Meanwhile, U.S. military cargo aircraft began landing in Beirut with supplies for the Lebanese army. The Lebanese army is laying siege to a Palestinian refugee camp controlled by radical Islamist terrorists. The U.S. shipments include night vision goggles and body armor.
Coming up, our distinguished panel of political analysts will be her to discuss the Senate's illegal immigration compromise and the Iraq war funding bill.
Also, new warnings from the Pentagon about the new war threat from communist China. We'll have a special report.
And a hotline for illegal immigrants to find out about immigration raids. We'll have a report on this plan by the pro- illegal alien lobby. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: The Senate today begins a week off from the amnesty debate. They'll take the time to explain to their constituents the compromised legislation, which could give amnesty to millions of people in this country illegally.
Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, a group of illegal alien activists is turning its attention to enforcement issues. They've set up a hot line to tip off their community to federal immigrations raids.
Casey Wian has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Chanting, "The race, yes, immigration officers, no," a group of illegal alien activists have started a phone hot line to warn people of raids by Immigration and Customs enforcement agents.
OPERATOR: Press one to report a raid, police check point or suspicious police or immigration official activities.
WIAN: The group front against the raids announced its hot line under Mexican flags at MacArthur Park in Los Angeles where police clashed with pro-amnesty supporters earlier this month. This group clearly wants more than amnesty. "This is my struggle, this is my land" they shout. They plan to alert what they call the Community by e-mail, phone calls and text messages of when ICE agents are conducting raids.
RON GOCHEZ, FRONT AGAINST RAIDS: These raids have to stop. We're here to denounce these raids as racist attacks against our community. We know that these attacks are racist because they're only happening in our community.
WIAN: Actually, they're happening all over the country with increasingly frequency. ICE says it is not targeting any particular ethnic communities or nationalities.
Last month alone, ICE apprehended illegal aliens from at least three dozen nations, including Brazil, China, Indonesia, Nigeria, Poland and Saudi Arabia.
Illegal alien activists are angry ICE continues to target fugitive criminal illegal aliens and employers, while Congress is considering amnesty.
ALLEGRA PADILLA, FRONT AGAINST RAIDS: At this particular point in time, comprehensive immigration reform amnesty is on the table, yet, no decision has been made. And families continuing to be torn apart.
WIAN: Families torn apart by their decision to remain in the United States illegally.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: Ice says, in a statement, it is enforcing immigration and customs laws every day around the country. Any group that hopes to keep up with our enforcement activities, ICE says, is going to be very busy -- Christine?
ROMANS: All right, Casey Wian. Thank you very much, Casey.
Time now for some of your thoughts.
Jay in Florida: "How can our legislators talk about immigration, border security and amnesty and ignore the two border control officers sitting in jail for years to try to enforce the laws? Is this American justice?"
Sally in Texas: "The legislation being proposed for illegal immigrants is an insult to my intelligence and a joke to those who are here legally."
We'll have more of your thoughts later on in the broadcast.
Coming up, new warnings about China's growing military strength, its threat to the United States and the balance of power in the war. We'll have a report.
Also, just who is behind the Senate's immigration compromise? We'll tell you who brought the legislation to the table and what they're trying to do to ensure it passes intact.
And later, our distinguished panel of political analysts will be here. We'll examine how the war is splitting the Democrats and immigration is splitting the Republicans. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: A new warning today about communist China's rising military threat to the United States and other countries. In a report to Congress, the Pentagon says China is rapidly improving its ability to launch surprise attacks near its borders. The report says Beijing's goal is to defeat high-tech adversaries, in short, but intent military campaigns.
Jamie McIntyre reports from the Pentagon.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): China's military is transforming from an old-style grind-them-down army of attrition to a modern quick-strike high-tech adversary.
One example, China's success in January in knocking its own weather satellite out of low-earth orbit, which the Pentagon report concludes "poses dangers to human space flight and puts at risk the assets of all space faring nations."
The 2007 report is packed with examples of China's growing military might, including a longer-range mobile ICBM, called the DF- 31, which will be ready this year; development of a new JIN class of nuclear submarines, armed with updated ballistic missiles; and fresh intelligence China wants to build its own aircraft carrier.
ROBERT GATES, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: It paints a picture of a country that has steadily devoted increasing resources to their military, that is developing some very sophisticated capabilities.
MCINTYRE: The key question is, how does China intend to flex its bigger military muscle? That's got the Pentagon's top intelligence officer puzzled.
JAMES CLAPPER, UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE: Well, if I knew the answer to that, you know, I think it's -- I think China -- my personal opinion, China sees itself as a world power.
MCINTYRE: One thing that is clear, the report notes China has deployed its most advanced systems, including more than 900 missiles directly across from Taiwan, which the U.S. has pledged to defend against invasion.
And the report cites as instructive what's known as the 24- Character Strategy, a maxim devised by former Chinese leader, Dung Shuo Peng, in the '90s, it counsels hide our capabilities and bide our time, be good at maintaining a low profile and never claim leadership"
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE: What all this suggests, says the Pentagon report, is that China is content for now to downplay its capabilities and avoid confrontation, while it builds up its military strength for the future.
In other words, Christine, what's known as keeping your powder dry.
ROMANS: So what do military planners do about it? What do the United States military do? And is there some sort division at the Pentagon about how to treat this rise of military power from China?
MCINTYRE: The big debate in the Pentagon is, what is China's real intention here? And they can't know that.
So what the military is trying to do is just react totally to its capabilities, to move more U.S. military assets into the region and to try to make sure that the United States maintains its technical superiority.
But, again, China's got a ways to go, but it's clearly on a path that, at some point in the future, it may be able to challenge the U.S., toe to toe.
ROMANS: All right, Jamie McIntyre. Thank you, Jamie.
One of China's closest allies, North Korean, today test fired of number of short-range missiles into its coastal waters. North Korea fired the anti-ship missiles from its East and West Coasts. The test firings coming as the deadlock over North Korea's nuclear weapons program continues.
The United States today scrapped a key test of an anti-missile program that is designed, in part, to protect this country against North Korea. The United States has already deployed some Interceptor missiles in California and Alaska. Officials scrapped this day's exercise because the target rocket went astray over the Pacific.
Coming up, pro-amnesty Senators try new tactics to save their so- called grand compromise on illegal immigration. We'll have a special report.
Also charges and countercharges after Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama vote against the war funding bill. Three top political analysts will join us.
And Senators McCain and Obama go head-to-head in a war of words that goes to the very heart of the political fight over the war in Iraq.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: The Senate immigration compromise. It's the result of the efforts of President Bush and small bipartisan group of Senators. They decided what went into the bill. And since its introduction, they've had to defend it from attacks from all sides.
Louise Schiavone reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Senate Immigration Reform Bill has upwards of 1,000 pages of revisions that never went through the committee process. Who came up with it?
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS, (R), ALABAMA: It's a group of Senators, got together -- affectionately called the masters of the universe.
SCHIAVONE: Masters of the Universe, so named by lawmaker's who are not among them, include Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy, Ken Salazar, Dianne Feinstein, Republican Senators John Kyle, Arlen Specter, Mel Martinez and Lindsey Graham, and last, but not least, President Bush.
BUSH: If anybody advocates drying to dig out 12 million people that have been in our society for a while, it's sending a signal to the American people that's just not real.
UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR: You tell me who on this side said we want to have a mass deportation? Zero.
SCHIAVONE: Amid mounting public resentment against illegal immigration and a demand to address it, the White House joined with key border state conservative and liberal lawmakers to forge a compromise. No subcommittee hearings, no committee hearings, just a massive document.
ROSEMARY JENKS, NUMBERSUSA: Nobody with the exception of a tiny group of people who have been forced to stay up all night and read the stupid thing have actually looked at what it really does. And there are provisions in there that I'll bet you that none of them are aware of.
ROMANS: Members of the immigration in crowd say they chatted up their colleagues before drafting the bill.
SEN. KEN SALAZAR (D), COLORADO: This legislation was just not pulled out of the darkness one day and placed here on the floor of the Senate.
SCHIAVONE: Oh, yes it was, says this critic.
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: Thank you, my elite colleagues. We're glad you've worked out this immigration problem. Thank you so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: Christine, there's still another week of Senate action ahead. The House hasn't even begun its debate. But with a week at home now for their Memorial Day break, senators will learn what voters think about the bill. And that may well determine whether Congress will pass that immigration bill this session -- Christine.
ROMANS: Senator Sessions calls them his elite colleagues. I mean, how do you get to be one of the masters of the universe? It's a pretty small club.
SCHIAVONE: Yes, it seems to be a self-selecting club, Christine. What's interesting about this group is that the real moderate Democrats can't be part of this elite group, because a lot of them are really offended by the guest worker program. They feel that it undermines Americans' wages.
And the real conservatives can't get in on this, because they feel that it becomes a very expensive proposition for the United States.
And so these people just sort of come together. There are people who are always in this kind of compromising group. You find a guy like President Bush and a guy like Senator Kennedy coming from opposite sends of political spectrum. And they're fascinated by the process, and they consider it a challenge. And they want to see it work.
ROMANS: A fragile coalition that they're trying to keep together as they go over this next week and try to go home and push their plan.
Louise Schiavone, thank you so much.
Illegal alien advocates claims the United States has restrictive policies which make it difficult for immigrants to enter the country legally. But in reality, U.S. immigration policies are more liberal than those of Canada, Australia and France.
Kitty Pilgrim reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): According to Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, the reality is we don't have enough people. Comparing U.S. immigration policies to France, Germany and Japan, he added, the big challenge of the 21st century is who gets the people? Who gets the immigrants?
The United States is the No. 1 immigration draw. By some calculations the current U.S. immigration legislation will promote a surge of millions of more immigrants and their family members.
JESSICA VAUGHAN, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: There is, of course, the sense of entitlement among immigrants that they should be allowed to bring in their family members and their extended family members. And that mentality is certainly going to continue under this legislation.
PILGRIM: Other countries put strict limits on immigrants' families. France, for example, tightened laws after riots in immigrant communities in 2005. French President Nicolas Sarkozy campaigned, saying France could not provide, quote, "a home for all the world's miseries." He now advocates controlled immigration.
RITA SIMON, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: France, for example, watches its immigrants much more carefully. The immigrants have to report in when they move, when they change jobs and so forth.
PILGRIM: Canada admits about one percent of the population, or 300,000 immigrants a year but favors young immigrants who can contribute longer before collecting retirement benefits.
DEMETRI PAPADEMETRIOU, MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: The point system is fairly simple, basically. You know, it tries to figure out what are the qualifications that Canada needs.
PILGRIM: In Australia, Prime Minister John Howard's re-election was tough against people seeking asylum, so-called boat people. Immigrants are admitted only for certain job categories, and there are strict limits on extended family members.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: The United States is the absolute first choice for immigrants, followed by Canada. And together, they receive more than one half of the world's immigrants.
But the United States has the most liberal policy in the world. There is simply no other country that can match the generosity of allowing in so many extended family members of immigrants -- Christine.
ROMANS: All right. Kitty Pilgrim. Thank you very much, Kitty.
Coming up, two Democratic senators, both presidential candidates, under fire for their vote on the war funding bill. We'll discuss election politics and the war in Iraq with three top political analysts.
Also "Heroes", our tribute to the men and women serving our country in Iraq and Afghanistan. Tonight, the store of Senior Airman Nicole O'Hara.
And a war over words -- actually it's more over spelling -- between senators McCain and Obama. We'll explain. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: Joining me now with the Senate's so-called grand compromise on illegal immigration, the war funding in Iraq and so much more, Republican strategist Ed Rollins; Michael Goodwin, New York Daily News, and the editor of OpinionJournal.com, James Taranto.
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us here tonight.
I want to start, I guess, with the Obama-Clinton no votes, two of 14 no votes for Iraq war funding. Risks or advantages for them on the campaign trail with those no votes?
ED ROLLINS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: You know, I think they had to do it because they're playing, certainly, to their constituency. I don't think they showed any courage or they didn't announce it in advance. They waited to be one of the last votes last night. I mean, if they really felt this way, they should have been out there and defended themselves more effectively.
I don't think it's a very good message for a person running for commander in chief, though, that you're going to cut off -- cut off the funds for your troops.
ROMANS: That's what the Republicans say.
MICHAEL GOODWIN, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: I think it's a short-term game for them, among sort of the far left of the Democratic Party, which is who they are catering to right now. Who seems to be running the Democratic Party is the far left.
Long-term, I think it is a problem for them. I think that is a black mark on your record when you vote against funding the troops. They had ample opportunity here to weigh in on this bill. It's a different bill. They should have voted for it.
JAMES TARANTO, OPINIONJOURNAL.COM: Well, remember John Kerry's comment in 2004: "I actually voted for the $84 billion before I voted against it." This was exactly the same situation. He and John Edwards both voted against funding the troops after both having voted for the Iraq war, as Mrs. Clinton did.
I think, more broadly, that this effort on the part of the Democrats to pull the troops out is advantageous to them only so long as they don't succeed in doing it. Because if they succeed in doing it, then we've lost the war, and they are responsible for having lost the war.
The American people -- public opinion is fickle. Remember, 70 percent of the American people favored the war at the beginning. Now, something like that number is against it. But they're against it because they think we're losing. And they blame President Bush for -- for the perception that we're losing.
ROMANS: This is just the beginning. Because this is really just one little step in terms of this war funding. Because we've got to do this all over again. And we're going to be talking about it in September. And the debate is going to keep heading forward here.
I want to talk about the Democrats vowing to keep up the pressure to set a timetable for withdrawal. Here's what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Yesterday, Congress took a small step in the direction of accountability that the Americans have demanded on the war in Iraq. I would have hoped for more. But it does represent a change in direction.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOODWIN: Well, look, I think that -- you mentioned September, Christine. And I think that really is the key date here. Because Petraeus, our general over there, has said he's going to review the surge, whether it's working.
And President Bush yesterday, actually, he said some, I thought, rather startling things. He now wants to look again at the Iraq Study Group. He likes the idea of training Iraqis instead of having our troops in so much combat.
Those are all the things that the Democrats were -- that was in the bill that he vetoed. That's what the Iraq Study Group. We are talking to Iran. We're kind of putting feelers out with Syria.
So he's clearly moving. And you know, by September, he may be where the Democrats are now. No telling where they'll be then. But he's clearly moving. I think he's looking for an exit.
ROLLINS: I think he was very honest in this press conference yesterday; we have very, very tough sledding. We've lost -- we've lost 100 men and woman in the last two months. And obviously, they say it's going to be even more severe in August. There's no way you can lose these kinds of numbers have and have any support from this country.
ROMANS: Let me ask you if it divides -- if this is the issue that's going to divide the Democrats, like we're seeing immigration divide the Republicans?
TARANTO: I think so. Because the Democrats are playing to a base of their party -- or are forced to play to a base of their party which really wants to lose the war. I'm not exaggerating here.
Go look at Markos Moulitsas, the Daily Kos online. He had a blog entry today in which he talked about he said, "We're in a long war. We can't back down. Our enemies are conservatives and corporatist Democrats and so forth."
The base of the Democratic Party, or a significant part of it, really sees the enemy as their domestic opponents and not the country's foes. The center of the country, which has turned against the war, is not turned against the war because they want America to lose. It's turned against the war because they think America is losing.
GOODWIN: I think James is right in the sense that the center of the country would switch back in support of the war if they believed it was effective, if they believed that we were achieving our goals.
I think we have to assume we're not -- that's not going to happen, just for sake of argument, in September. Then I think the ball's going to be back in the president's court. What is he going to do? What is Petraeus going to recommend? That way, I think the politics are going to change dramatically once we see a new strategy in Iraq.
ROLLINS: The difficulty is you can't win this war unless the Iraqi army gets fully engaged. And they have shown no capacity whatsoever to do that.
ROMANS: I don't believe anyone wants to lose this war. I think that this is a complicated situation that people have different...
TARANTO: Go read this blog entry by Markos Moulitsas. It may change your opinion. Look, John Edwards said earlier this week there isn't even a global war on terror. Who do you think he's appealing to with that kind of statement?
ROMANS: Let's talk about immigration here quickly. Because this is -- this is the thing that's really roiling the Republicans. Jon Kyl this week said -- stood up and said, "Yes, I'm learning a lot of new words from my constituents."
And you know, John Boehner had a nice four-letter word of his own. I mean, there's -- there's a lot of anxiety going on here about this. Does this, with -- at the helm with the masters of the universe, as Louise Schiavone reported, does this move forward from here? Does this have traction? Is it going to happen, Ed?
ROLLINS: Well, I think they're going to make every effort. I think it may get through the Senate. I think the House version will be such a bad bill that at the end of the day, they won't get sufficient Republicans to vote for it.
I think the guy who's going to pay a heavy price here is John McCain. John McCain has now made this -- the Kennedy-McCain bill. He's going to go on every talk show and try to sell this, and the conservative talk shows. And I think he'll get battered and bruised pretty severely on this.
GOODWIN: I would say it's 50-50 as to whether it's going to pass. I mean, one day it looks to me like it's dead. The next day, it looks like they're breathing some life back into it. So look, you know, with the president ready to sign this, you don't -- you don't need a very big margin here. One vote will do it.
So it's got a real chance of passing.
ROMANS: A lot of people keep saying it's good enough. It's good enough. It's better than the status quo. We've got to do this. This is our chance now. I mean, Ted Kennedy said we've got to do this now. If we don't do it now, I don't know when we're going to do it.
TARANTO: Well, I think there's something to be said about being cautious, for not rushing into it. For giving everybody a chance to read the bill and debate on it. And I think some people are justifiably troubled by the speed with which they're trying to push this through.
ROMANS: The White House is really pushing this. And I want to take a listen here to what the president said this week about the immigration bill. He's really urging the Senate to pass immigration reform now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Immigration problems cannot be solved piecemeal. They must be all addressed together. And they must be addressed in logical order. So this legislation requires that border security and worker verification targets are met before other provisions of the bill are triggered.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROLLINS: This president has had the opportunity, since September 11, to protect our borders. And if the numbers are accurate that 100 -- that 1 million illegals are coming across the border every year, probably 5 million have come across during his tenure since September 11.
He's had his power -- the ability to security the borders and hasn't done it. So that ought to be the first priority. And once that's done, then we can go deal with the other issues.
ROMANS: What about the triggers, though? They say there are going to be triggers. And then after that, we can deal with some of the other elements.
GOODWIN: Well, the triggers simply require the president to say they've been met.
ROMANS: Right. To say they can do -- the sense of the Congress in this bill is that it can be done in 18 months.
GOODWIN: Well, but just think about that. We have not been able to seal the border ever. Certainly in the last six years. Now suddenly, we're able to seal the border in 18 months? It's not credible.
But if the president says it's sealed, then it's sealed.
So I think that's one of the problems with this bill, along with all the major provisions as to what it actually stipulates. So I think there's a lot wrong with it.
But there is such an eagerness to get something done in Washington. The president clearly wants something other than the war on his record. And the Democrats want this bill. So it may happen for the worst possible reasons.
ROMANS: We'll leave it there for just a little, gentlemen. We're going to come back right after the break and talk about this more. There's so much to talk about today. But more of this panel ahead.
And our weekly tribute to the men and women who serve this country in uniform. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: It could be a matter of experience or a matter of spelling. In a press release defending his no vote on the war spending bill, the Obama campaign mentions Senator McCain's trip to Iraq where he wore a flak jacket, F-L-A-K. The press release, though, spelled it F-L-A-C-K.
Senator McCain responded with a release of his own. McCain's release said, "By the way, Senator Obama, it's a flak jacket" -- F-L- A-K -- "not a flack jacket."
While some dictionaries have both spellings, F-L-A-K is the preferred one. By the way, this controversy was generated by both senators' public relations staffs. They're known, of course, as flacks, spelled with a "c." And the reporters who go crazy over this sort of thing are hacks, I would say.
More now with our panel of top political analysts. More than a year out, and we're already starting to get personal, you know. What do you make of it?
ROLLINS: Well, first of all, I think Senator McCain, who I have a great deal of respect for, needs to wear a flak jacket if he's going to basically try to take on the conservatives on this immigration issue.
But the problem with this bill is 12 people put it together in the White House. It's -- it's more than 300 pages.
ROMANS: Now, it's 600. I read the first 300. Now it's got -- now it's doubled.
ROLLINS: No one can tell you how much it's going to cost. No one can tell you all the details of it. I bet there's not five members of the Senate that have read any detail of it.
And I think -- I think they need to slow this thing down and really look at the consequences and at least get a price tag that's accurate.
ROMANS: I want to -- I just want to talk a little bit here for a minute. I want to read to you something that a senator said in the -- in the Senate debate on immigration. I want to read it to you verbatim and get your thoughts here.
"There are three million to 12 million human beings in the United States who are here illegally. They are being used and exploited, and this is their only vehicle out of the dark. Because you know, every one of you here, that we will never grant a separate legalization to these unfortunate people unless we know it isn't going to happen again."
That was not this week. That was in 1986, Senator Alan Simpson, a Republican of Wyoming.
ROLLINS: I followed Alan Simpson every day. I was the White House political director. And I told him, exactly as I've said on this show many times, that this bill is not going to work, and it obviously hasn't worked.
That bill is still in effect. That bill has worker rights. That bill has employer...
ROMANS: Enforcement.
ROLLINS: ... enforcement and none of it has worked.
ROMAN: So what -- I mean, what kind of message is that? That we're here saying the same kind of language coming from the Senate floor again? Everyone is saying it's not amnesty, because amnesty is a dirty word because of the 1986 amnesty that apparently has failed. I mean, what -- what's the lesson?
GOODWIN: I think it's classic Washington at work. It passes a law, it doesn't enforce it, so then it needs a new law. So it only passes laws. Nobody enforces half of them anyway.
But Congress thinks it's doing its work by passing laws. I mean, it's got no reality to what happens in America. That's -- that's why Washington begins to look like it's so disconnected from the American people.
TARANTO: Well, it may also be that it's just an intractable problem to have, you know, the government dictating who can come in. But at the same time, we have -- the market has its needs for labor, for unskilled labor and skilled labor. And perhaps the people in Washington just aren't qualified to decide what -- what the market needs.
ROMANS: ... hear you say that the folks in Washington aren't qualified for an awful lot of things.
ROLLINS: The interesting thing is most people don't know what 12 million means. Twelve million people is basically larger than 44 states.
ROMANS: Right.
ROLLINS: The population of 44 states. It's a gigantic number of people. Obviously, something needs to be done about it. And I don't think anybody thinks we can move them out.
But more important is who are these people? And what are their educational needs? What are their technological needs? What burden are they going to put on this country? And are they good people or bad people? We won't know that until we do some kind of a survey on them.
GOODWIN: Well, I think we could begin by sealing the border. I mean, that would be the first real step.
ROMANS: Well, operational control would be the first step. And I'm not sure we're even there.
GOODWIN: Right, we're not there. But if we did that, and then if we began to use the provisions of the 1986 law against employers who knowingly hire illegal labor...
ROMANS: Right.
GOODWIN: ... et cetera, et cetera, we would begin then, I think, to shrink the pool, to get -- to get a realistic number and then begin to be able to deal with the people here. We could then have a more compassionate conversation, I think, about those people.
ROMANS: They call that attrition by enforcement. And what I hear for people who are opposed to attrition by enforcement, they say that it is a stealth amnesty, that people aren't just going to go home, that you're just going to drive people deeper underground.
GOODWIN: Let's assume they come here for work. If the work isn't available, many of them will not stay.
ROMANS: It's interesting, because I was covering the Phoenix immigration rallies. And a contractor, you know, a housing contractor there, told me he thought that the rallies would be fewer people because he said, we don't have any work. You know, people have gone home for six months or a year. And he said it's a completely poor situation, you know, back and forth.
And so my question is, do we need to have a guest worker program? Who's going to decide how many? How are they going to enforce it? The current programs are exploited, you know. How we are going to do that?
TARANTO: Well, we probably do need a guest worker program of some sort. And again, the problem is you end up with politicians and bureaucrats making these decisions instead of leaving it to the market.
ROMANS: Ed?
ROLLINS: I think you need some kind of a guest worker program. I think the critical...
ROMANS: Does it take the pressure off the border like president says it does, or it is just an attraction...
ROLLINS: I think the president's mind-set from the day he was a governor in Texas -- what goes on in Texas is totally different than the rest of the country. And the problem is so much more severe today than it was when he was governor of Texas. I don't think it's realistic.
I think the bottom line is we've got to basically make sure that the borders are resealed or sealed for the first time and that sufficient funding is there. My greatest fear is we legalize the 12 million. We say we're going to fix the borders, and they cut the money off two years, three years down the road.
ROMANS: Now I understand that thought (ph) from Alan Simpson on the floor in 1986. He said we've got to fix this problem, because it's not good for the country. It's divisive. And, you know, we need a legal immigration system, and we need to welcome people who come here. And if we have problems, it's -- we're going to not be a welcoming country anymore. And we can't let that happen.
GOODWIN: Well, the numbers in 1986 were about 3 million. Now they're 12 million. So that tells you how well they'll all work.
ROMANS: If we know the numbers, if we know the numbers, frankly.
OK. Ed Rollins, thank you so much. Michael Goodwin, James Taranto.
GOODWIN: Thank you.
ROMANS: Thank you, everyone, for joining us. Thanks. Have a great weekend.
TARANTO: Thank you.
ROMANS: Coming up at the top of the hour, "THE SITUATION ROOM" with Wolf Blitzer -- Wolf.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Christine.
A new detention in Iran, a fifth Iranian-American now reportedly seized by the Tehran government. It's escalating the already tense standoff with Washington.
Also, the house speaker, Nancy Pelosi, leaving the hot spotlights in the Capitol for a much colder climate. Very, very cold. We'll tell you what's behind her trip up north.
And new tell-all books on Bill and Hillary Clinton about to be released. What will they reveal that we don't already know?
All that coming up right here in "THE SITUATION ROOM" -- Christine.
ROMANS: All right. Thank you, Wolf.
Still ahead, our weekly tribute to our men and women serving in uniform, "Heroes". We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROMANS: And now, "Heroes", our weekly tribute to the men and women who serve this nation in uniform. Tonight, we introduce you to Nicole O'Hara, a senior airman who helped repel an insurgent ambush in Iraq. She risked her own life to save the lives of many others.
Kitty Pilgrim has her remarkable story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM (voice-over): As dawn breaks over Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, Senior Airman Nicole O'Hara stands guard, protecting one of this nation's largest fighter jet bases. It's a long way from Iraq, where she recently served with an Army unit protecting vital supply convoys. SR. AIRMAN NICOLE O'HARA, U.S. AIR FORCE: You are constantly looking out. You were watching and keeping your eyes open for anything that looks suspicious. It's just constant.
PILGRIM: One evening, her convoy stopped to check a possible roadside bomb. But then she and her detachment were ambushed by insurgents.
O'HARA: It was on the radio immediately. And my truck commander was hitting my leg, telling me to contact left, contact left. My gun was pointing to the left. And I saw where those rounds were coming from. I started firing.
It all lasted about a matter of maybe 45 seconds. But it seemed like hours.
PILGRIM: O'Hara helped stop the attack and killed six insurgents. Airman O'Hara was credited with saving 39 lives, but moving forward from the ambush has been a huge personal challenge.
O'HARA: The fact that I was doing my job, doing what I was trained to do, that's fine. But the simple fact that I did what I did, you know, took someone's life away, is -- is really hard to do deal with.
PILGRIM: O'Hara is proud she completed her mission successfully.
O'HARA: I'm just glad everything went as well as it did. And that everybody came home safely. That's really all that matters to me.
PILGRIM: Airman O'Hara was recently chosen as the top base security specialist in the entire Air Force. She is one of about 20,000 members of the Air Force who have served with the Army and Marine Corps in Iraq.
Kitty Pilgrim, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Airman O'Hara was awarded a Bronze Star for valor for her courage during the convoy ambush. We wish her well.
And we thank you for being with us tonight. Please join us tomorrow. For all of us here, thanks for watching. Have a great weekend. Good night from New York.
"THE SITUATION ROOM" starts right now with Wolf Blitzer -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Thanks, Christine.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
