Return to Transcripts main page

News from CNN

U.S. Turns Up Heat on Militants in Falluja; Kerry and Bush Campaigns; Military Politics

Aired October 15, 2004 - 11:59   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.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: We have a busy hour of news here in Washington, around the nation, and around the world. We'll get to all of that. First, though, some headlines "Now in the News."
A warning on antidepressants and possible adolescent suicides. An order issued today requires all antidepressant drugs to carry the government's strongest safety label. It will warn consumers of the increased risk between drugs and suicidal thoughts among children and teens.

Incentives to Iran to give up enriching uranium. At the State Department today, the Bush administration hosting a meeting of allies to seek new ways to curb uranium nuclear plans. Officials say if a package emerges it could also contain new penalties for noncooperation.

A Louisiana jury recommends death for Derek Todd Lee for one of the seven murders he is accused of committing. On Tuesday, Lee was convicted of a second murder related to a crime spree that terrorized women in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, from 1998 to 2003.

Up first, Iraq and the start of the Muslim holy month. On the first day of Ramadan, United States forces are leading renewed attacks on the militant stronghold of Falluja. At the same time, a car bomb has killed 10 people in Baghdad, which continues to reel from yesterday's bombings in the heavily-guarded Green Zone, purportedly carried out by Falluja-based terrorists.

CNN's Brent Sadler is in the Iraqi capital. He's joining us now live with more details -- Brent.

BRENT SADLER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Thanks, Wolf.

We are seeing a strong U.S.-led military push to squeeze the insurgents inside Falluja, that key stronghold of theirs west of the capital. Now, an offensive began during the hours of darkness. U.S. warplanes and artillery pounding suspected insurgent positions in Falluja.

Now, this is not, we're told by the U.S. military, the start of a wide-scale -- much anticipated wide-scale offensive involving ground and air efforts against Falluja. More, it is the shape of things to come if the insurgents, nationalistic insurgents, do not break away from the terror foreign fighters there led principally by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Now, insurgent leaders were having negotiations with the Iraqi government for many weeks. Those negotiations failed. This offensive got under way. And there are unconfirmed reports, Wolf, from Falluja, according to the police there, that one of those negotiators has been picked up by U.S. authorities. Not confirmed by the U.S. military, though.

Now, this attack comes after repeated threats, ultimatums from the interim government here that unless al-Zarqawi's terrorist allies broke away from the insurgents, and that that city began to disarm and began to pacify itself, then serious military consequences would follow. And what we've seen, combined operation, two U.S. infantry battalions, one from the Marines, one from the Army, combing with Iraqi special forces, backed up by American warplanes and helicopter gun ships, taking the fighting to the heart of that stronghold.

U.S. troops now around the stronghold of Falluja. Not entering the city as such, but is certainly squeezing the militants who are inside there.

Wolf, just one footnote we're hearing from the U.S. military here that relates to the bombing inside the Green Zone, that double bombing some 24 hours ago. It's now confirmed, according to the U.S. military, that two suicide bombers were responsible for those blasts now confirmed to have killed four Americans and injured at least 20 other people -- Wolf.

BLITZER: So what does that say about the Green Zone? This is supposed to be the most secure part of the Iraqi capital, yet there were these attacks yesterday that you just described. What does it say about security any place in Baghdad?

SADLER: Well, absolutely, it certainly damages the fortress-like reputation of the huge Green Zone area. This zone has been subjected to repeated rocket and mortar attacks for many months. Devices -- explosive devices have been discovered there in the past couple of weeks. One was wrapped up inside a sandbag. Incidentally, very close to one of the blast sites just 24 hours ago.

But certainly this does shake the myth, if you like, that the Green Zone, all its security, all its searches, really has been exposed by the fact that two suicide bombers were somehow able to get explosives in there, operate in there, and detonate themselves. It begs the question: are there now Iraqis sympathetic to those who would carry out these attacks inside the Green Zone? Remember, about 10,000 Iraqis live in there. Or, are Iraqis in there being coerced through violence to support this sort of terrorism -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Brent Sadler reporting for us from Baghdad. Brent, thank you very much.

What happens next in the fight for Falluja? And what about security in the Green Zone? We'll discuss that and more with General George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander. He will join me here live. That's coming up in a short while. But first now, turning to the race for the White House. President Bush and John Kerry fighting a turf war in the battleground state of Wisconsin today. That state has 10 electoral votes and narrowly supported Al Gore in 2000.

Kerry is gearing up for a rally in Milwaukee this hour. Our Ed Henry is covering that part of the story. He's joining us now live -- Ed.

ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon, Wolf.

That's right, John Kerry is coming to the Milwaukee area technical college. He wants to hit the jobs issue. And these final 18 days of the campaign, he really wants to zero in on domestic matters, and he's doing it in a dwindling number of battleground states.

Today Wisconsin, 10 electoral votes, a state that John Kerry desperately wants to keep in the Democratic column. Tonight he'll be heading to Ohio, a major prize that he is trying to wrest away from President Bush.

Last night, Kerry had a big rally in Iowa. That's another state Al Gore won in 2000 that Kerry wants to make sure that he keeps that.

Earlier yesterday, Kerry was in Nevada, another battleground that was in the president's column last time. Like Ohio, he's trying to wrest it away.

Also, this is coming at a time when the Kerry aides say their candidate is very strong. They feel like he comes out of these three debates with a head (ph) of steam. They're saying that he looked very presidential, that he feels very confident, and we definitely saw him yesterday with a much feistier stump speech, really laying into President Bush on the domestic front. Very much on the attack, not so much defensive on these domestic issues.

But John Kerry was on the defensive over an issue that came up in that third debate, something that he raised. In fact, John Kerry invoking the name of Mary Cheney, daughter of Vice President Cheney, mentioning the fact that she's a lesbian in the context of the gay marriage debate.

We heard Lynne Cheney lash out at John Kerry, say that he's not a good man. Vice President Cheney said that he was an angry father over what was raised.

Initially, John Kerry did not want to comment on that. He, in fact, finally did after the vice president weighed in, said that he only meant good things there. He was trying to praise Vice President Cheney's family for dealing with the difficult matter.

Republicans privately feel that perhaps the Kerry-Edwards ticket, since John Edwards raised this issue as well in the vice presidential debate, is trying to split the conservative vote, send a little signal to conservatives and say, you know, maybe this White House is not so much behind you on gay marriage. Republicans very angry about that.

But the Kerry camp insists they had no ulterior motive. In fact, that John Kerry was trying to praise Vice President Cheney and his family -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Ed Henry reporting for us. Thanks, Ed, very much.

Our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley, will interview John Kerry later today. Hear what he has to say tonight on CNN's "PAULA ZAHN NOW." That airs 8:00 p.m. Eastern only here on CNN.

President Bush will also be in Wisconsin later today. But first, he is campaigning in Iowa, a battleground state with seven electoral votes. Gore also took Iowa in a very close contest in 2000.

Our Elaine Quijano is tracking the president's busy day. She's joining us now live from the White House -- Elaine.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon to you, Wolf.

With 18 days left to go, the sprint to the finish for the Bush campaign will include plenty of visits to Midwest battleground states. And as you said, at the top of the president's list and on his schedule today are Iowa and Wisconsin.

Now, yesterday, the president focused his efforts out West, making campaign stops in Nevada and also in Oregon. But today, turning the focus to the Midwest. Two states that the campaign has heavily targeted, Iowa and Wisconsin, places where aides point to tens of thousands of volunteers registered to date.

Now, combined, those states carry a total of 17 electoral votes. And even though Mr. Bush did lose both states in 2000, he did so by less than one percentage point in each state.

Now, this time around, even though polls are showing the race is extremely tight in both places, the campaign feels that those states are places where the president can pull ahead. They feel that's especially true in Wisconsin, where Bush aides say that John Kerry has been forced to defend that area, traditionally a Democratic-leaning state.

Now, the president this afternoon first heads to a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He then moves on to Oshkosh, Wisconsin, for another campaign event there. And look for the president to continue with his post-debate attacks on Senator John Kerry, trying to portray him as a tax-and-spend liberal who favors big government.

But Bush aides are conceding that the president did have more momentum, they feel, going into the debates than he has now coming out of them. And they say they feel that his performances on the campaign trail will be more crucial now than ever -- Wolf.

BLITZER: He's an excellent campaign stump speech deliverer. So we'll see how he does. Elaine Quijano for us. Thanks very much. A new poll released just a short while ago appears to show U.S. troops and their families solid by backing the commander in chief this election year. Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, is joining us now live to crunch some of these numbers for us.

First of all, this is the Annenberg Poll. Tell us a little bit about this poll.

WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, it was a poll taken recently of U.S. service members, active and Reserve and Guard service members and their families, taken the end of September and early October.

BLITZER: So it was before the most recent debate. The last debate.

SCHNEIDER: Yes.

BLITZER: Let's go through some numbers, because they do confirm overwhelmingly that military troops and their families lean Republican, lean for Bush. Let's go through Bush's job approval numbers for -- we'll put it up on the screen -- 67 job approval, 29 disapproval. That's a huge number.

SCHNEIDER: That is. Among the general public, polled at the same time in a separate survey by Annenberg, the result was 49 percent approving President Bush, 49 percent disapproving. So it's pretty clear that service members and their families are more approving of Mr. Bush.

But keep this in mind, the sample of service members and their families was 43 percent Republican. Only 19 Democrats. Among the general public, it was 30 percent Republican, 33 percent Democrat.

The people who go into the service and the people they marry and are in their families tend to be self-selected. They tend to be Republican to begin with.

BLITZER: So that's why these numbers are so good for the president.

Here's another good number for the president. U.S. going in the right direction? Among military personnel and their families, 64 percent say it's going in the right direction, 31 percent wrong direction. If those numbers were for the public at large, this would not even be a contest.

SCHNEIDER: That's right, but they're not. Among the public at large, only 37 percent say the country is moving in the right direction. A majority, 55 percent, say it's not, which is why the election is so close.

BLITZER: Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Among military personnel and their families, 64 percent say yes, 32 percent say no. That's a lot higher than the public at large. SCHNEIDER: That's right. The public at large, just 45 percent say it was worth going to war, 51 percent, a slight majority, say it was not.

Here's something interesting. The people in service themselves, whether active or Guard or Reserves, 69 percent say Iraq was worth going to war over. Its their mission.

Their families a bit lower. Fifty-seven percent say it was worth going to war. The members and their families who have actually served in Iraq or the Iraq theater, 55 percent.

So it's a bit lower among those who have actually served. Though even among them, it's higher than in the general public.

BLITZER: But this is surprising, this next one, and we'll put it up on the screen. Iraq war, did it reduce or increase the risk of terrorism against the United States? They're pretty evenly split.

Forty-seven percent say it reduced the risk. Forty-two percent say it increased the risk. Nine percent said it didn't make a difference.

SCHNEIDER: That's right. That is surprising, because they are divided. They won't say it has reduced the risk of terrorism. They're not sure.

The public, however, a majority, say it has increased the risk of terrorism, 53 percent. Only a third of the public say it has reduced the risk. So while they have more confidence in the policy than the general public, the military and their families are not sure.

BLITZER: When these military personnel and families were asked this question, "Who has a clear plan for the successful conclusion of the situation in Iraq," among those who responded in this Annenberg survey, Bush 47 percent, Kerry, 18 percent. There's not a whole lot of confidence in there for John Kerry when it comes to Iraq.

SCHNEIDER: There is not. But again, the numbers for Bush are not all that strong.

They're not sure Bush has a clear plan for Iraq. They are divided over whether Bush has a clear plan for Iraq.

What does the general public say? Most Americans say they don't think Kerry has a clear plan. And most Americans say they don't think Bush has a clear plan.

BLITZER: I think it's obvious, based on these numbers and this survey, that if there's a close race in a state -- let's say Florida or Ohio -- and it comes down to absentee ballots and military personnel who are voting absentee or voting, and they have to count those numbers, then it's going to be good for Bush, not good for Kerry.

SCHNEIDER: That's right. That's right, it would be good for Bush to have the military -- more military cast ballots and those ballots were counted. And they have to be cast according to law.

These numbers are not surprising, Wolf. Number one, psychologists will tell you when you give people a mission they become committed to what they are doing. Also, of course, these are military people. Bush is their commander in chief.

They're voting for their commander in chief. That really isn't a surprise. And many of them were Republicans to begin with.

BLITZER: Bill Schneider, thanks very much.

SCHNEIDER: Sure.

BLITZER: What's the plan of attack in Iraq? Can multinational forces retake control of insurgent areas? The retired U.S. Army four- star general, George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander, will join me live to discuss military strategy.

And a bit later, the road to the White House. How will the Bush and Kerry campaigns maneuver through the final days leading up to the vote? All that coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Over the last week or so, United States forces in Iraq have launched new operations on major insurgent strongholds. First in Ramadi, now in Falluja. The same time yesterday, specifically, the insurgents managed to carry out a deeply troubling attack in the nerve center of Baghdad, supposedly the most secure area, the Green Zone.

Joining us now to offer his assessment of the situation, retired U.S. Army General George Joulwan. He's the former supreme allied commander of NATO.

General, thanks very much for joining us.

GEN. GEORGE JOULWAN, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Good to be here, Wolf.

BLITZER: Well, first of all, they say it's preparing the battlefield, what's happening yesterday and today in Falluja, it's not necessarily the all-out offensive that perhaps will be coming down the road. When they say they are preparing the battlefield, what do they mean?

JOULWAN: Well, what they are trying to do is to understand certain things that are coming up. We've got the election coming up. You have Ramadan that's...

BLITZER: The Iraqi election, you mean?

JOULWAN: Iraqi election.

BLITZER: The end of January?

JOULWAN: Right. You have -- now it appears that from Falluja in particular is the command and control for attacks that are taking place, particularly in the Sunni Triangle in Baghdad.

So for all of that, what they are trying to do is to reassert the initiative on the part of the coalition. In many respects, in my opinion, the initiative has gone over to the insurgents. And you have to get that back if you're going to have some sort of Iraqi election in January.

A secure environment is essential. And so part of this strategy -- and this is the first stage of it -- Falluja is part of seizing control, establishing control of government control.

Now, the challenge is going to be are the Iraqi military security police up to the task? That is going to be a question. And it may come into play in what occurred just recently in the Green Zone.

BLITZER: Well, we're going to get to the Green Zone in a second, because we saw Samarra, they are going in there, they're trying to deal with insurgents, Ramadi, Falluja. Sadr City, the slum area, a million people-plus living there, many of them loyal to these insurgents, Muqtada al-Sadr, specifically. This is urban conflict, urban warfare, Marines, Rangers, or soldiers. This is a dangerous, dangerous stuff.

JOULWAN: Very, very difficult and very dangerous. And we're using armored vehicles that have saved hundreds of lives, because we used them because of the improvised explosive devices, the mortars, rocket-propelled grenades. All of those things are taking place in this so-called Sunni Triangle which is now going to be, I think, the object and the mission for the coalition forces over the next several months.

BLITZER: You can't with an air -- just with an air attack. You can help -- they can help out with close Apache helicopters or airstrikes, but this requires down and dirty fighting.

JOULWAN: Wolf, a year and a half ago we talked about the importance of after Baghdad and imposing your will on the enemy. We had -- we did not do that, if I could -- from a strategic and military standpoint.

And we're trying -- we are paying the price for not doing that now. We didn't do it then. We've got to do it now if we are going to succeed in Iraq.

BLITZER: And so I assume they're well trained. These Marines were itching to go in and finish off the job months ago in Falluja. Now they may get their chance.

JOULWAN: Remember what happened in Najaf, though. The Marines were geared up, ready to go, then they sent an armored unit smack down in there with tanks and Bradleys. And it subdued the insurgents very quickly.

I think you need to have a combination of air, ground, artillery, all of that together. Marines and Army fighting together, but in a coordinated way, with artillery and air working together. But you need to have the ground force. And hopefully the Iraqis will be up to the task.

BLITZER: And then -- but in Najaf, these were mostly Shiites who were loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr, and they negotiated a deal, they left, they gave up their arms, presumably, and Muqtada al-Sadr is still roaming around. But he didn't want to fight until the bitter end.

In Falluja, we are talking about Sunnis. These are Saddam loyalists, foreign terrorists, as described, maybe a handful of Shia. But this is presumably a different breed.

JOULWAN: But you've got to remember, Saddam Hussein put a very heavy hand in Falluja when he was -- when he was in power. And so I think there's some room here for the interim government in time to be able to also get its influence into that area.

But you have to get rid of the leadership of these insurgents. And al-Zarqawi is one of the often named and other foreign influence in that city.

That has to go. And we started this in April, as you remember, after they -- some atrocities on some Americans. And now here we are six months later trying to get the job done.

BLITZER: You think it's clear that those terrorists loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr are different than the terrorists loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born terrorist leader in Iraq?

JOULWAN: Exactly.

BLITZER: Stand by, General. We're going to take a quick break.

Want to talk about security in the Green Zone. Want to talk about NATO training Iraqi personnel, what's happening in Afghanistan

We have a lot more to talk about with General George Joulwan. We'll take a quick break. More of our conversation when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. We are continuing our conversation with General George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander, retired U.S. Army.

The Green Zone in Baghdad, this is an area where the U.S. ambassador, John Negroponte, has his embassy, the U.S. military is headquartered there, the Iraqi government of Ayad Allawi is headquartered there. It's secure, they've got bunkers, they've got everything. Supposedly the securest area in Iraq.

Yesterday, two suicide bombings, four Americans killed. And a lot of Iraqis are dying, too. What's going on?

JOULWAN: Well, it's very, very difficult to really please everyone coming in. But clearly, one of the issues is the Iraqis that are inside, the government personnel, the security personnel. Are they part of the solution or the problem? And I think that needs to be sorted out.

When we were doing it with contractors or whatever, when we had control, I believe it was much safer. Now we have to look at who is in charge of screening and how trustworthy are they. I hate to be that blunt about it, but that's what -- that, to me, is a key issue.

BLITZER: Do you see NATO as an alliance getting more directly involved in training Iraqi military and police forces? Going in there, doing it, France and Germany, the other NATO allies who have been reluctant partners in this, let NATO rally play the kind of robust role in Iraq that they are playing in Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: I would hope that would come about. I think it takes leadership on our part to -- the issue, Wolf, in my opinion, is how much of a political voice are you going to give the alliance if they do this in Iraq?

I think we have -- we don't have countries now. We have an alliance that we're the leader of. And so how much of a political voice are you going to give the North Atlantic Council? That to me is going to be key.

As you know, in Afghanistan, there is a move now to have NATO take all of that over. They have close to 8,000 to 10,000 troops now. And -- but again, that will come under the political apparatus of the North Atlantic Council.

That is not subjecting ourselves to foreign control. It's an alliance that has served us well for over 45 to 50 years. And I think it's going to be very important that NATO play a role. And also in Iraq. But its' going to start out slow in Iraq with training.

BLITZER: We haven't spent a lot of time looking at it lately. But in Kosovo and Bosnia, NATO plays a significant role. The European Union increasingly stepping up to the plate.

JOULWAN: They're going to take over, the European Union, in Bosnia, as I understand it, this year. Remember now, NATO declared an Article V. For the first time in its history, their highest form of alert.

BLITZER: Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: On the war in terror. Let me be clear.

BLITZER: But that justified them going into Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: Going into Afghanistan.

I think what we need to understand now is that whether it began in Iraq, it now -- the terrorists now see Iraq as battleground. So they're looking at it globally as a battleground.

I think our European allies need to understand that, because they are closer to the terrorists in Iraq and what that can do to their cities than we are here. So I think there's a way to get them on board.

It's going to take some leadership. It's not an old Europe and a new Europe. There's an alliance. And we have to come together as one team with one mission to make this work. I think the alliance is willing to do it, but we have to reach out to them and talk to them as partners.

BLITZER: So what do you think -- whoever is elected president of the United States, what do you think the U.S. has to do to get this alliance really aligned as far as Iraq is concerned?

JOULWAN: I think, first of all, we have to understand and convince them we're in this together, that they did declare an Article V, that -- and we have to give some sort of input into this North Atlantic Council that has 26 nations in it now, that we're the leader of. That takes great leadership and skill. I've been through this several times within the alliance. But the United States not only needs to inform but consult. And that's not turning things over to a foreign government. That is an alliance that we've spent a lot of money on, provided some leadership that's been very successful since the end of World War II.

BLITZER: And one other point you're going to make -- we are out of time, but very briefly, getting the Israeli/Palestinian peace process back on track, in your opinion?

JOULWAN: Absolutely essential to what we're trying to do, and we should take credit for what we have done with Muslim countries in -- from Somalia to Kosovo to Bosnia and elsewhere. We need to get people to understand that. Our European allies understand that, and we need to form this. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. It's unfortunately caught up in this presidential race. This is an American issue.

And our future is at stake here for our children and grandchildren, and we have got to demonstrate that leadership. And I hope that takes place.

BLITZER: Good point. I don't think a lot of Muslims understand that over the past 15 years, every time the U.S. has gone to war, whether in Kuwait, or Somalia, or Kosovo, or Bosnia, or Afghanistan or Iraq, it's to help Muslims.

JOULWAN: We've saved tens of thousands of them. We need to understand that, and so do our Muslim friends. But the alliance, to me, is important here, because of what we have built up over the last 50 or 60 years.

BLITZER: General Joulwan, thanks very much for joining us.

JOULWAN: My pleasure.

BLITZER: The presidential campaign, the themes, issues, the potential pitfalls. We will talk about that and more. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Just two and a half weeks until Election Day, and the candidates are continuing to blaze a hot trail through the battleground states, where this race certainly will be decided. What's their fourth-quarter game plan? Here to talk about that, two guests, Amy Walter, U.S. house editor of the "Cook Political Report," and Stu Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the "Rothenberg Political Report," a CNN political analyst, two of the best we have going for us here in Washington.

Thanks to both of you for joining us.

Listen to these soundbites that we've put together. The uproar, I guess you could call it an uproar, that's followed Senator Kerry's reference to Mary Cheney, Lynne and Dick Cheney's daughter, at the debate the other night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We are all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is lesbian, she would tell you that she is being who she was. She's being who she was born as.

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRES. OF THE UNITED STATES: You saw a man who will say and do anything in order to get elected. And I am not speaking just as a father here, though I am a pretty angry father, but as a citizen.

LYNNE CHENEY, WIFE OF V.P. DICK CHENEY: This is not a good man. And of course I am speaking as a mom, and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick.

ELIZABETH EDWARDS, SEN. JOHN EDWARDS WIFE: It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response. I think it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Amy, I've been getting flooded with e-mail from irate people all over the country on both sides of the debate. Is this a little sideshow, or is this going to continue to plague, presumably, both campaigns?

AMY WALTER, "THE COOK POLITICAL REPORT": Yes, I don't see it existing much longer, and we will see how much longer we can keep it in the press cycle. But ultimately, when you've got two more weeks, little things like this are going to come up and dominate the news cycle for a little while and then go back down. But fundamentally, these two candidates now are going to spend the next 18 days trying to get the focus on the terrain, where they're much stronger. And so right now, this I don't think is helping either candidate, unless they are trying, to help each other with their base somehow.

BLITZER: Stu, what do you make of this? And I'll ask you this within the context of a few weeks before the first debate, the vice president himself when asked about same-sex marriage, a constitutional ban, he made a direct reference to Mary Cheney's daughter, pointing out she's gay.

STU ROTHENBERG, CNN POL. ANALYST: Well, Wolf, I think it's different if the vice president was referring to his daughter, then senator Kerry suggesting that he somehow knew what the vice president's daughter was thinking about something.

So, I actually thought -- look, I was in the media tent when this happened, and there was a lot of, what happened? Why did he do that? This is the second time. I think it's dangerous. I guess I think it's more of a danger for the Democrats than the Republicans, because it makes Senator Kerry look as if he has somehow trying to be unfair, trying to inject something that is none of his business, that it's Cheney family business. And I think, you know, then Elizabeth Edwards response only poured gasoline on the fire, that somehow they're ashamed.

Look, the Kerry/Edwards campaign ought not want to be discussing this. They should focused on Iraq and jobs, and not on these other issues.

BLITZER: The picture we're showing of Vice President Cheney at a town meeting in Kalamazoo, Michigan, another key battleground state, with his wife Lynne. These are live pictures we're showing our viewers.

Let's move on to talk about the three debates, Amy. I take it, at least according to the polls, that Kerry won all three. Has there ever been -- and maybe, Stu, you know the answer to this, too -- has there ever been a case where one presidential candidate has won, quote, "won" all three debates and gone on to lose the election?

ROTHENBERG: I was talking to a Republican strategist about this on the phone this morning, and he posed the question to me, and I think the answer was clearly, no. I mean, going for 0-3 and still winning, it's certainly possible. I think the first debate were a clear Kerry win. The second and third were close, but the polls suggested the Democrat carried the day. So it would be -- it would say something interesting about these debates, wouldn't they, if the president ends up winning.

WALTER: Yes, and I also think I don't know how much more momentum Kerry is going to be able to milk out of these debates. I mean, we certainly saw that the first debate changed the direction where the polls were going, certainly helped put him forward. Can he really keep grabbing on to that with no debates left in this? And as we saw with this Mary Cheney issue, it just takes one issue, or one flap, to move you off on to your heels, and suddenly maybe we are talking about something, that as Stu pointed out, the candidates didn't want to be talking about at all.

BLITZER: And we will be getting our first CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll, a full scientific poll, not the instant poll that we put out after the debate in Tempe, Arizona, Sunday noon Eastern on CNN's "LATE EDITION," a show hosted by me. So we'll have those numbers Sunday at Noon. It will be the first time we really see if -- what happens if there was any movement either way as a result of this third and final presidential debate.

What is the key issue, in your opinion, Stu, that these two candidates have to focus on right now that is best for them in terms of one, energizing their base, and, two, winning over undecided voters?

ROTHENBERG: Both campaigns of course have been talking primarily about the war against terror, the war on Iraq. Are they one thing or two things? You know, we've been talking about this issue extensively now for many, many weeks. You have to wonder whether it's going to move voters.

I really think this election is about, from the Republicans' point of view, leadership strength, consistency, taking the country in the right direction. And from the Democrats' view, change. It's not working, whether it's jobs or foreign policy, we need change.

So I think kind of the broad themes are going to be what the election is about now.

WALTERS: Yes. And I think that the president ended the debate with his two-minute statement saying exactly that, which is, we have been through a lot together, right? That was his statement that I think sort of said it all, which is, you know me. We have been through a lot of stuff together, a lot of bad stuff. You trusted me through it. Why would you want to change over to this guy that you don't really know that well. You don't really like him as much as you like me. Choose me. Make this a referendum on the two candidates, who you like better.

The Kerry campaign is saying, actually, make this a referendum on the last four years, on the economy, on your questions about where this direction of the country is going. But fundamentally I think it's always going to come down to this, we say this, but the ground game and really how sophisticated, how focused both camps are and outside groups...

BLITZER: The ground game meaning getting out the vote.

WALTER: Absolutely.

BLITZER: That's going to be critical in these battleground states. All right, standby, I want to continue this conversation. I also want to look ahead to the races in the House of Representatives, the Senate. Can the Democrats take control of one of those bodies? These people know the answer. Amy and Stu, more of them when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. It's a fierce arm wrestle to win over undecided voters for Bush and Kerry. We are talking about the final sprint to the White House and more with Amy Walter, U.S. House editor of the "Cook Political Report," and Stu Rothenberg, CNN political analyst, he's the editor of the "Rothenberg Political Report."

Enough about presidential politics for a moment. Let's talk about the race in the House of Representatives. The Republicans control it. Is there any chance, Amy, that the Democrats could be the majority in the House after November 2nd?

WALTER: Well, there's a chance for everything, right? But I would say it's a very, very, very long shot. And here's why.

BLITZER: How many races are actually contentious?

WALTER: That's the reason. There are very few. At most, let's say there are 35 or so.

BLITZER: Out of...

WALTER: Out of 435 that are up, right? You look at those races, and it means that Democrats would need to win an overwhelming number of those seats, lose very few of their own even to be able to get close to that.

So you take that, you take there are very few incumbents who are retiring, very few incumbents who look terribly vulnerable. And then the fact that there is this redistricting that happened in Texas. Democrats could lose as many as six seats, they probably end up losing closer to four or five. That makes it tougher.

BLITZER: Do you accept that assessment, Stu, because you study the House of Representatives?

ROTHENBERG: Yes. I agree with Amy. We are putting out another news letter today, I think we are going to have 44 races on it that we are watching, 45, something like that. I agree there are a fewer that are really competitive. When you are a handicapper, Wolf, you try to give yourself a little bit of a cushion. There are a handful of Republican incumbents, particularly in bad Republican districts, good Democratic districts, that could have trouble because of the top of the ticket.

But we don't see a grand partisan throw-out-the-Republican wave that the Democrats hoped would develop in reaction against the president and against his party. We don't see this being a true national party election. Do you see that? You don't see that?

WALTER: Absolutely not.

BLITZER: So in other words, the only way it would change, if there was a massive landslide for Kerry, you'd need a lot of coattails that could bring over Democrats.

ROTHENBERG: Well, what would have to happen, Wolf, is that in the final few days the voters would have to say, the Republicans control the White House, the House and the Senate, and we don't like the direction of the country. The country is going in the wrong track. We need to sweep out -- it's not just President Bush, it's the Republicans in Congress. And that is a -- it's not an unreasonable scenario, it just is not happening.

WALTER: Well, and it has to be organic, because it's not a message that necessarily is being put out there.

BLITZER: All right. So let's assume the House stays Republican, what about the Senate?

ROTHENBERG: Well, the Senate is more in play, I think. It's not easy for the Democrats. It's easier for the Republicans to get to 51, but there are enough seats, there are certainly three, maybe even a fourth Republican Senate seat that is coming into play: Alaska, Colorado, and Oklahoma. There is some movement in Kentucky where the Republican incumbent, Jim Bunning, is having some problems, self- inflicted often.

So the Democrats could get to 50 or 51. They only need 50 if John Kerry wins the White House. But I think it's easier for the Republicans.

BLITZER: Let's switch gears briefly. Ralph Nader, how much of a concern is he going to be to John Kerry this time around?

WALTER: Well, when you look at the fact that he is on the ballot in most of these battleground states, and we're talking about races that could be determined by a couple of thousand votes, even if Nader doesn't do as well as he did last time, which he's not expected to do, but 200 votes here, a thousand vote there could make a difference.

What I do wonder, though,even in some of these other states is, we are looking at the 2000 turnout numbers. We know that turnout is going to be so much greater this year. What the number ends up being, we don't know. But both sides are working to turn out so many more voters that Nader, in that sense, if he takes fewer votes and there is a bigger universe, he maybe does not become as big of a factor as he was in 2000.

ROTHENBERG: We have a little difference. He's irrelevant. I think he's irrelevant because there are...

BLITZER: That's not such a little difference.

ROTHENBERG: There are going to be Nader voters, but to people who vote for Nader are true Nader voters, even if he wasn't on the ballot, I don't believe they would vote for John Kerry. They have the opportunity. They know that what Nader did in 2000, I think people who really are willing to switch Democratic won't allow that to happen in 2004.

BLITZER: We leave it there. Stu Rothenberg, thanks very, Amy Walters, thanks to you as well. Both of you can go out and enjoy your lunch now.

And if the election is as close as a lot of pundits predict, maybe Ralph Nader, despite what Stu Rothenberg said, could play a decisive role. In fact I'll ask him what his role will be. He'll join me Sunday on "LATE EDITION," that's at noon Eastern right here on CNN "LATE EDITION," the last word in Sunday talk.

An inexpensive and sometimes illegal work force, immigrants are finding themselves under fire.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I see what's happening here in our county, reminds me of what they called the barrios, the poor neighborhoods in Southern California.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Another example of an "Immigrant Nation: Divided Country." Details coming up right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: On Monday this week, a Chicago-area woman gave birth to quintuplets as her Marine husband lay in a hospital bed, recovering from war wounds suffered in Iraq. This morning, Taunacy Horton spoke briefly with reporters.

Let's take a quick listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TAUNACY HORTON, MOTHER OF QUINTUPLETS: Josh is still really hurt, but we are hopeful for his recovery and know that he has the best care possible.

And even though circumstances didn't allow josh to be there at the delivery, my hope is that Josh can be there when we first get to hold these babies. I can't wait until we can be reunited and do this together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Mrs. Horton went on to say she's OK, her husband's OK and the couple's five babies are all OK. The children, by the way, were born prematurely. All weighed less than two pounds.

Sergeant Joshua Horton, who's now in a Maryland military hospital, was wounded just days before the births.

At issue, illegal immigration. Is it spiraling out of control and destroying the fabric of American society? Or is it helping keep the American Dream alive?

CNN PRESENTS explores that very issue this Sunday night.

CNN's Maria Hinojosa with a preview of two families on the front lines of the growing debate.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (singing): And I'm proud to be an American... MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): July 4 in northern Georgia in the cradle of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (singing): Who gave that right to me.

HINOJOSA: The people of Clayton, Georgia, are taking in the good life and feeling patriotic. But the ones who make this party possible are people like Gabe (ph)...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Another plate? OK.

HINOJOSA: ... who asked us not to use his last name.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's hard work today. There's no Independence Day for us, just for the American people.

HINOJOSA: Gabe got here four years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Only I know Georgia for Atlanta the Olympics Games. Maybe this city is more rich. People is rich.

HINOJOSA: Gabe, his wife and son came here with a legal visa to visit Disneyland. They just never left. They were just getting by in Mexico, but they risked losing everything for a chance at something better.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): In Mexico, we had less time to be together as a family. Here, we have more time to share together. Our economic situation is much better.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lots of people have balloons today.

HINOJOSA: Just one hour south in Gwinnett County, Georgia, Jimmy Hercheck (ph), another proud Southerner, is also feeling patriotic, passing down his traditions to his daughters, Alice and Beatrice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Throw her out some food, Beatrice.

HINOJOSA: Some Latinos watch the celebrations from a distance. Jimmy Hercheck thinks they're still too close.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I see what's happening here in our county reminds me of what they call the barrios, you know, the poor neighborhoods in Southern California.

HINOJOSA (on camera): What's happening now?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Somebody is coming to pick up workers.

HINOJOSA (voice over): Hercheck is living in a Georgia transformed. Some 100,000 Latinos have settled in his county, more than in any other county in Georgia.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Several dozen men out here looking for jobs, and there's just two or three jobs that they can get at one time. HINOJOSA: About half of those Latinos are illegal. Hercheck says they're destroying his neighborhood. A year ago, he sold his house and moved.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It brings back a lot of memories. It was pretty much your middle-class family neighborhood. And now you look around, it's maybe half small families and the other half have become pretty much boarding houses. I'm afraid that America could become a third-world country. We're importing poverty by millions every year.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Don't miss this special report, "IMMIGRANT NATION, DIVIDED COUNTRY," and Maria Hinojosa reporting. It airs Sunday night, here on CNN, 8:00 p.m. Eastern, 5:00 Pacific, "IMMIGRANT NATION, DIVIDED COUNTRY."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: I'll be back later today, every weekday, 5:00 p.m. Eastern, for WOLF BLITZER REPORTS. Caught off guard by the flu vaccine, how would America fare if it were something much more serious, like a bioterrorism attack. We'll take a closer look at just how well prepared we are.

Until then, thanks for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer.

LIVE FROM, with Kyra Phillips and Drew Griffin, starts right now.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired October 15, 2004 - 11:59   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: We have a busy hour of news here in Washington, around the nation, and around the world. We'll get to all of that. First, though, some headlines "Now in the News."
A warning on antidepressants and possible adolescent suicides. An order issued today requires all antidepressant drugs to carry the government's strongest safety label. It will warn consumers of the increased risk between drugs and suicidal thoughts among children and teens.

Incentives to Iran to give up enriching uranium. At the State Department today, the Bush administration hosting a meeting of allies to seek new ways to curb uranium nuclear plans. Officials say if a package emerges it could also contain new penalties for noncooperation.

A Louisiana jury recommends death for Derek Todd Lee for one of the seven murders he is accused of committing. On Tuesday, Lee was convicted of a second murder related to a crime spree that terrorized women in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, from 1998 to 2003.

Up first, Iraq and the start of the Muslim holy month. On the first day of Ramadan, United States forces are leading renewed attacks on the militant stronghold of Falluja. At the same time, a car bomb has killed 10 people in Baghdad, which continues to reel from yesterday's bombings in the heavily-guarded Green Zone, purportedly carried out by Falluja-based terrorists.

CNN's Brent Sadler is in the Iraqi capital. He's joining us now live with more details -- Brent.

BRENT SADLER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Thanks, Wolf.

We are seeing a strong U.S.-led military push to squeeze the insurgents inside Falluja, that key stronghold of theirs west of the capital. Now, an offensive began during the hours of darkness. U.S. warplanes and artillery pounding suspected insurgent positions in Falluja.

Now, this is not, we're told by the U.S. military, the start of a wide-scale -- much anticipated wide-scale offensive involving ground and air efforts against Falluja. More, it is the shape of things to come if the insurgents, nationalistic insurgents, do not break away from the terror foreign fighters there led principally by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Now, insurgent leaders were having negotiations with the Iraqi government for many weeks. Those negotiations failed. This offensive got under way. And there are unconfirmed reports, Wolf, from Falluja, according to the police there, that one of those negotiators has been picked up by U.S. authorities. Not confirmed by the U.S. military, though.

Now, this attack comes after repeated threats, ultimatums from the interim government here that unless al-Zarqawi's terrorist allies broke away from the insurgents, and that that city began to disarm and began to pacify itself, then serious military consequences would follow. And what we've seen, combined operation, two U.S. infantry battalions, one from the Marines, one from the Army, combing with Iraqi special forces, backed up by American warplanes and helicopter gun ships, taking the fighting to the heart of that stronghold.

U.S. troops now around the stronghold of Falluja. Not entering the city as such, but is certainly squeezing the militants who are inside there.

Wolf, just one footnote we're hearing from the U.S. military here that relates to the bombing inside the Green Zone, that double bombing some 24 hours ago. It's now confirmed, according to the U.S. military, that two suicide bombers were responsible for those blasts now confirmed to have killed four Americans and injured at least 20 other people -- Wolf.

BLITZER: So what does that say about the Green Zone? This is supposed to be the most secure part of the Iraqi capital, yet there were these attacks yesterday that you just described. What does it say about security any place in Baghdad?

SADLER: Well, absolutely, it certainly damages the fortress-like reputation of the huge Green Zone area. This zone has been subjected to repeated rocket and mortar attacks for many months. Devices -- explosive devices have been discovered there in the past couple of weeks. One was wrapped up inside a sandbag. Incidentally, very close to one of the blast sites just 24 hours ago.

But certainly this does shake the myth, if you like, that the Green Zone, all its security, all its searches, really has been exposed by the fact that two suicide bombers were somehow able to get explosives in there, operate in there, and detonate themselves. It begs the question: are there now Iraqis sympathetic to those who would carry out these attacks inside the Green Zone? Remember, about 10,000 Iraqis live in there. Or, are Iraqis in there being coerced through violence to support this sort of terrorism -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Brent Sadler reporting for us from Baghdad. Brent, thank you very much.

What happens next in the fight for Falluja? And what about security in the Green Zone? We'll discuss that and more with General George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander. He will join me here live. That's coming up in a short while. But first now, turning to the race for the White House. President Bush and John Kerry fighting a turf war in the battleground state of Wisconsin today. That state has 10 electoral votes and narrowly supported Al Gore in 2000.

Kerry is gearing up for a rally in Milwaukee this hour. Our Ed Henry is covering that part of the story. He's joining us now live -- Ed.

ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon, Wolf.

That's right, John Kerry is coming to the Milwaukee area technical college. He wants to hit the jobs issue. And these final 18 days of the campaign, he really wants to zero in on domestic matters, and he's doing it in a dwindling number of battleground states.

Today Wisconsin, 10 electoral votes, a state that John Kerry desperately wants to keep in the Democratic column. Tonight he'll be heading to Ohio, a major prize that he is trying to wrest away from President Bush.

Last night, Kerry had a big rally in Iowa. That's another state Al Gore won in 2000 that Kerry wants to make sure that he keeps that.

Earlier yesterday, Kerry was in Nevada, another battleground that was in the president's column last time. Like Ohio, he's trying to wrest it away.

Also, this is coming at a time when the Kerry aides say their candidate is very strong. They feel like he comes out of these three debates with a head (ph) of steam. They're saying that he looked very presidential, that he feels very confident, and we definitely saw him yesterday with a much feistier stump speech, really laying into President Bush on the domestic front. Very much on the attack, not so much defensive on these domestic issues.

But John Kerry was on the defensive over an issue that came up in that third debate, something that he raised. In fact, John Kerry invoking the name of Mary Cheney, daughter of Vice President Cheney, mentioning the fact that she's a lesbian in the context of the gay marriage debate.

We heard Lynne Cheney lash out at John Kerry, say that he's not a good man. Vice President Cheney said that he was an angry father over what was raised.

Initially, John Kerry did not want to comment on that. He, in fact, finally did after the vice president weighed in, said that he only meant good things there. He was trying to praise Vice President Cheney's family for dealing with the difficult matter.

Republicans privately feel that perhaps the Kerry-Edwards ticket, since John Edwards raised this issue as well in the vice presidential debate, is trying to split the conservative vote, send a little signal to conservatives and say, you know, maybe this White House is not so much behind you on gay marriage. Republicans very angry about that.

But the Kerry camp insists they had no ulterior motive. In fact, that John Kerry was trying to praise Vice President Cheney and his family -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Ed Henry reporting for us. Thanks, Ed, very much.

Our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley, will interview John Kerry later today. Hear what he has to say tonight on CNN's "PAULA ZAHN NOW." That airs 8:00 p.m. Eastern only here on CNN.

President Bush will also be in Wisconsin later today. But first, he is campaigning in Iowa, a battleground state with seven electoral votes. Gore also took Iowa in a very close contest in 2000.

Our Elaine Quijano is tracking the president's busy day. She's joining us now live from the White House -- Elaine.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon to you, Wolf.

With 18 days left to go, the sprint to the finish for the Bush campaign will include plenty of visits to Midwest battleground states. And as you said, at the top of the president's list and on his schedule today are Iowa and Wisconsin.

Now, yesterday, the president focused his efforts out West, making campaign stops in Nevada and also in Oregon. But today, turning the focus to the Midwest. Two states that the campaign has heavily targeted, Iowa and Wisconsin, places where aides point to tens of thousands of volunteers registered to date.

Now, combined, those states carry a total of 17 electoral votes. And even though Mr. Bush did lose both states in 2000, he did so by less than one percentage point in each state.

Now, this time around, even though polls are showing the race is extremely tight in both places, the campaign feels that those states are places where the president can pull ahead. They feel that's especially true in Wisconsin, where Bush aides say that John Kerry has been forced to defend that area, traditionally a Democratic-leaning state.

Now, the president this afternoon first heads to a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He then moves on to Oshkosh, Wisconsin, for another campaign event there. And look for the president to continue with his post-debate attacks on Senator John Kerry, trying to portray him as a tax-and-spend liberal who favors big government.

But Bush aides are conceding that the president did have more momentum, they feel, going into the debates than he has now coming out of them. And they say they feel that his performances on the campaign trail will be more crucial now than ever -- Wolf.

BLITZER: He's an excellent campaign stump speech deliverer. So we'll see how he does. Elaine Quijano for us. Thanks very much. A new poll released just a short while ago appears to show U.S. troops and their families solid by backing the commander in chief this election year. Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, is joining us now live to crunch some of these numbers for us.

First of all, this is the Annenberg Poll. Tell us a little bit about this poll.

WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, it was a poll taken recently of U.S. service members, active and Reserve and Guard service members and their families, taken the end of September and early October.

BLITZER: So it was before the most recent debate. The last debate.

SCHNEIDER: Yes.

BLITZER: Let's go through some numbers, because they do confirm overwhelmingly that military troops and their families lean Republican, lean for Bush. Let's go through Bush's job approval numbers for -- we'll put it up on the screen -- 67 job approval, 29 disapproval. That's a huge number.

SCHNEIDER: That is. Among the general public, polled at the same time in a separate survey by Annenberg, the result was 49 percent approving President Bush, 49 percent disapproving. So it's pretty clear that service members and their families are more approving of Mr. Bush.

But keep this in mind, the sample of service members and their families was 43 percent Republican. Only 19 Democrats. Among the general public, it was 30 percent Republican, 33 percent Democrat.

The people who go into the service and the people they marry and are in their families tend to be self-selected. They tend to be Republican to begin with.

BLITZER: So that's why these numbers are so good for the president.

Here's another good number for the president. U.S. going in the right direction? Among military personnel and their families, 64 percent say it's going in the right direction, 31 percent wrong direction. If those numbers were for the public at large, this would not even be a contest.

SCHNEIDER: That's right, but they're not. Among the public at large, only 37 percent say the country is moving in the right direction. A majority, 55 percent, say it's not, which is why the election is so close.

BLITZER: Was it worth going to war in Iraq? Among military personnel and their families, 64 percent say yes, 32 percent say no. That's a lot higher than the public at large. SCHNEIDER: That's right. The public at large, just 45 percent say it was worth going to war, 51 percent, a slight majority, say it was not.

Here's something interesting. The people in service themselves, whether active or Guard or Reserves, 69 percent say Iraq was worth going to war over. Its their mission.

Their families a bit lower. Fifty-seven percent say it was worth going to war. The members and their families who have actually served in Iraq or the Iraq theater, 55 percent.

So it's a bit lower among those who have actually served. Though even among them, it's higher than in the general public.

BLITZER: But this is surprising, this next one, and we'll put it up on the screen. Iraq war, did it reduce or increase the risk of terrorism against the United States? They're pretty evenly split.

Forty-seven percent say it reduced the risk. Forty-two percent say it increased the risk. Nine percent said it didn't make a difference.

SCHNEIDER: That's right. That is surprising, because they are divided. They won't say it has reduced the risk of terrorism. They're not sure.

The public, however, a majority, say it has increased the risk of terrorism, 53 percent. Only a third of the public say it has reduced the risk. So while they have more confidence in the policy than the general public, the military and their families are not sure.

BLITZER: When these military personnel and families were asked this question, "Who has a clear plan for the successful conclusion of the situation in Iraq," among those who responded in this Annenberg survey, Bush 47 percent, Kerry, 18 percent. There's not a whole lot of confidence in there for John Kerry when it comes to Iraq.

SCHNEIDER: There is not. But again, the numbers for Bush are not all that strong.

They're not sure Bush has a clear plan for Iraq. They are divided over whether Bush has a clear plan for Iraq.

What does the general public say? Most Americans say they don't think Kerry has a clear plan. And most Americans say they don't think Bush has a clear plan.

BLITZER: I think it's obvious, based on these numbers and this survey, that if there's a close race in a state -- let's say Florida or Ohio -- and it comes down to absentee ballots and military personnel who are voting absentee or voting, and they have to count those numbers, then it's going to be good for Bush, not good for Kerry.

SCHNEIDER: That's right. That's right, it would be good for Bush to have the military -- more military cast ballots and those ballots were counted. And they have to be cast according to law.

These numbers are not surprising, Wolf. Number one, psychologists will tell you when you give people a mission they become committed to what they are doing. Also, of course, these are military people. Bush is their commander in chief.

They're voting for their commander in chief. That really isn't a surprise. And many of them were Republicans to begin with.

BLITZER: Bill Schneider, thanks very much.

SCHNEIDER: Sure.

BLITZER: What's the plan of attack in Iraq? Can multinational forces retake control of insurgent areas? The retired U.S. Army four- star general, George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander, will join me live to discuss military strategy.

And a bit later, the road to the White House. How will the Bush and Kerry campaigns maneuver through the final days leading up to the vote? All that coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Over the last week or so, United States forces in Iraq have launched new operations on major insurgent strongholds. First in Ramadi, now in Falluja. The same time yesterday, specifically, the insurgents managed to carry out a deeply troubling attack in the nerve center of Baghdad, supposedly the most secure area, the Green Zone.

Joining us now to offer his assessment of the situation, retired U.S. Army General George Joulwan. He's the former supreme allied commander of NATO.

General, thanks very much for joining us.

GEN. GEORGE JOULWAN, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Good to be here, Wolf.

BLITZER: Well, first of all, they say it's preparing the battlefield, what's happening yesterday and today in Falluja, it's not necessarily the all-out offensive that perhaps will be coming down the road. When they say they are preparing the battlefield, what do they mean?

JOULWAN: Well, what they are trying to do is to understand certain things that are coming up. We've got the election coming up. You have Ramadan that's...

BLITZER: The Iraqi election, you mean?

JOULWAN: Iraqi election.

BLITZER: The end of January?

JOULWAN: Right. You have -- now it appears that from Falluja in particular is the command and control for attacks that are taking place, particularly in the Sunni Triangle in Baghdad.

So for all of that, what they are trying to do is to reassert the initiative on the part of the coalition. In many respects, in my opinion, the initiative has gone over to the insurgents. And you have to get that back if you're going to have some sort of Iraqi election in January.

A secure environment is essential. And so part of this strategy -- and this is the first stage of it -- Falluja is part of seizing control, establishing control of government control.

Now, the challenge is going to be are the Iraqi military security police up to the task? That is going to be a question. And it may come into play in what occurred just recently in the Green Zone.

BLITZER: Well, we're going to get to the Green Zone in a second, because we saw Samarra, they are going in there, they're trying to deal with insurgents, Ramadi, Falluja. Sadr City, the slum area, a million people-plus living there, many of them loyal to these insurgents, Muqtada al-Sadr, specifically. This is urban conflict, urban warfare, Marines, Rangers, or soldiers. This is a dangerous, dangerous stuff.

JOULWAN: Very, very difficult and very dangerous. And we're using armored vehicles that have saved hundreds of lives, because we used them because of the improvised explosive devices, the mortars, rocket-propelled grenades. All of those things are taking place in this so-called Sunni Triangle which is now going to be, I think, the object and the mission for the coalition forces over the next several months.

BLITZER: You can't with an air -- just with an air attack. You can help -- they can help out with close Apache helicopters or airstrikes, but this requires down and dirty fighting.

JOULWAN: Wolf, a year and a half ago we talked about the importance of after Baghdad and imposing your will on the enemy. We had -- we did not do that, if I could -- from a strategic and military standpoint.

And we're trying -- we are paying the price for not doing that now. We didn't do it then. We've got to do it now if we are going to succeed in Iraq.

BLITZER: And so I assume they're well trained. These Marines were itching to go in and finish off the job months ago in Falluja. Now they may get their chance.

JOULWAN: Remember what happened in Najaf, though. The Marines were geared up, ready to go, then they sent an armored unit smack down in there with tanks and Bradleys. And it subdued the insurgents very quickly.

I think you need to have a combination of air, ground, artillery, all of that together. Marines and Army fighting together, but in a coordinated way, with artillery and air working together. But you need to have the ground force. And hopefully the Iraqis will be up to the task.

BLITZER: And then -- but in Najaf, these were mostly Shiites who were loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr, and they negotiated a deal, they left, they gave up their arms, presumably, and Muqtada al-Sadr is still roaming around. But he didn't want to fight until the bitter end.

In Falluja, we are talking about Sunnis. These are Saddam loyalists, foreign terrorists, as described, maybe a handful of Shia. But this is presumably a different breed.

JOULWAN: But you've got to remember, Saddam Hussein put a very heavy hand in Falluja when he was -- when he was in power. And so I think there's some room here for the interim government in time to be able to also get its influence into that area.

But you have to get rid of the leadership of these insurgents. And al-Zarqawi is one of the often named and other foreign influence in that city.

That has to go. And we started this in April, as you remember, after they -- some atrocities on some Americans. And now here we are six months later trying to get the job done.

BLITZER: You think it's clear that those terrorists loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr are different than the terrorists loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born terrorist leader in Iraq?

JOULWAN: Exactly.

BLITZER: Stand by, General. We're going to take a quick break.

Want to talk about security in the Green Zone. Want to talk about NATO training Iraqi personnel, what's happening in Afghanistan

We have a lot more to talk about with General George Joulwan. We'll take a quick break. More of our conversation when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. We are continuing our conversation with General George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander, retired U.S. Army.

The Green Zone in Baghdad, this is an area where the U.S. ambassador, John Negroponte, has his embassy, the U.S. military is headquartered there, the Iraqi government of Ayad Allawi is headquartered there. It's secure, they've got bunkers, they've got everything. Supposedly the securest area in Iraq.

Yesterday, two suicide bombings, four Americans killed. And a lot of Iraqis are dying, too. What's going on?

JOULWAN: Well, it's very, very difficult to really please everyone coming in. But clearly, one of the issues is the Iraqis that are inside, the government personnel, the security personnel. Are they part of the solution or the problem? And I think that needs to be sorted out.

When we were doing it with contractors or whatever, when we had control, I believe it was much safer. Now we have to look at who is in charge of screening and how trustworthy are they. I hate to be that blunt about it, but that's what -- that, to me, is a key issue.

BLITZER: Do you see NATO as an alliance getting more directly involved in training Iraqi military and police forces? Going in there, doing it, France and Germany, the other NATO allies who have been reluctant partners in this, let NATO rally play the kind of robust role in Iraq that they are playing in Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: I would hope that would come about. I think it takes leadership on our part to -- the issue, Wolf, in my opinion, is how much of a political voice are you going to give the alliance if they do this in Iraq?

I think we have -- we don't have countries now. We have an alliance that we're the leader of. And so how much of a political voice are you going to give the North Atlantic Council? That to me is going to be key.

As you know, in Afghanistan, there is a move now to have NATO take all of that over. They have close to 8,000 to 10,000 troops now. And -- but again, that will come under the political apparatus of the North Atlantic Council.

That is not subjecting ourselves to foreign control. It's an alliance that has served us well for over 45 to 50 years. And I think it's going to be very important that NATO play a role. And also in Iraq. But its' going to start out slow in Iraq with training.

BLITZER: We haven't spent a lot of time looking at it lately. But in Kosovo and Bosnia, NATO plays a significant role. The European Union increasingly stepping up to the plate.

JOULWAN: They're going to take over, the European Union, in Bosnia, as I understand it, this year. Remember now, NATO declared an Article V. For the first time in its history, their highest form of alert.

BLITZER: Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: On the war in terror. Let me be clear.

BLITZER: But that justified them going into Afghanistan?

JOULWAN: Going into Afghanistan.

I think what we need to understand now is that whether it began in Iraq, it now -- the terrorists now see Iraq as battleground. So they're looking at it globally as a battleground.

I think our European allies need to understand that, because they are closer to the terrorists in Iraq and what that can do to their cities than we are here. So I think there's a way to get them on board.

It's going to take some leadership. It's not an old Europe and a new Europe. There's an alliance. And we have to come together as one team with one mission to make this work. I think the alliance is willing to do it, but we have to reach out to them and talk to them as partners.

BLITZER: So what do you think -- whoever is elected president of the United States, what do you think the U.S. has to do to get this alliance really aligned as far as Iraq is concerned?

JOULWAN: I think, first of all, we have to understand and convince them we're in this together, that they did declare an Article V, that -- and we have to give some sort of input into this North Atlantic Council that has 26 nations in it now, that we're the leader of. That takes great leadership and skill. I've been through this several times within the alliance. But the United States not only needs to inform but consult. And that's not turning things over to a foreign government. That is an alliance that we've spent a lot of money on, provided some leadership that's been very successful since the end of World War II.

BLITZER: And one other point you're going to make -- we are out of time, but very briefly, getting the Israeli/Palestinian peace process back on track, in your opinion?

JOULWAN: Absolutely essential to what we're trying to do, and we should take credit for what we have done with Muslim countries in -- from Somalia to Kosovo to Bosnia and elsewhere. We need to get people to understand that. Our European allies understand that, and we need to form this. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. It's unfortunately caught up in this presidential race. This is an American issue.

And our future is at stake here for our children and grandchildren, and we have got to demonstrate that leadership. And I hope that takes place.

BLITZER: Good point. I don't think a lot of Muslims understand that over the past 15 years, every time the U.S. has gone to war, whether in Kuwait, or Somalia, or Kosovo, or Bosnia, or Afghanistan or Iraq, it's to help Muslims.

JOULWAN: We've saved tens of thousands of them. We need to understand that, and so do our Muslim friends. But the alliance, to me, is important here, because of what we have built up over the last 50 or 60 years.

BLITZER: General Joulwan, thanks very much for joining us.

JOULWAN: My pleasure.

BLITZER: The presidential campaign, the themes, issues, the potential pitfalls. We will talk about that and more. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Just two and a half weeks until Election Day, and the candidates are continuing to blaze a hot trail through the battleground states, where this race certainly will be decided. What's their fourth-quarter game plan? Here to talk about that, two guests, Amy Walter, U.S. house editor of the "Cook Political Report," and Stu Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the "Rothenberg Political Report," a CNN political analyst, two of the best we have going for us here in Washington.

Thanks to both of you for joining us.

Listen to these soundbites that we've put together. The uproar, I guess you could call it an uproar, that's followed Senator Kerry's reference to Mary Cheney, Lynne and Dick Cheney's daughter, at the debate the other night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We are all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is lesbian, she would tell you that she is being who she was. She's being who she was born as.

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRES. OF THE UNITED STATES: You saw a man who will say and do anything in order to get elected. And I am not speaking just as a father here, though I am a pretty angry father, but as a citizen.

LYNNE CHENEY, WIFE OF V.P. DICK CHENEY: This is not a good man. And of course I am speaking as a mom, and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick.

ELIZABETH EDWARDS, SEN. JOHN EDWARDS WIFE: It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response. I think it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Amy, I've been getting flooded with e-mail from irate people all over the country on both sides of the debate. Is this a little sideshow, or is this going to continue to plague, presumably, both campaigns?

AMY WALTER, "THE COOK POLITICAL REPORT": Yes, I don't see it existing much longer, and we will see how much longer we can keep it in the press cycle. But ultimately, when you've got two more weeks, little things like this are going to come up and dominate the news cycle for a little while and then go back down. But fundamentally, these two candidates now are going to spend the next 18 days trying to get the focus on the terrain, where they're much stronger. And so right now, this I don't think is helping either candidate, unless they are trying, to help each other with their base somehow.

BLITZER: Stu, what do you make of this? And I'll ask you this within the context of a few weeks before the first debate, the vice president himself when asked about same-sex marriage, a constitutional ban, he made a direct reference to Mary Cheney's daughter, pointing out she's gay.

STU ROTHENBERG, CNN POL. ANALYST: Well, Wolf, I think it's different if the vice president was referring to his daughter, then senator Kerry suggesting that he somehow knew what the vice president's daughter was thinking about something.

So, I actually thought -- look, I was in the media tent when this happened, and there was a lot of, what happened? Why did he do that? This is the second time. I think it's dangerous. I guess I think it's more of a danger for the Democrats than the Republicans, because it makes Senator Kerry look as if he has somehow trying to be unfair, trying to inject something that is none of his business, that it's Cheney family business. And I think, you know, then Elizabeth Edwards response only poured gasoline on the fire, that somehow they're ashamed.

Look, the Kerry/Edwards campaign ought not want to be discussing this. They should focused on Iraq and jobs, and not on these other issues.

BLITZER: The picture we're showing of Vice President Cheney at a town meeting in Kalamazoo, Michigan, another key battleground state, with his wife Lynne. These are live pictures we're showing our viewers.

Let's move on to talk about the three debates, Amy. I take it, at least according to the polls, that Kerry won all three. Has there ever been -- and maybe, Stu, you know the answer to this, too -- has there ever been a case where one presidential candidate has won, quote, "won" all three debates and gone on to lose the election?

ROTHENBERG: I was talking to a Republican strategist about this on the phone this morning, and he posed the question to me, and I think the answer was clearly, no. I mean, going for 0-3 and still winning, it's certainly possible. I think the first debate were a clear Kerry win. The second and third were close, but the polls suggested the Democrat carried the day. So it would be -- it would say something interesting about these debates, wouldn't they, if the president ends up winning.

WALTER: Yes, and I also think I don't know how much more momentum Kerry is going to be able to milk out of these debates. I mean, we certainly saw that the first debate changed the direction where the polls were going, certainly helped put him forward. Can he really keep grabbing on to that with no debates left in this? And as we saw with this Mary Cheney issue, it just takes one issue, or one flap, to move you off on to your heels, and suddenly maybe we are talking about something, that as Stu pointed out, the candidates didn't want to be talking about at all.

BLITZER: And we will be getting our first CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll, a full scientific poll, not the instant poll that we put out after the debate in Tempe, Arizona, Sunday noon Eastern on CNN's "LATE EDITION," a show hosted by me. So we'll have those numbers Sunday at Noon. It will be the first time we really see if -- what happens if there was any movement either way as a result of this third and final presidential debate.

What is the key issue, in your opinion, Stu, that these two candidates have to focus on right now that is best for them in terms of one, energizing their base, and, two, winning over undecided voters?

ROTHENBERG: Both campaigns of course have been talking primarily about the war against terror, the war on Iraq. Are they one thing or two things? You know, we've been talking about this issue extensively now for many, many weeks. You have to wonder whether it's going to move voters.

I really think this election is about, from the Republicans' point of view, leadership strength, consistency, taking the country in the right direction. And from the Democrats' view, change. It's not working, whether it's jobs or foreign policy, we need change.

So I think kind of the broad themes are going to be what the election is about now.

WALTERS: Yes. And I think that the president ended the debate with his two-minute statement saying exactly that, which is, we have been through a lot together, right? That was his statement that I think sort of said it all, which is, you know me. We have been through a lot of stuff together, a lot of bad stuff. You trusted me through it. Why would you want to change over to this guy that you don't really know that well. You don't really like him as much as you like me. Choose me. Make this a referendum on the two candidates, who you like better.

The Kerry campaign is saying, actually, make this a referendum on the last four years, on the economy, on your questions about where this direction of the country is going. But fundamentally I think it's always going to come down to this, we say this, but the ground game and really how sophisticated, how focused both camps are and outside groups...

BLITZER: The ground game meaning getting out the vote.

WALTER: Absolutely.

BLITZER: That's going to be critical in these battleground states. All right, standby, I want to continue this conversation. I also want to look ahead to the races in the House of Representatives, the Senate. Can the Democrats take control of one of those bodies? These people know the answer. Amy and Stu, more of them when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. It's a fierce arm wrestle to win over undecided voters for Bush and Kerry. We are talking about the final sprint to the White House and more with Amy Walter, U.S. House editor of the "Cook Political Report," and Stu Rothenberg, CNN political analyst, he's the editor of the "Rothenberg Political Report."

Enough about presidential politics for a moment. Let's talk about the race in the House of Representatives. The Republicans control it. Is there any chance, Amy, that the Democrats could be the majority in the House after November 2nd?

WALTER: Well, there's a chance for everything, right? But I would say it's a very, very, very long shot. And here's why.

BLITZER: How many races are actually contentious?

WALTER: That's the reason. There are very few. At most, let's say there are 35 or so.

BLITZER: Out of...

WALTER: Out of 435 that are up, right? You look at those races, and it means that Democrats would need to win an overwhelming number of those seats, lose very few of their own even to be able to get close to that.

So you take that, you take there are very few incumbents who are retiring, very few incumbents who look terribly vulnerable. And then the fact that there is this redistricting that happened in Texas. Democrats could lose as many as six seats, they probably end up losing closer to four or five. That makes it tougher.

BLITZER: Do you accept that assessment, Stu, because you study the House of Representatives?

ROTHENBERG: Yes. I agree with Amy. We are putting out another news letter today, I think we are going to have 44 races on it that we are watching, 45, something like that. I agree there are a fewer that are really competitive. When you are a handicapper, Wolf, you try to give yourself a little bit of a cushion. There are a handful of Republican incumbents, particularly in bad Republican districts, good Democratic districts, that could have trouble because of the top of the ticket.

But we don't see a grand partisan throw-out-the-Republican wave that the Democrats hoped would develop in reaction against the president and against his party. We don't see this being a true national party election. Do you see that? You don't see that?

WALTER: Absolutely not.

BLITZER: So in other words, the only way it would change, if there was a massive landslide for Kerry, you'd need a lot of coattails that could bring over Democrats.

ROTHENBERG: Well, what would have to happen, Wolf, is that in the final few days the voters would have to say, the Republicans control the White House, the House and the Senate, and we don't like the direction of the country. The country is going in the wrong track. We need to sweep out -- it's not just President Bush, it's the Republicans in Congress. And that is a -- it's not an unreasonable scenario, it just is not happening.

WALTER: Well, and it has to be organic, because it's not a message that necessarily is being put out there.

BLITZER: All right. So let's assume the House stays Republican, what about the Senate?

ROTHENBERG: Well, the Senate is more in play, I think. It's not easy for the Democrats. It's easier for the Republicans to get to 51, but there are enough seats, there are certainly three, maybe even a fourth Republican Senate seat that is coming into play: Alaska, Colorado, and Oklahoma. There is some movement in Kentucky where the Republican incumbent, Jim Bunning, is having some problems, self- inflicted often.

So the Democrats could get to 50 or 51. They only need 50 if John Kerry wins the White House. But I think it's easier for the Republicans.

BLITZER: Let's switch gears briefly. Ralph Nader, how much of a concern is he going to be to John Kerry this time around?

WALTER: Well, when you look at the fact that he is on the ballot in most of these battleground states, and we're talking about races that could be determined by a couple of thousand votes, even if Nader doesn't do as well as he did last time, which he's not expected to do, but 200 votes here, a thousand vote there could make a difference.

What I do wonder, though,even in some of these other states is, we are looking at the 2000 turnout numbers. We know that turnout is going to be so much greater this year. What the number ends up being, we don't know. But both sides are working to turn out so many more voters that Nader, in that sense, if he takes fewer votes and there is a bigger universe, he maybe does not become as big of a factor as he was in 2000.

ROTHENBERG: We have a little difference. He's irrelevant. I think he's irrelevant because there are...

BLITZER: That's not such a little difference.

ROTHENBERG: There are going to be Nader voters, but to people who vote for Nader are true Nader voters, even if he wasn't on the ballot, I don't believe they would vote for John Kerry. They have the opportunity. They know that what Nader did in 2000, I think people who really are willing to switch Democratic won't allow that to happen in 2004.

BLITZER: We leave it there. Stu Rothenberg, thanks very, Amy Walters, thanks to you as well. Both of you can go out and enjoy your lunch now.

And if the election is as close as a lot of pundits predict, maybe Ralph Nader, despite what Stu Rothenberg said, could play a decisive role. In fact I'll ask him what his role will be. He'll join me Sunday on "LATE EDITION," that's at noon Eastern right here on CNN "LATE EDITION," the last word in Sunday talk.

An inexpensive and sometimes illegal work force, immigrants are finding themselves under fire.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I see what's happening here in our county, reminds me of what they called the barrios, the poor neighborhoods in Southern California.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Another example of an "Immigrant Nation: Divided Country." Details coming up right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: On Monday this week, a Chicago-area woman gave birth to quintuplets as her Marine husband lay in a hospital bed, recovering from war wounds suffered in Iraq. This morning, Taunacy Horton spoke briefly with reporters.

Let's take a quick listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TAUNACY HORTON, MOTHER OF QUINTUPLETS: Josh is still really hurt, but we are hopeful for his recovery and know that he has the best care possible.

And even though circumstances didn't allow josh to be there at the delivery, my hope is that Josh can be there when we first get to hold these babies. I can't wait until we can be reunited and do this together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Mrs. Horton went on to say she's OK, her husband's OK and the couple's five babies are all OK. The children, by the way, were born prematurely. All weighed less than two pounds.

Sergeant Joshua Horton, who's now in a Maryland military hospital, was wounded just days before the births.

At issue, illegal immigration. Is it spiraling out of control and destroying the fabric of American society? Or is it helping keep the American Dream alive?

CNN PRESENTS explores that very issue this Sunday night.

CNN's Maria Hinojosa with a preview of two families on the front lines of the growing debate.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (singing): And I'm proud to be an American... MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): July 4 in northern Georgia in the cradle of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (singing): Who gave that right to me.

HINOJOSA: The people of Clayton, Georgia, are taking in the good life and feeling patriotic. But the ones who make this party possible are people like Gabe (ph)...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Another plate? OK.

HINOJOSA: ... who asked us not to use his last name.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's hard work today. There's no Independence Day for us, just for the American people.

HINOJOSA: Gabe got here four years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Only I know Georgia for Atlanta the Olympics Games. Maybe this city is more rich. People is rich.

HINOJOSA: Gabe, his wife and son came here with a legal visa to visit Disneyland. They just never left. They were just getting by in Mexico, but they risked losing everything for a chance at something better.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): In Mexico, we had less time to be together as a family. Here, we have more time to share together. Our economic situation is much better.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lots of people have balloons today.

HINOJOSA: Just one hour south in Gwinnett County, Georgia, Jimmy Hercheck (ph), another proud Southerner, is also feeling patriotic, passing down his traditions to his daughters, Alice and Beatrice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Throw her out some food, Beatrice.

HINOJOSA: Some Latinos watch the celebrations from a distance. Jimmy Hercheck thinks they're still too close.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I see what's happening here in our county reminds me of what they call the barrios, you know, the poor neighborhoods in Southern California.

HINOJOSA (on camera): What's happening now?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Somebody is coming to pick up workers.

HINOJOSA (voice over): Hercheck is living in a Georgia transformed. Some 100,000 Latinos have settled in his county, more than in any other county in Georgia.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Several dozen men out here looking for jobs, and there's just two or three jobs that they can get at one time. HINOJOSA: About half of those Latinos are illegal. Hercheck says they're destroying his neighborhood. A year ago, he sold his house and moved.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It brings back a lot of memories. It was pretty much your middle-class family neighborhood. And now you look around, it's maybe half small families and the other half have become pretty much boarding houses. I'm afraid that America could become a third-world country. We're importing poverty by millions every year.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Don't miss this special report, "IMMIGRANT NATION, DIVIDED COUNTRY," and Maria Hinojosa reporting. It airs Sunday night, here on CNN, 8:00 p.m. Eastern, 5:00 Pacific, "IMMIGRANT NATION, DIVIDED COUNTRY."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: I'll be back later today, every weekday, 5:00 p.m. Eastern, for WOLF BLITZER REPORTS. Caught off guard by the flu vaccine, how would America fare if it were something much more serious, like a bioterrorism attack. We'll take a closer look at just how well prepared we are.

Until then, thanks for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer.

LIVE FROM, with Kyra Phillips and Drew Griffin, starts right now.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com