Return to Transcripts main page
The Situation Room
President Bush Tries New Speech Focus on Iraq; How will the War Affect November Elections?; Interview with Ken Mehlman
Aired March 20, 2006 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks very much Ali and to our viewers, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM where new pictures and information are arriving all the time. Standing by, CNN reporters across the United States and around the world to bring you today's top stories.
Happening now, the U.S. mission in Iraq. A fourth year of challenges and bloodshed beginning. It's midnight in Baghdad where troops are passing yet another milestone amid new violence and growing anxiety back home.
The new buzz about President Bush, it's 4:00 p.m. in Cleveland where the commander-in-chief faced some tough question today about Iraq. With his political standing growing shakier, there's some surprising talk about impeachment.
And grand old problems for the president's grand old party. It's 4:00 p.m. here in Washington where Republicans are trying to find their way to victory in congressional elections. This hour, I'll talk about strategy and setbacks with the Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman. I'm Wolf Blitzer, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Right now, the third anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq is looking a lot like many other days in that long-time war zone, deadly. Police report at least 20 people killed in various bombings and attacks in and around Baghdad today. Seven of them died in two evening blasts at a busy coffee shop and a popular restaurant.
Back here in the United States, President Bush tried again to sound upbeat about the situation in Iraq, despite dwindling public support for the mission and for him. Our Jeff Greenfield is standing by in New York, with some thoughts on the implications of this Iraq anniversary. But let's go to the White House. First, Kathleen Koch standing by with the latest from there -- Kathleen?
KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, the administration knows that the White House is facing an uphill battle in trying to persuade skeptical Americans that the war in Iraq is still worth fighting.
So today, the president tried to personalize the conflict to help Americans understand how individual Iraqis feel by talking about a northeastern Iraqi town called Tal Afar. The town is in the grips of brutal insurgents who ruled the city using murder and violence until the coalition stepped in and tried a new strategy, combining U.S. military might, Iraqi troops maintaining order and a new focus on the town's economic future. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: By working with local leaders to address community grievances. Iraqi and coalition forces helped build the political support needed to make the military operation a success. The military success against the terrorists helped give the citizens of Tal Afar security and this allowed them to vote in the elections and begin to rebuild their city.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOCH: President Bush admitted that not every city in Iraq is enjoying the same level of success as Tal Afar is. But he did say it is a model for what can be. Now after the president's remarks, he spent more than an hour taking questions from the audience in what was billed as the quote, "oldest free speech forum in the United States." There were some serious questions and by the end of the marathon session, some lighter moments as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I've got to go back to work.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My name is Jose Feliciano.
BUSH: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes it is.
BUSH: Yes, it's like the time I called a guy and said, "Hey this is George Bush calling" and he said, "Come on, quit kidding me, man."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOCH: So President Bush was well received this afternoon in Cleveland. It's not likely that his speech today made any dent in the dismal poll numbers that show some 61 percent of Americans disapprove of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, Wolf.
BLITZER: Kathleen Koch at the White House, thanks Kathleen.
A leading Democratic critical today is urging the president to take a political risk to try to improve the situation in Iraq. On this, the third anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion, Senator Joe Biden is blaming what he calls the administration's, and I'm quoting now, "dangerous incompetence for leaving Iraq or the brink of a full- blown civil war."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOE BIDEN (D-DE), FOREIGN RELATIONS CMTE: It doesn't happen if we don't end up with nonsectarian leadership and the two security ministries. If we don't end up at the end of this summer with an amendment to the Constitution that allows all the parties, including the Sunnis to buy in, then all the king's horses and all the king's men will not be able to hold Iraq together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Biden says the president should personally fly to other countries to try to bolster international pressure on Iraqi leaders to form that kind of national unity government. If Democrats have their way, Iraq will be a defining issue in the midterm elections this fall. Control of Congress will be hanging in the balance along with momentum for the presidential race in 2008. Let's bring in our senior analyst Jeff Greenfield. He's been thinking about all of this. Jeff?
JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST: Well Wolf, the question is simple. How will the public's current unhappiness over Iraq play out politically? The answer is also simple. We don't know, since the election is seven and a half months away.
What we do know is how Iraq and the broader terrorism issue played out in the last two elections. And there's an intriguing clue there.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GREENFIELD (voice-over): In the wake of the September 11th attacks in 2001, President Bush became the leader of a nation at war.
BUSH: I can hear you.
GREENFIELD: Or at least a nation at war with the perpetrators and enablers of those attacks.
BUSH: Either you're with us or you are with the terrorists.
GREENFIELD: That frame turned out to be a big political asset to Republicans in the 2002 midterms, where terror, not Iraq was dominant. In Georgia for instance, Saxby Chambliss won a Senate seat from Democrat and Vietnam War purple heart winner Max Cleland, by suggesting that Cleland's opposition to the rules governing the new Homeland Security Department weaken the fight against Osama bin Laden.
That issue also helped Republicans capture Democratic seats in Missouri and Minnesota, and with them capture control of the Senate. By the 2004 presidential race, the public had already turned negative on the Iraq war, but still gave Bush high marks for the broader war on terror. In their first debate, Kerry tried to separate the two.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Saddam Hussein didn't attack us, Osama bin Laden attacked us.
GREENFIELD: But the Bush campaign hit hard at Kerry as inconsistent, a flip-flopper, using his wind surfing hobby as a metaphor and throwing Kerry's own words back at him.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He bragged about voting for the $87 billion to support our troops before he voted against it.
(END VIDEOTAPE) GREENFIELD: So even if we don't know the answer about this fall's vote, we do know one key question. Will the public's negative views on Bush in Iraq erode his once high marks on the war in terror? And if so, can the Republicans change the debate to focus more on, say the social issues that would fire up the GOP base? Wolf?
BLITZER: And one of the huge wild cards out there is between now and November, no one knows what's going to happen in the war on terror? Will there be another terror attack here in the United States? That's a huge if, obviously, but it could have a significant impact.
GREENFIELD: As could the capture of Osama bin Laden, which is why the next four and a half months of polls, we will be conducted several dozen times a day, might not tell us that much, Wolf.
BLITZER: Jeff Greenfield, he loves our polls. Thanks very much for all of that. Let's talk a little bit more about the polls that Jeff loves so much.
In recent days, we've seen new deterioration in the president's approval rating when it comes to Iraq. We averaged together, take a look at this, six recent polls taken in the last two weeks alone, to find that 33 percent of Americans approve of the way Mr. Bush is handing the situation in Iraq.
A new Gallup poll, by the way, out today, finds 37 percent of Americans approve of the way Mr. Bush is doing his job overall. That's in line with other recent surveys, but not a new low point.
With the president weakened politically, there's new discussion here in Washington of possibly repercussions. One Democrat's attempt to censure Mr. Bush appears to be going nowhere. So why are some people suddenly talking about impeachment?
Let's bring in our senior analyst, political analyst, Bill Schneider. He's looking at this part of the story. Bill?
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Wolf, the philosopher George Santayana wrote, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." But sometimes that happens with those who remember the past all too well.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER (voice-over): Senator Russ Feingold's motion to censure President Bush raises a question. If he believes the president broke the law, why isn't the senator proposing impeachment?
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: It might not be good for the country to try to remove the president from office, even though he's surely done wrong. But what we can't do is just ignore it.
SCHNEIDER: Democrats have not forgotten what the Republican Congress did to President Clinton. Gary Trudeau's Doonesbury cartoon shows a college instructor asking students to consider the case of two presidents. Quote, "the first president initiates a bloody, costly, unending war on false premises and approves covert policies of illegal detentions, kangaroo courts, extraordinary renditions, torture, and warrantless wiretapping of thousands of Americans. The second president lies about hooking up with an intern. Question, which one should be impeached?"
Congressional Democrats are not rushing to endorse impeachment. Senator Dick Durbin, for instance, was noncommittal.
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: I'm not ruling it in or out at this point in time.
SCHNEIDER: If Democrats are responding cautiously to the talk about censure and impeachment, there are some conservatives who say, bring it on. Like this "Wall Street Journal" editorial claiming that Democrats are all but certain to impeach the president if they win control of Congress this year. "Let's have this impeachment debate before the election, so voters can know what's really at stake."
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER: Some Republicans want to make this year's midterm election a referendum or impeachment. They believe it will rally conservatives to support their beleaguered president. And they remember what happened to them at the polls in 1998 when they proposed impeaching President Clinton.
BLITZER: What do the polls show us about how the American public feels about impeaching President Bush.
SCHNEIDER: The poll results vary. One poll taken in January does show a narrow majority of Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he wire tapped Americans without a court warrant.
This latest "Newsweek" poll finds only 26 percent who feel Congress should take action to impeach the president and consider removing him from office. How about the proposal to censure the president? forty-two percent of the public favor censure in the "Newsweek" poll and 58 percent are opposed.
BLITZER: For more on the impeachment talk, how it's playing out among Republicans online. Let's bring in our Internet reporter, Jacki Schechner.
JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, the RNC is using their Web site and an e-mail campaign to get the message out, that message being that impeachment is the logical extension of censure and do you really want your president being embarrassed by the Democrats in the last two years of his presidency.
They tell me that this has been a very popular e-mail campaign for them and that it came from the top down. This is conversation that we were seeing on some conservative blogs as they discussed censure. You can see where the words censure and impeachment were linked in this post by Captain's Quarters, one of the big conservative blogs. They were also talking about censure and impeachment on blogs for Bush.
They were also talking about how impeachment would be bad for the Democrats on Polling Pundit, another big conservative blog. And also discussion on Whiz Bank how keeping Republicans in office would be the only way to avoid this.
As for the Democrats on line, they're talking about Bush's sinking poll numbers and the increasing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
BLITZER: Ken Mehlman is standing by, we will be speaking to him about all of this, including impeachment. That's coming up right here in THE SITUATION ROOM. In the meantime, let's go to Jack Cafferty. He has another week of excellent questions for our viewers.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: We will know that on Friday. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is causing a stir with some comments that he made comparing Iraq to post-war Germany.
Rumsfeld wrote in "The Washington Post" yesterday, "Turning our backs on post-war Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing post-war Germany back to the Nazis. It would be as great a disgrace if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination because it was too hard or too tough or we didn't have the patience to work with them as they built free countries."
Two former top officials, Henry Kissinger Zbiginew Brizenski, disagreed with Rumsfeld. Kissinger said that in Germany, "There was no significant resistance movement." And Brizenski said, "For Rumsfeld to talk this way, suggests that he either doesn't know history or he's simply demagoguing." Representative John Murtha called the comparison to Nazi Germany irresponsible. Here's the question.
Would pulling out of Iraq be the same as handing Germany over to the Nazis at the end of World War II. E-mail us your thoughts to caffertyfile@CNN.com or go to CNN.com/caffertyfile.
BLITZER: Politicians have to learn not to make comparisons with Nazis. No matter what's going on today, that's almost always going to be a big mistake.
CAFFERTY: The other overriding lesson that none of them ever seem to learn is that they shouldn't just open their mouths and say stupid things.
BLITZER: Coming up, Republicans in Congress break with the president over port security and they don't see eye to eye with him on a number of other issues. So is this the big tent, the Republican big tent, about to collapse. I will speak live to the Republican Party Chairman, Ken Mehlman.
And how can Congress get the people's work done if lawmakers are often out of town? We'll take a closer look at why the House is rarely in the house.
Plus, she's America's top diplomat, but apparently being Secretary of State is not necessarily Condoleezza Rice's dream job. We're going to tell you what it is in our political radar today. Why that job, that dream job, is now open. Will she apply?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back. In this midterm election year, it all comes down to November 7th. That's when we will get a clearer picture of the political fallout from everything that's happening now, from Iraq to the president's record low poll numbers.
We're joined now by the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman here in THE SITUATION ROOM. Ken, you've got a tough job right now. We are going to go through some of the tough issues you're dealing with.
We all woke up and read in The Washington Post this morning this headline: "GOP Struggles to Define it's Message for 2006 Elections" Our recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll on this third anniversary of the war asked was the situation in Iraq worth going to war over. Only 37 percent, one in three, of the American people think it was worth it. This issue is hovering over the president and the Republicans like none other.
KEN MEHLMAN, RNC CHAIRMAN: It's a very important issue, Wolf. I think that most Americans, that poll may reflect those numbers, the latest headlines. It certainly was worth it. The fact is I believe, and I think most Americans who think about it,, will recognize that we're safer. A vicious dictator --
BLITZER: Let me interrupt you on that point when you say we're safer. A good Republican, conservative senator, Chuck Hagel from Nebraska, which is not exactly New York or Massachusetts, said this yesterday. I want you to listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHUCK HAGEL (R), NEBRASKA: Are we better off today than we were three years ago? Is the Middle-East more stable than it was three years age? Absolutely not. It's more unstable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MEHLMAN: I would disagree with Senator Hagel. I think the notion that if Saddam Hussein were still in power, somebody that was paying $25,000 to terrorists in Israel and in the Palestinian territories was still in power that that would be a good thing and we would be safer.
Would we be safer if somebody who repeatedly violated United Nations's resolutions were still able to plot and plan. This is a tough war we're dealing with, Wolf. But the notion that somebody who associated with terrorists, who was trying to reconstitute his WMD was allowed to stay in power. I think that would have been a big mistake and I think we would be less safe today.
BLITZER: The argument is that he was contained by U.N. resolutions, he was contained by no-fly zones, by weapons inspectors and that 2,300 American troops would not necessarily have been killed. Almost a half a trillion dollars in U.S. money would not have been spent.
MEHLMAN: Wolf, certainly the families of those 2,300, our hearts go out to. Let's remember the 3,000 people that were killed on 9/11. And the lesson of 9/11 was that if we allow threats to gather, ultimately it will be too late, because the threat will be imminent.
We knew, and we still know today, about Saddam Hussein. Here was someone who was uniquely dangerous, had uniquely invaded his neighbors, had uniquely used WMD, had a nuclear program to reconstitute that effort he had going forward.
BLITZER: But there were no weapons of mass destruction and he was contained. Well, let's move on and talk about some of the other issues that you face. Because you have got a tough job. Register voters choice for Congress. Democrats now come out ahead, 55 to 39 percent. And which party would do a better job dealing with the economy, bread and butter issues? Fifty-three percent say Democrats. Thirty-eight percent say Republicans. Those -- forget about Iraq -- are bread and butter issues.
MEHLMAN: Well, Wolf, as you know, the election on November 7 is not a national election, you are going to vote for individual candidates. I'm confident that while the environment is tough, we are going to maintain our majority in the House and Senate.
And I will tell you one of the reasons I am confident we are going to do it. This past weekend a report came out that the Democrat Leader Harry Reid had suggested that the members of his caucus, the Senate Democrats, that they hold a series of events during this recess where they try to use military families and people returning from Iraq to exploit them to make political gains.
I think the American people are going to have a clear choice between leaders like George W. Bush and others who will do whatever it takes to win the war on terror and leaders like Harry Reid who will say whatever it takes to win the next election. I think that the American people don't want to see that kind of politicization that you are seeing from Mr. Reid.
And I think the fact that you have someone like Harry Reid who talked about wanting to kill the Patriot Act, the fact that you have Democrats, the potential leader of the House Judiciary Committee talking about impeaching the president, the fact that you have a majority of folks in the House among the Democrats would be majority if they won the majority, you talk about treating the central front on the war of terror...
BLITZER: On the issue of impeachment -- because this a sensitive issue. Correct me if I'm wrong. There's been a sense that I'm getting that you and other Republican leaders like this talk because you think it is going to really energize your base.
MEHLMAN: Wolf, the talk originally came up from a number of different people, including John Conyers, a gentlemen who if the Democrats took control would be the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. And what I think is important for people to understand is this is their agenda.
BLITZER: But are you worried about that talk?
MEHLMAN: I certainly think it's important for the American people to understand what folks would do if they in fact took control and what they're thinking about. And I think one of the critical questions is do you believe the president ought to be, whether it is censured, whether it is impeached -- should he be encouraged or should he be punished for using every legal tool at his disposal to win the war on terror?
BLITZER: But how worried are you that this talk of impeachment could really get going?
MEHLMAN: I'm concerned that there are people who would like to be the leaders in Washington who believe that rather than giving the president every tool he needs to win the war on terror, they're making comments like impeachment and like censure. I think the American people need to understand that choice on election day.
BLITZER: Here's looking beyond 2006 to 2008 and Hillary Rodham Clinton, the junior senator from New York. Here's what Republican strategist Ed Rollins said last month. He said, "Either we bog down Hillary Clinton in 2006 in New York or we give Hillary a free pass, let her build up chips around the country by helping other candidates and walk out of New York with a big win and become unstoppable for 2008."
Are you giving her a pass? You can barely find a candidate to run against her in New York?
MEHLMAN: Wolf, I'm focused on the 2006 elections. I'm focused on doing what we can to make sure we keep Republican majorities in the House and the senate, win Republicans in governor's races. That's where I think our focus ought to be. Ultimately, Hillary Clinton will have a voting record and she will have a history of voting with the American people will consider should she decide to run in 2008.
BLITZER: Is there any Republican in New York State that can beat her this year?
MEHLMAN: Well, there are a number of candidates who have announced. There are others who are looking at running. I am not going to predict that. That's something that New Yorkers will make the decision about. Obviously, she is in a very strong position to win reelection in New York.
BLITZER: And how worried are you about her in 2008?
MEHLMAN: Whoever the Democrats nominate in 2008, I believe, will be formidable candidate. The country is closely divided.
But the most important thing we have got to do now is to make sure we have a president and we have a Congress that are committed to doing everything possible to win the war on terror, not saying anything possible to win the next election nor are they trying to play political games to exploit things and certainly not talking about censuring a president who legally made sure that we intercept foreign terrorists before they hit the United States.
BLITZER: Ken Mehlman thanks for joining us.
MEHLMAN: Thanks a lot.
BLITZER: Ken Mehlman is the chairman of the Republican Party. As I said, he has got a tough job here in Washington.
And to our viewers, remember, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where political news is arriving all the time. CNN, America's campaign headquarters.
Up next, it's Monday and while you may be back at work, get this, Congress is not. We're going to take a closer look at lawmakers who are in town but out of town a lot more than they're supposed to be. And a lot of them not necessarily doing the nation's work. What's going on?
Also, dangerous weather down under. A monstrous storm slamming into Australia. Our Zain Verjee joins us with a closer look at the damage. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: There she is. Zain Verjee, she's standing by with a quick look at some other news making headlines. Hope you had a nice weekend Zain.
ZAIN VERJEE, CNN ANCHOR: I did, thanks, Wolf.
The White House is calling for new elections in Belarus where incumbent President Aleksandr Lukashenko won another term over the weekend. White House Spokesman Scott McClellan says today that Lukashenko's campaign was conducted in a climate of fear, including arrests and beatings. Independent observers call the weekend election a farce. Both the U.S. and the European Union have threatened sanctions.
It's the equivalent of a hurricane, but it is just called something else in Australia. Tropical cyclone Larry is losing strength after leaving a path of destruction along Australia's northeast coast. At it's Category 5 peak, it was packing wind gusts up to 180 miles an hour. And that was about 24 hours ago.
There were reports of massive structural damage and widespread power outages in the Australian state of Queensland. Only minor injuries are reported so far. No deaths have been reported.
It's officially spring, but look at this. You would never know it's in the plain states. A storm system that barreled through dumped more than a foot of snow on the region. Hundreds of miles of major highways have been closed. Students at hundreds of schools in Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado and South Dakota got a snow day. The snowstorm is being blamed for at least two deaths.
The same storm system is being blamed for torrential rains that caused dangerous flash floods in north Texas. The flooding killed at least one person. Up to eight inches of rain fell on the area over the weekend, sending water into living rooms and submerging cars. Downpours also soaked Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Thanks very much, Zain, for that.
Happening now on Capitol Hill -- well actually, there's not much happening on Capitol Hill right now. Congress, in fact, is in recess. And to hear critics tell it, that's pretty much business as usual.
CNN's Andrea Koppel is joining us now here in Washington with more on what is going on or shall we say, Andrea, what is not going on?
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. St. Patrick's Day may have been last week but for the first time ever, lawmakers are taking this whole week off as part of that holiday, just one of many breaks the House, especially, is taking this year, as members of Congress are increasingly spending much more time out of Washington than they are on Capitol Hill.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KOPPEL (voice over): Just weeks into his tenure House majority leader, John Boehner had set an ambitious agenda.
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), MAJORITY LEADER: To keep America prosperous, to ensure affordable and assessable health care, to try to spend the American people's tax dollars wisely...
KOPPEL: A tall order considering the House of Representatives is only expected to be in session 97 days this year, the shortest congressional calendar in 60 years.
NORMAN ORNSTEIN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Now we have a Tuesday to Thursday club that basically means people get in late Tuesday night and leave Thursday at noon. So they're here a day and a half out of the week.
KOPPEL: In fact, in January, the House was only in session one day, to attend President Bush's State of the Union address. This abbreviated calendar is packed with a growing number of week-long breaks. In February, members spend seven days in session due to a President's Day recess. This month, it's a St. Patrick's Day break. Next month, two weeks for Easter and Passover. Then, it's Memorial Day, Independence Day, and then the whole month of August.
A spokeswoman for Congressman Roy Blunt, who helped create this year's schedule, told CNN, "It's pretty disingenuous to allege they're not working if they're not here. These breaks allow them to be in their districts more, to meet face to face with constituents and take their concerns back to Washington."
But a lot of their time out of Washington is also spent fundraising for their own campaigns, which some say comes at price.
ORNSTEIN: The less time members are spending in Washington, the less time they're doing oversight to see that the laws they passed are actually being carried out fairly, the less time they're doing deliberative work to make sure that the laws they pass are put together well. We're getting shoddy legislation and no oversight out of this deal, and it's a raw deal for the American people.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KOPPEL: But congressional staffers like to stress that 97 days is the floor and not the ceiling. Last year, they say the House was scheduled to be in 101 days but ended up in session 139 days. But then last year, lawmakers weren't gearing up for midterm elections, Wolf.
BLITZER: Andrea, the other side of the story is the fewer days members are in Congress, the critics will at least point out that the less damage they can do to the American people.
KOPPEL: Well, that's one way of looking at it. But as you just heard Norm Ornstein at the American Enterprise Institute put it, he also goes on to say that, in fact, when you have an agenda like the one that Representative Boehner has laid out, where you have so many things that you need to accomplish, they're still going to do it, Wolf, but they're just going to compress it. They're going to end up getting these incredibly intense days rather than having more time for lawmakers to actually examine what they're voting on.
BLITZER: Andrea Koppel, thanks very much.
Up next, Iraq three years later and counting. As the conflict drags into yet another year, what's the best strategy for the White House?
Plus, should Donald Rumsfeld step down as defense secretary? Would that help the Bush administration? Standing by, Paul Begala and Torie Clarke. Our strategy session. That's coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Today in our strategy session, three years after the U.S-led invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration is strongly defending its actions and the progress that's being made. Will their arguments win support for the overall U.S.-led mission? Can the country avoiding civil war? That is the Iraqi country avoiding civil war, not this country. Joining us now are CNN political analyst, Democratic strategist Paul Begala, and former Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clarke. I just want to precise. We're not talking about a civil war.
PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: There's always that chance.
BLITZER: We had one a long time ago in this country. We don't want to have another one.
BEGALA: In Texas, we call it the war of northern aggression in my Texas district.
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: Let's talk about this war, prospects of Iraq having its own civil war. Torie, you were the Pentagon spokeswoman three years ago, almost exactly today at the start of the way. I want to play you a little excerpt of what you told reporters that day, March 22, 2003.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TORIE CLARKE, FORMER PENTAGON SPOKESWOMAN: We said from the very beginning, well before the start of military operations, there are a lot of unknowns. There are a lot of bad things that can happen. And we will take it one day at a time. And the only thing that is of great certainty is what the outcome is, the end of this regime.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Honestly, did you ever think then that three years later this would be going on?
CLARKE: I honestly didn't know. Absolutely telling the truth that there were many, many unknowns.
BLITZER: Was there a discussion, though? You were inside the inner, inner circle then. Was there a discussion of an insurgency exploding a potentially a civil war erupting?
CLARKE: There was a very rigorous going-over of the many bad things that can happen when you take action. But you weigh the potential of those bad things happening against the risk of inaction. And we decided because of the pattern of abuse and because Saddam Hussein had used weapons of mass destruction, because he was consorting with terrorists of all sizes and shapes, the president made the decision to go to war.
BLITZER: Here's what Donald Rumsfeld wrote yesterday, Paul, in "The Washington Post": "Turning our backs on post-war Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing post-war Germany back to the Nazis. It would be as great a disgrace as if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination because it was too hard or too tough or we didn't have the patience to work with them as they built free countries." Does he have a point?
BEGALA: No. No. I think the only person who believes that is Donald Rumsfeld -- well, and the president and the vice president. I saw a different op-ed yesterday. I want to read you a quote from it. Martin Van Creveld is a military historian at Hebrew University. He's one of the most esteemed military historians in the world.
In fact, he's required reading for our American troops. Here's what he wrote yesterday. "This is the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C. sent his legions into Germany and lost them." That's what military historians think.
The soldiers fighting this war, 72 percent of them in a Zogby poll, said they want our presence there ended within a year. So historians have weighed in saying this is a debacle. The troops say it's a debacle. The American people no longer trust anything that Mr. Rumsfeld or President Bush or Mr. Cheney say. This is a complete disaster for our country.
BLITZER: There's any increasing drumbeat that your former boss, Donald Rumsfeld, should either be forced to resign or should step down. I asked Senator Joe Biden, the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee about this yesterday. Listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BIDEN: Imagine what would happen if announced tomorrow the headlines in the papers in America and throughout the world that Rumsfeld was fired. It would energize the rest of the world. They'd be willing to help us. It would energy American forces. It would energize the political environment. Yes, he should step down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Is Rumsfeld that despised around the world?
CLARKE: I disagree completely with your characterization. I don't think there is an increasing drumbeat about this. And the president is the one who gets to decide whether or not Rumsfeld stays or go. The president has said repeatedly he thinks he's doing a very good job in difficult circumstances and wants him to say.
And what kind of signal would it send, by the way? I mean, this is tough, tough stuff. No two ways about it. And there have been good things that have happened. There has been important progress made in Iraq. Nobody seems to focus on the positive things that have happened that much. They only focus on the negatives.
But people who are on the ground, the military leadership on the ground, understands how tough this is, understands that this secretary has backed them up completely with what they've needed, when they've needed it, what they want. And it would send a very, very...
BLITZER: I'm going to let Paul respond to that. But Torie makes a point, Paul. What kind of signal would it send to Al Qaeda and the terrorists, the insurgents, if Rumsfeld were forced out?
BEGALA: It would send a signal to our soldiers that incompetence will be punished. When Les Aspin was the secretary of defense for President Clinton, he was asked to send armor into Somalia. He declined to do so. Eighteen rangers were killed, the famous -- it became "Blackhawk Down," a book and a film.
Les Aspin lost his job for that. He made an enormous mistake. Men died because of that mistake. He was fired because of that. Secretary Rumsfeld has made much larger mistakes, and many more people have died. He overruled his military commanders, who said they needed 300,000 troops to peacefully occupy this country, and now people are dying because of the incompetence of Mr. Rumsfeld.
And so we have to show that there is a price to be paid for incompetence. By the way, if President Bush put Joe Lieberman in there, who's a Democratic senator from Connecticut, the strongest supporter of the war in either party, really, it would begin, I think, to form a bipartisanship in this foreign policy that I think has been very grossly lacking.
CLARKE: In the past, Paul has trashed Senator Lieberman for his stand on this war, for saying he thought it was the right thing to do.
(CROSSTALK)
CLARKE: And now he wants him to be the secretary of defense.
BEGALA: Because he supports the president on this, and I don't.
CLARKE: It is an urban legend that Rumsfeld has overruled the military leadership. Nothing could be further the truth. And, by the way, it is an insult to people like Abizaid and Casey and Franks, who have 30 and 40 years in uniform to suggest something like that. It is an insult to them. Whether you mean to or not, you are insulting them when you say they are not getting what they need when they need it for what is happening in Iraq.
BEGALA: Eric Shinseki was the Army chief of staff, the number one general in America. He testified under oath that we needed hundreds of thousand of troops. Mr. Rumsfeld and his pinhead professor Wolfowitz who worked for him public insulted him and trashed him. And it effectively really couped (ph) him. It effectively relieved him from his duty a year early.
(CROSSTALK)
CLARKE: Months before General Shinseki testified and said it will take several hundred thousand troops on the ground, months before it was publicly known that Shinseki was not coming back as the Army chief of staff. Do not propagate the myth. It's irresponsible.
BEGALA: They named his replacement early, extraordinarily early, so as to disempower him because he told the truth.
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: We're going to do some fact checking on this and get back to both you on this, maybe tomorrow. Thanks very much. Good discussion.
CLARKE: Thanks, Wolf.
BLITZER: Coming up, she already has an impressive career. But could the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, finally get her dream job? There's a new employment opportunity out for potentially Dr. Rice. That's coming up on our political radar.
And could they be a new Republican dream team? Find out why Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McCain are getting together. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: On our political radar this Monday, the White House says it will verbally reprimand two government employees who misidentified themselves as journalists. The incident happened in Mississippi this month while the men were doing advance work for the president's visit to the Gulf Coast.
A local man told "The Biloxi Sun Herald" that the men claimed to work for FOX News out of Houston and were scouting for a story on new construction. The White House said that's clearly not appropriate.
Senator John McCain is lending some of his political muscle to Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Arizona Republican speaks at a big Beverly Hills fundraiser tonight for the California governor and for the state GOP. Schwarzenegger needed help for his reelection campaign. McCain gets a high profile platform to keep testing the presidential waters, even though the event would be closed to the news media.
Talk about a political football. We learned today that the NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue will retire in July. That's big news over at the State Department. The secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, makes absolutely no bones about the fact she'd love to be commander- in-chief about pro football. I asked her about her dream job a few years ago. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Dr. Rice, we have to leave it right there. But today being the Super Bowl here in the United States, a lot of speculation that one day when you leave government, you'd like to be the commissioner of the NFL.
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: That's true. That's not speculation. That's fact.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: She is very, very serious about that. Today, Paul Tagliabue's retirement and Secretary Rice's NFL ambitions cam up over at the State Department briefing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: It looks like the secretary's dream job has finally opened up.
SEAN MCCORMACK, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: I noticed that right before I came out here.
QUESTION: Are you worried that you might lose the secretary of state to that?
(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: What did he say? We want to know what he said. Let's find out what he said. We'll keep following this story to see if Dr. Rice eventually does apply for the NFL job. Good story.
And couldn't ignore this picture. Look at this. Elephants on parade here in the Republican-dominated capital city. It's not a political statement or any kind of foreshadowing about future election results. It's just the Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus, yes, coming to D.C. There they are. Elephants on the streets of Washington, D.C.
In today's culture wars, if you've ever searched Amazon.com, then you know the company's in the business of suggesting other products you might also enjoy. But one abortion rights advocacy group isn't happy with what the company is suggesting. We'll get more from our Internet reporter, Abbi Tatton -- Abbi?
ABBI TATTON, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, that group is the religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. And it was one of their members who last week was looking for a book and searched on the term "abortion." The results that she got included this message, that we've recreated here: "Did you mean adoption?" As well as a list that she says skew towards antiabortion position.
Now, we contacted Amazon, who said that they've taken down that message now. However, they stress that there is no bias in their search results. What they say is that their search results are based on tens of millions of past searches by their 54 millions users at Amazon -- Wolf?
BLITZER: Abbi, thanks very much.
Up next, mounting unrest in the Middle East. Gunfire becomes almost commonplace in the Palestinian territories again. Is it Gaza City, or is id Dodge City?
Also ahead, in another hotbed of violence, is Iraq on the verge of civil war, or is there civil war already there? I will talk with "Time" magazine's Baghdad bureau chief, Michael Ware. That's coming up in our next hour. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Jack is back with "The Cafferty File."
Hi, Jack.
CAFFERTY: How are you doing, Wolf? In yesterday's "Washington Post," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld wrote this: "Turning our backs on post-war Iraq today would be the modern day equivalent of handing post-war Germany back to the Nazis." The question this hour is, would pulling out of Iraq be the same as handing Germany over the Nazis after World War II?
Van in Denver, Colorado: "No. Pulling out of Iraq right now would be like pulling out of Vietnam before 40,000 more American soldiers were killed."
T. in Omaha, Nebraska: "Rumsfeld just can't stop making stupid remarks. The Nazis were finished, period. And there was not civil war. The comparison is as idiotic as the fool who made it."
Jerry in Philadelphia: "Would you say there's a difference between the Nazis and the Muslim killers? So why is the Rumsfeld comparison wrong? I'm with Rumsfeld on this."
Roseanne in Olympia, Washington: "No. There's not analogy between Iraq and post-war Germany. Could we please hear more about impeachment?"
S. writes, "Bush went into Iraq just like Hitler went into Poland. Maybe that's the way Rumsfeld should have drawn the comparison."
Jeff writes, "There are known knowns, there are known unknowns, there are unknown unknowns, and there are known clowns."
And Jack in Saukville, Wisconsin: "I'm confused. Jack opens his mouth and says something stupid every day. Why is he picking on Rumsfeld?"
BLITZER: What's the answer?
CAFFERTY: I'm not picking on anybody. I'm just asking -- we're soliciting public opinion here.
BLITZER: That's all we do.
CAFFERTY: That's all we do.
BLITZER: Thanks very much. See you in a few minutes.
Coming up, much more on Iraq three years later. Those are new reports from the Pentagon and from Baghdad. Those are coming up just moments from now.
And the business of preparing for bird flu. We're going to take you behind the scenes of corporate contingency plans under way right now. That's coming up in our 7:00 p.m. Eastern hour right here in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Here's a look at some of the hot shots coming in from our friend over at the Associated Press, pictures likely to be in your hometown newspapers tomorrow. Kabul, Afghanistan. A 41-year-old man is on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity 16 years ago. It's a crime punishable by death under Afghanistan's Islamic law. The prosecutor offered to drop the charges if he went back to Islam. The man refused.
Paris. City workers in protective gear take out the trash during a bird flu preparation drill. Baghdad, U.S. Army Corporal Abraham Mubal (ph) mops the floor at one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces. Back to Paris. The French president, Jacques Chirac, smiling while arriving in a group photo with Jordan's Queen Rania. She and her husband, the King of Jordan, Abdullah, are wrapping up a short working visit in France. Some of today's hot shots, pictures often worth 1,000 words.
Zain Verjee joining us once again from the CNN global headquarters in Atlanta with some other stories making news -- Zain?
VERJEE: Wolf, gunfire ran through Gaza City today. Fatah gunmen broke into a government compound in the Palestinian city, firing rifles in the air and demanding jobs and payments for their salaries. Five clashes between militants and police today left 23 people injured. Monday's worst clash happened when militant broke into the finance ministry building. When police arrived, the complex was a battle scene for half an hour.
Meanwhile, Israel briefly reopened the county crossing on Monday to let humanitarian aid flow into Gaza, but it closed soon after, citing security reasons.
CNN has learned that French trade unions and student groups are calling for work stoppages, strike, and demonstrations. The so-called day of action would happen a week from Tuesday, that's the 28th of March, to protest France's new youth employment law. The law, passed last month, is designed to reduce youth unemployment by making it easier for companies to hire and fire. And that basically sparked a new wave of street demonstrations.
A judge in Houston, Texas -- in the Houston district court, rather, has put off Andrea Yates' murder retrial until June. Yates is the 41-year-old Texas woman who drowned her children in her bathtub five years ago. The jury rejected her insanity plea and convicted and sentenced Yates to life in prison in 2002. The conviction was set aside because of false testimony from an expert witness -- Wolf?
BLITZER: Zain, thanks very much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
