Return to Transcripts main page
The Situation Room
Key Senators Now Applauding Robert Gates; Pentagon's Future Battle Plan In Iraq May Be Shaped By Panel's Recommendations; Evan Bayh Interview
Aired December 05, 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: 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, an open Gates -- the president's choice to take over the Pentagon give senators a candid assessment about Iraq. It's 4:00 p.m. here in Washington, where Robert Gates acknowledges the war isn't being won right now. We have all the headlines from his confirmation hearing.
Also this hour, James Baker's Iraq mission. The former secretary of state meets with the president before his Iraq Study Group's big announcement tomorrow.
Will the panel's recommendations give Mr. Bush political cover to change course?
And the likely suspects in the run-for the White House. I'll ask Senator Evan Bayh what he has that some other bigger name Democrats don't necessarily. And we'll find out if Americans are satisfied with their 2008 options.
I'm Wolf Blitzer.
You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Robert Gates went into the Senate hearing room today on a fast track toward confirmation and he'll likely leave even more convinced that the top Pentagon job will be his. Key senators now applauding Robert Gates, saying he's giving straight answers to some tough questions about Iraq, answers that don't entirely square with what Mr. Bush and his other top advisers have been saying.
A bigger test for the president and his war team may come tomorrow. That's when the Iraq Study Group delivers its recommendations. We could get a sense of whether Mr. Bush will give a thumbs up or a thumbs down.
Our White House correspondent, Ed Henry, is standing by.
But let's go up to Capitol Hill.
Andrea Koppel with the latest on the Gates confirmation hearings -- Andrea. ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, after questioning Gates for about five hours in the hearing room behind me, senators have now gone behind closed doors to continue with the classified section of this hearing. But as you said, there is no doubt but that he is on a fast track to confirmation.
That said, the majority of the questions today, or at least some of the questions covered a whole wide range of issues. As expected, the focus of most of the questions had to do with Iraq and what Gates specifically would do to resolve the crisis in Iraq.
What grabbed the headlines, however, had to do with a very pointed question that was put to him on two separate occasions. The question was whether Gates thought the U.S. was winning the war in Iraq.
Gates responded: "No."
After lunch, Gates came back and said he had to clarify that comment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY NOMINEE: Only because I'm concerned that the troops in the field might have misunderstood something I said. While I was having lunch and eating my sandwich, I was watching the news. And I certainly stand by my statement this morning that I agreed with General Pace that we are not winning, but we are not losing.
And -- but I want to make clear that that pertains to the situation in Iraq as a whole. Our military forces win the battles that they fight.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOPPEL: Gates went on to say that our soldiers have done an incredible job and he isn't aware of a single battle that they've lost -- Wolf, he is expected to be voted out of committee tonight, voted on the floor of the Senate tomorrow. He could on the job by early next week -- Wolf.
BLITZER: He surprised a lot of us, Andrea, when he said the United States is not winning the war in Iraq right now.
He also surprised me when he agreed with Senator McCain that the U.S. didn't have enough troops in Iraq three-and-a-half years ago after Saddam's -- Saddam Hussein's downfall. He was blunt on a bunch of issues.
KOPPEL: He was. And I think, you know, senators could sort of read into his answers what they -- whatever they wanted. And even though they were complimenting him for his candor and the fact that he was answering them very directly, in point of fact, he really was saying, you know, I need to wait until I get on the job and I can get over to Iraq and speak to the commanders on the job. So he was open to all of these questions and all of these issues, Wolf. But that's not necessarily saying that he's going to recommend to President Bush that they move in that direction.
BLITZER: And implied in a lot of his answers were that his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, not necessarily doing all that good of a job.
Andrea, thanks very much for that.
The Pentagon's future battle plan in Iraq may be shaped by a blue ribbon panel's recommendations. The group's leader, the former secretary of state, James Baker, met with President Bush today on the eve of the eagerly anticipated report.
Let's turn to our White House correspondent, Ed Henry, for more -- Ed.
ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, the White House certainly bracing for this report. The president today lunching with James Baker. As you noted, it lasted for about an hour. It was in the president's private dining area, just over the -- off the Oval Office. And I'm told it was initiated by Secretary Baker, sort of a courtesy heads up to the president.
Then tomorrow morning, 7:00 a.m. Mr. Baker and his nine colleagues on the Iraq Study Group will be here briefing the president on their findings and recommendations.
We're also told that the president will have probably comments but will not really officially react to the contents of the report.
He certainly wants some wiggle room, a few weeks to consider this report, but also weigh it against the reviews being conducted by the National Security Council, the Pentagon, etc.
Tony Snow today was asked if this lunch was sort of the cushion before the blow by James Baker. He insisted this does not have to be adversarial. He said this is a commission, "not an insurgency that's trying to attack the White House."
But even before this report's release tomorrow, the White House thrown on the defensive by those comments by Robert Gates, as Andrea noted, saying that the U.S. is not winning the war in Iraq.
At a press conference just two weeks before the mid-term elections, the president had the opposite answer to that question.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Absolutely, we're winning.
TONY SNOW, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Number one, I know that you want to pit a fight between Bob Gates and the president. It doesn't exist. Read the full testimony and you'll see. The second thing is that it is really important to realize that there's a lot of stuff going on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY: Now, Tony Snow insisted that what he was trying to explain was that when you listen to the broader answers from Robert Gates, he was on the same page with the president in saying that the goal here is to do everything it takes to make sure that in the end Iraq an defend and sustain itself -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Ed Henry at the White House.
Thanks for that.
Let's bring in our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley, and our chief national correspondent, John King.
Before we get to the Iraq Study Group, a quick question. When the president just recently says, "Absolutely, we're winning," and today Robert Gates tells the Senate Armed Services Committee the United States is not winning, how do you square that?
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SR. POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they can't square that. They can just hope that another news cycle comes up and we go on to something else. I mean it is what it is. They've said what they're going to say and you just try to move on at this point.
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Mr. Gates gave up an important job to come here and to get the job. The president said he wanted him. Mr. Gates said he needed some independence. The White House knew that answer was coming. They don't like it. And Candy is right, they hope it disappears and goes away.
But to get off to a good footing with the Congress, with something Secretary Rumsfeld didn't have, Bob Gates decided he needed to give that answer.
BLITZER: And he did want to clarify so as not to worsen the morale of U.S. troops. He didn't want to make it appear that he was criticizing the 140,000 or 150,000 troops on the ground. He issued that sort of clarification. But he didn't back away from his bottom line, that the United States is not winning.
CROWLEY: It was sort of a winning the battle, losing the war sort of answer, you know, because he wanted to make it clear that in battles, the troops are winning, but the war, they're losing, which is also sort of a difficult thing to square. Nonetheless, that was his clarification.
BLITZER: Is the president going to get some sort of cover tomorrow from this Iraq Study Group to go ahead and make dramatic changes in Iraq?
KING: Well, certainly he gets cover, if the president needs cover, from the fact that you have a blue ribbon commission. It's a who's who of Democratic and Republican elder statesmen, his own family, close friends. James Baker, the former secretary of state, the head of the commission.
So, sure, he gets political cover if he needed cover to make a significant political change in Iraq. But you could argue the elections gave him cover if he needed to make a significant change in Iraq and he hasn't made those changes yet. A big personnel change at the Pentagon.
But will there be more troops?
The president has said keep it as it is.
Will there be fewer troops?
The president has said that's a bad idea.
Will he talk to Iran and Syria?
The president has steadfastly said no.
So there is no indication that the president is willing to accept the bigger, more controversial, outside of the Bush box ideas, if you will.
BLITZER: Candy?
CROWLEY: Well, I mean listen to what has come out about what is probably going to be in this report, that there will be an idea that we need to set benchmarks for bringing the troops out. No date certain, but benchmarks. That we need to talk directly with Iran and Syria, both of which the president, in the last two weeks, has said well, I'm not bringing troops out until we've achieved success, whatever that means, and I'm not going to deal with Iran until they get rid of their nuclear program.
So, I don't think he's looking for cover at this point. It would -- John is right, it would give it to him. But does he want it?
BLITZER: But this is a president, also, who said just on the eve of the election that Rumsfeld was staying for another two years and then the next day he was gone. So if he wants to change policy, he can change policy irrespective of what he says publicly.
KING: I think the president is well aware his policy has gone bad and gone awry in Iraq. But he believes fundamentally he made the right decision. And he believes fundamentally that we could debate that decision forever, but he made that decision. And now he needs to figure out a graceful and a strong way out.
And no matter what the domestic political environment here and no matter what the policy options before the president, things will not get better until Iraq is more secure on the ground, until the political situation is better, and those are decisions and those are factors that are dependent on the Iraqis. The president can do so little to influence that that, in many ways, he is a hostage to the situation on the ground, until any U.S. policy, whether it's a consistent policy or a changed policy, can work. BLITZER: And at the confirmation hearing today, some of the president's fiercest critics -- Ted Kennedy, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Carl Levin on the Democratic side -- they were very, very complimentary and nice to the president's choice to replace Donald Rumsfeld.
CROWLEY: Democrats believe that part of the message of '06 was stop fighting, stop all of this partisanship. So you're seeing that.
How long it will last is a whole different thing. I talked to somebody today that said this -- if this forms a consensus around Iraq, the Study Group, if they get around Gates, which it looks as though they will, they've got about six months before the presidential campaign kicks and it's, you know, all things back to normal.
So right now they are trying very hard on the Democratic side to look like they are going to govern differently.
KING: I thought the presidential campaign started about six minutes into that here.
CROWLEY: It's true enough. True enough.
BLITZER: It started the minute that we knew who was the majority in the House and the Senate.
Guys, thanks very much for coming in, Ed Henry, Andrea Koppel, John King, Candy Crowley. They are all part of the best political team on television.
And remember, for the latest political news at any time, check out our Political Ticker at CNN.com/ticker.
Let's go to CNN's Mary Snow.
She's joining us in New York with a closer look at some of the other stories making news -- Mary.
MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, Iraq's prime minister appeared on national television a short time ago to announce a new plan to improve security in his country. Nuri al-Maliki says he will launch a diplomatic push urging Iraq's neighbors to help improve stability and restore order in Iraq. The prime minister also says he will reshuffle his cabinet and hold a national unity conference in an effort to ease sectarian tensions.
The broadcast came during another bloody day in the Iraqi capital. At least 50 people died in a series of attacks that included car bombings, mortar attacks, shootings and a roadside bomb blast. Additionally, authorities found 60 bodies dumped across Baghdad and the U.S. military reported that one American soldier was killed in an explosion northeast of Baghdad yesterday.
A top U.S. commander says Iraqi forces will take over responsibility for security in their country next year. This afternoon, Major General William Caldwell told reporters that: "2007 is truly going to be the year of transition."
Caldwell predicted that by next summer, Iraqi forces will take the lead in operations in all areas of the country, with U.S. advisers and troops in a support role only.
General Caldwell will be right here in THE SITUATION ROOM talking to Wolf in the next hour -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Thanks very much, Mary, for that.
Let's check in with Jack Cafferty.
He's got "The Cafferty File" -- hi, Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Wolf, being the prime minister of Iraq might well be the worst job in all the world. The civil war is out of control, Muqtada al-Sadr threatening to shut down the government, the Iraq Study Group is out with that report tomorrow, which will recommend who knows what all.
Then there was that little sit-down yesterday -- President Bush and Shiite leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. He is expected -- Bush is expected to meet with a Sunni leader next month. If I was Nuri al- Maliki, it might be time I started hitting the Prozac here.
It was just a week ago we got the leaked White House memo questioning al-Maliki's ability to lead in Iraq. That was followed by a rather hollow endorsement from Bush when the two men actually got together in Jordan.
Remember when the president said Don Rumsfeld would be there until the end of his term?
Remember when he told Mike Brown after Katrina, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job?"
To borrow a line from Julius Ceasar, you have to wonder if Bush is coming to bury al-Maliki, not to praise him.
The question is this -- is Nuri al-Maliki the right person to lead Iraq into the future?
E-mail your thoughts to CaffertyFile@CNN.com or go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile -- Wolf.
BLITZER: The word future in Iraq has, I guess, a perilous definition. It's not an easy challenge by any means, as you well point out, Jack.
Thanks very much for that.
Coming up, it's beginning to look a lot like Christmas over at the White House. And voters are busy making up their wish lists for the 2008 campaign. We're going to tell you which presidential prospects are spreading cheer.
Plus, is the Bush administration paving the way for dramatic changes in Iraq or more of the same?
The Robert Gates hearing and the Iraq Study Group report under the microscope in our Strategy Session this hour.
And up next, Senator Evan Bayh formally today taking the first step toward a presidential campaign. I'll talk to the Indiana Democrat about his prospects and the issue dominating the political scene right now, Iraq.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back.
As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Evan Bayh joined in the questioning today of Defense Secretary nominee Robert Gates. The Indiana Democrat also is in pre-campaign mode right now. He formally set up a presidential exploratory committee today. And this weekend, he'll visit the lead off primary state of New Hampshire.
And joining us now from Capitol Hill, Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, a member of the Armed Services Committee.
You filed your exploratory papers today to create this committee. We'll talk about politics shortly.
But Senator Bayh, are you going to vote to confirm Robert Gates as the next secretary of defense?
SEN. EVAN BAYH (D-IA), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Yes, Wolf, I will. He impressed me as being more candid, more open-minded and more realistic than what we've been seeing out of the administration these last six years.
But that said, Wolf, simply changing the faces in the Pentagon isn't enough. We need a new policy. And that depends on what's going on in the president's mind, and I'm not convinced that the president quite yet understands what needs to be done in Iraq.
BLITZER: But you have to give the president some credit for bringing in Gates, who said -- the president said I want a fresh pair of eyes and some new thinking because clearly they're not very happy with what's happening on the ground.
BAYH: Yes, that's right. And that is a step in the right direction. But ultimately, Wolf, the question is will he listen to the counsel that he's receiving?
We've seen some examples recently -- Stephen -- where he has not. Stephen Hadley issues a memo or had a memo leaked about his doubts about al-Maliki. The president says he's the right man for Iraq. Even Rumsfeld, on the way out, was suggesting other options that the president very shortly thereafter dismissed as unrealistic.
So the question is Gates is a good man. He may have some good ideas.
Will the president listen?
Time will tell.
BLITZER: The -- he acknowledged the United States is not winning today, in Iraq.
Do you believe the United States is losing in Iraq?
BAYH: Well, things aren't going nearly as well as they need to, Wolf.
Look, 13,000 Iraqis have died in the last four months. That's the equivalent of 150,000 Americans dying in a four month period. So, clearly there's not the kind of stability there necessary for us to -- for things to go well.
BLITZER: And who's fault is that?
BAYH: Well, Prime Minister al-Maliki indicated it was the politicians in Baghdad's fault, and he's right about that, Wolf.
Look, this will not be solved in Washington. It can only be solved in Iraq. And is not going to be solved by Americans, including the president of the United States. It can only be solved by Iraqis.
Are they willing to make the hard choices necessary to live in one country? Can they begin to think as Iraqis first rather than Sunni, Shia and Kurds?
It's not clear that they can. And to date, they have not. That's what needs to be done.
BLITZER: What is the single most important thing you would like to see President Bush do right now?
BAYH: I think announcing that we are not going to stay in Iraq forever, that we are going to set a flexible -- emphasis on the word flexible -- time line for bringing our presence there to closure would be a wake up call to the Iraqi leadership, Wolf, and what it may take to get them to begin to do what only they can do.
We've tried for three-and-a-half years now of telling them we're going to stay the course, don't worry, we're with you, reassuring them and all that. It simply has not worked.
We've got to try something else. And I think a wake up call like that might be what is necessary to get them to make the hard choices, to try and stabilize that country.
BLITZER: Has he done anything right as far as Iraq is concerned, the president?
BAYH: Well, there's been a long catalog of things that have not gone well. I'm sure there are, Wolf. It's difficult for me to think of one off the top of my mind.
But look, this latest statement, that he wants a fresh set of eyes, let's hope that there's a sincere willingness to reconsider. And, as I said in the hearing today, Wolf, deciding to alter course need not be a sign of weakness. In fact, it could be a show of intelligence that will strengthen the country and help to promote our national security interests.
I've been concerned that the president and those who advise him are so afraid of looking to be weak, they persist in a policy that no longer makes sense, thereby weakening the country even though they personally continue to look steadfast. And that's not what our country needs.
BLITZER: When I was watching the hearings today, I saw among the senators there at least three potential presidential prospects, you being one of them; Senator McCain being another; Senator Clinton being a third.
I know you disagree, I assume you disagree with Senator McCain on adding another 50,000 or to troops to Iraq.
You wouldn't support that, would you?
BAYH: No. I would not. I agree with Senator McCain that having more troops initially was very important and, in fact, the failure to do that is one of the reasons that things have gone so poorly.
But at this juncture, adding more American troops is not the answer. The Iraqis have to step up. Only they can solve this. That's where we need to focus.
BLITZER: What about you and Senator Clinton? Are you on the same page or are there differences as far as your Iraq strategy is concerned?
BAYH: I can't answer that question in an informed way, Wolf. She and I have not sat down to compare notes and ideas. Our questions today were somewhat similar. I'm sure we would agree on much, perhaps have some differences. But I -- I simply can't answer that question for you in any detail.
BLITZER: You filed papers today creating a presidential exploratory committee, suggesting that you're taking the next step in going toward 2008.
Tell our viewers what you bring to the table right now, let's say, that some of the other Democrats who might want to run-for president, like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, may not necessarily have.
BAYH: Well, I can't compare myself to the others, Wolf. I'll let you and your viewers do that for themselves.
But I can tell you that I have a keen appreciation of the challenges that face our country, an agenda for dealing with those challenges, a proven track record of delivering the kind of results when I was governor or my state that the American people, I think, are hungry for in Washington.
And perhaps more than anything else, Wolf, this -- our nation's capital has broken down. We need someone who can unite Democrats, Independents and Republicans in a politics of common purpose to move our country forward.
That's not happening today. But it's something I demonstrated repeatedly an ability to do and I think that's something we're going the need in the next president.
BLITZER: You said the other day you're going to need $25 million to $50 million to sustain a serious run-for the White House.
How much do you have already on hand?
BAYH: We have about $10,700,000 on hand right now, Wolf, which is a good start. But there's still work to be done.
BLITZER: So how do you do that? Where go you get the rest of that money?
BAYH: From people who believe as I do, that the country needs a better direction and that they're looking for the experience, the character that I have to offer and an ability to unite America to move this country in the direction that it needs to go.
We are not going to get the progress that our people deserve as deploy polarized and divided as we currently are.
BLITZER: Senator Bayh, thanks very much for joining us.
BAYH: Thank you, Wolf.
BLITZER: And still ahead, the early presidential field, as we just saw, starting to take shape.
Are voters satisfied with their options or are they looking for someone not on the list of would-be contenders?
And did Robert Gates break ranks with President Bush or did he help the White House set the stage for changes in Iraq?
The hearing and the politics in our Strategy Session.
That's coming up. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back to THE SITUATION ROOM.
I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
Getting Robert Gates through the confirmation hearings likely will be the easy part for President Bush, as he tries to get out of the weeds in Iraq.
Will he accept a blue ribbon panel's suggested solutions tomorrow?
In our Strategy Session today, CNN political analyst and Democratic strategist, Donna Brazile, and CNN contributor, Bill Bennett, the host of the radio program "Morning In America."
Guys, thanks very much for coming in.
WILLIAM BENNETT, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Sure.
BLITZER: Let's talk with Robert Gates said today about why he accepted this new assignment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GATES: Senator, I am not giving up the president, the presidency of Texas A&M, the job that I've probably enjoyed more than any that I've ever had, making considerable personal financial sacrifice and, frankly, going through this process to come back to Washington to be a bump on a log.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: And he certainly was not a bump on a log today. He was blunt. He was candid, winning kudos from Democratic members of that Armed Services Committee, as well, which is not an easy challenge.
DONNA BRAZILE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, given his last performance in 1991, when he had the angst and allegations about his role in Iran-Contra, he was very refreshing. He was not just blunt, but I thought he was candid. He basically said to the senators that, you know, all of the options should be on the table, that he's prepared to go to Iraq to listen to the commanders on the ground.
What I heard today is that Mr. Gates essentially said that he's prepared to hear this time from Democrats.
BLITZER: It was music to the ears of Democrats, Bill, I think you will acknowledge...
BENNETT: Oh, yes.
BLITZER: ... when he said...
BENNETT: No...
BLITZER: ... when he agreed with Senator Levin when he said the United States is not winning in Iraq.
BENNETT: Yes, it wasn't music to me and to others.
Frankly, have you been to Collins Station, Texas?
I mean, it's a nice town, A&M. BLITZER: Texas -- it's a big university.
BENNETT: It's a big university. It's a great university and they did beat Texas.
But, become secretary of defense and his earning power will increase dramatically. So a little too much protestation there.
I'm, frankly, nervous about this, Wolf. I know it's giving general satisfaction, particularly to the Democrats. But it's making me nervous. Somebody is being snookered here, it seems to me, because he is supposed to represent the president's views. The president's views are very clear -- we have to win, we can't leave. It would be a disgrace. It would be a dishonor. And Bob Gates is his man at defense, yet Bob Gates is being welcomed warmly by the Democrats.
There's something missing in this picture.
They didn't press him very hard about how close he was with the president's views, and maybe that's going on in executive session. But it's a little nervous making for some of us.
BLITZER: Well, one thing, Donna, that's missing in the picture, perhaps, is the fact that Democrats won in November on the elections and the president has to take that into consideration.
BRAZILE: Look, the president has had an opportunity over the last couple of weeks to hear from a range of sources, including Donald Rumsfeld, with the leaked memo with 21 recommendations. So, perhaps, Mr. Gates read those recommendations, and said, you know, it looks like Mr. Murtha had a little hand in -- in writing these recommendations. Why not just be candid and tell the Democrats, tell Republicans, tell the American people that the only way to win is to have a political solution?
BLITZER: If you're nervous about the testimony today of Robert Gates...
BENNETT: I'm nervous about Gates.
BLITZER: A little bit.
What about the Iraq Study Group, which is going to make its recommendations tomorrow? You have got five Democrats, five Republicans, Baker and Hamilton, the two co-chairmen. What do you make of this?
BENNETT: Yes, well, you're on the right track. As the man says in the play, things get worse and worse.
Look, the Iraq Study Group makes me very nervous. I don't see much difference, frankly, between the Iraq Study Group and Bob Gates. He was a member of the Iraq Study Group. Jim Baker coming to the rescue, maybe in politics, but, in foreign policy, I think the Kurds in Iraq would remember that -- not remember him that gratefully. Look, the president stated, the mission is to win. I'm -- I don't know what the Iraq Study Group is going to say. If there is a dramatic shift in policy, the memo hasn't been received by the president. There is some cognitive dissonance here, is what I'm saying.
And, the day after Bob Gates is confirmed, and the day after tomorrow, after we got the Iraq Study Group recommendations, let's see what the president has to say. Yes, there was an election, but we still have the same commander in chief. And he still has the responsibility.
BLITZER: What do you think this political -- it's really a political panel, because I don't think, even though you have a former -- a couple of former secretaries of state, you know, when you have Sandra Day O'Connor, you know, is not necessarily an expert on the Middle East, on the -- and a bunch of other political guys in that panel tomorrow. So, it's mostly these wise guys who are coming up with some recommendations.
BRAZILE: I talked to Cliff May and a number of people who had an opportunity to talk to the Iraq Study Group. They have -- they have talked to 250 experts, including military officials, about their various options.
They have also spoken to the president twice. They have spoken to the vice president. So, I assume that they have included the concerns and perhaps the recommendations of the military. It's time that we move forward. And what this group will do tomorrow is lay out a bipartisan way out of Iraq. And that is what we should all welcome.
BLITZER: I want you to watch this videotape yesterday, the former president, the president's father, breaking down at this event. It was very emotional, but let's play a little clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE H.W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A true measure of a man is how you handle victory and also defeat. So, in '94, Floridians chose to rehire the governor. They took note of his defeated opponent, who showed, not merely with words, but by his actions, what decency he...
(APPLAUSE)
BUSH: I can do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: You know, that's a loving father. He is speaking about his son, the outgoing governor...
BENNETT: Yes.
BLITZER: ... of Florida, Jeb Bush. And it was clearly an emotional, emotional moment. Is it surprising to you that... BENNETT: No.
BLITZER: ... that this first President Bush is as emotional as he is? Maybe, as you get older, you become a little bit more emotional?
BENNETT: Well, look, think of just how much emotion he has to expend on watching his son, the president, what he is going through. Whether you agree with him or not, this is a very tough thing.
And, as the president said in an interview he gave the other day, he said: You know, I talk to my dad every couple of weeks. And I know how much he is suffering. And I tell him, I don't feel as bad as I think you do.
But, look, I know these guys. This is one great family. They are very, very close. And it's not surprising. I had a lot of bosses. I worked for several presidents. There was never a human being as decent that I ever worked for in any job as George Herbert Walker Bush.
BLITZER: Even Ronald Reagan?
BENNETT: Ronald Reagan was my guy. That's my favorite president.
But, in terms of the personal touch, paying attention to the personal things, George Herbert Walker Bush was the best, sweetest, nicest, most engaging personal boss I ever had.
BLITZER: I think Bill Bennett is about to break down a little bit.
(LAUGHTER)
BENNETT: No, I'm -- well, you keep going, yes. I started angry.
(CROSSTALK)
BENNETT: And now you have softened me up.
(LAUGHTER)
BRAZILE: I had an opportunity to write the president right after Katrina to thank him for his efforts, along with President Clinton. And I didn't, you know, suspect that I would get a letter back.
He wrote a very touching letter. He is a very decent and honorable man.
BLITZER: It was a very emotional, moving moment. And, as any of us, you know, who love our fathers, we can relate to that...
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: ... we do. BLITZER: ... certainly a clear moment in history.
BENNETT: We love our sons.
BLITZER: Thanks very much, guys, very much.
BENNETT: Right.
BRAZILE: Thank you.
BLITZER: I want to thank Bill Bennett and Donna Brazile. Remember, they are part of the best political team on television.
Also, for the latest political news at any time, check out our Political Ticker at CNN.com/ticker.
All options are on the table. Defense secretary nominee Robert Gates testified today. Tomorrow, the Iraq Study Group will release its plan.
Meantime, the online community wonders if it can do better.
Let's bring in our Internet reporter, Jacki Schechner.
JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, that's exactly the idea behind this project at Instapundit.com. Can the blogosphere do better?
Glenn Reynolds is asking people to weigh in on what he calls an Iraq-Iran-Syria symposium. And conservatives are e-mailing him and linking -- he's linking to posts, where they have ideas for what they think is going to be in the Iraq Study Group report and what they think should happen.
For example, there is James Ruhland, who says he just got back from Iraq. And he suggests that soldiers come off of the mega-bases and embed more with Iraqi troops. He also thinks that there should be better P.R. for the war here at home.
There's another suggestion coming from Jeffrey Barto (ph), who is a -- a doctoral candidate. And he says that we should give Iraqis bigger and better lives outside of the mosque, that we should invest in commerce, so they don't turn as much to religion, his suggestion.
The links are continuing to pour in. You can catch them all at Instapundit.com -- everything from oil profit-sharing suggestions, to getting our troops up to speed in learning Arabic.
Now, the idea here behind this project, Glenn Reynolds posted, it's to be proactive, instead of reactive. But you can certainly expect that they are all going to be taking a look at those suggestions, when they come out tomorrow -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, thank you for that, Jacki Schechner.
Up next: Is Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, ready to fight the historical tide by showing an independent streak? Our Jeff Greenfield considering the two-party system in the race to 2008.
And up next: What if America's favorite presidential hopeful wasn't in the running? We're going to take a -- a look at a new list of who voters want in and out.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: As 2006 draws to a close, it's the season for the White House wannabes to dip their toes in the presidential waters. Are they getting a cool or a warm reception?
Let's turn to our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider -- Bill.
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Wolf, it's time for everyone to make their Christmas list, including the voters. Who do they want and not want for 2008?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER (voice-over): 'Twas the month after midterms, and, all through the land, contenders are stirring and showing their hand. Yes, it's that festive time of year when candidates begin to offer themselves as gifts to the country. But which ones do people really want?
The Gallup poll asked voters to make up their Christmas lists, who they want to see run for president and who they don't want. There are only two that most voters want, both Republicans.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I would very much like to be president of the United States.
SCHNEIDER: Most voters want McCain to run. Democrats, too? They can't make up their minds. Half want him to run. Half don't.
Rudy Giuliani is right up there with McCain. In fact, Republicans want Giuliani even more than they want McCain. Voters are wary of the top two Democrats on the list.
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: I don't know what the future holds. And I have no decision ready to be made.
SCHNEIDER: Most voters don't want Hillary Clinton to run. She's at the top of the Democrats' list. Seventy-seven percent want her. But she's near the bottom of the Republican's list. Eighty-eight percent don't want her.
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), ILLINOIS: I don't have a particular timetable.
SCHNEIDER: Voters are a little skeptical of Barack Obama. About 60 percent of Democrats want him to run -- not as popular as Clinton. And about 60 percent of Republicans don't want him to run, not as unpopular as Clinton.
Two gifts are about as popular this year as a lump of coal. Most voters, even most Democrats, don't want John Kerry to run. Most voters, even most Republicans, don't want Newt Gingrich to run.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER: Why are Americans so fussy? Because presidents are not like Christmas gifts. They are very hard to return -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Bill Schneider, doing some good work for us, as usual, thank you.
On our "Political Radar" this Tuesday: fresh evidence that Senator Hillary Clinton is making presidential campaign moves -- the Associated Press reporting, the New York Democrat has started calling political operatives in Iowa and New Hampshire to discuss her prospects in 2008. That would be her first direct effort to reach out to influential Democrats in states that hold those early and important presidential contests.
Former Democratic Senator John Edwards reportedly is lining up top operatives for his possible presidential bid -- AP quoting an Edwards adviser as saying former Democratic Congressman David Bonior of Michigan has signed on to manage Edwards' campaign, if he launches one. In the meantime, Bonior, who has very close ties to labor unions, has signed on as a senior adviser to Edwards' leadership PAC.
And, remember, for the latest political news at any time, check out our Political Ticker at CNN.com/ticker.
Coming up: The top military spokesman in Iraq weighs in on the Robert Gates confirmation hearings. Did the defense secretary nominee do anything to undermine U.S. troop morale in Iraq? That's coming up in our next hour.
Also coming up: independents day and the presidential prospects on parade. Could one mayor turn the race and the party system upside down? Jeff Greenfield standing by with that.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back.
Let's check in with Mary Snow for a closer look at some other stories making news -- Mary.
SNOW: Wolf, U.S. authorities have the ability to consistently stop illegal border crossings over less than 15 percent of the border with Mexico. That's according to a just-released report to Congress from the Department of Homeland Security. The agency says it has -- quote -- "effective control" over 284 miles of the nearly 2,000-mile southern border. According to the report, it will take another five years and more than $7.5 billion to secure the entire border. At this hour, the doors are closed at nine Taco Bell restaurants in New York and New Jersey, after an outbreak of E. coli poisoning. Health officials from the two states say most of the 39 victims identified so far ate at one of the Taco Bell outlets, before becoming ill. But they say they're still investigating, and no definite link to the fast-food chain has been established.
New York will become the nation's first city to ban artificial trans fats from all restaurants, bakeries and food service establishments. A short time ago, the city's board of health voted unanimously in favor of the ban, but slightly relaxed the deadline to comply. I will take a look at this story in the next hour of THE SITUATION ROOM.
And snow and ice storms, from Texas to Michigan, are now being blamed for at least 23 deaths. And forecasters say there's more wintry weather on the way. These pictures here are from eastern Missouri, where some areas were pummeled with as much as 16 inches of snow overnight. Another surge of arctic air is expected to move across the eastern part of the country later this week -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, Mary, thank you -- Mary Snow reporting.
Still ahead: An outspoken critic of the president's Iraq policy considers the way forward. In our next hour, I will be speaking with former Democratic Senator Max Cleland, and ask him if the White House seems poised to change direction, or duck and cover.
And is Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki the right person to lead Iraq into the future? Jack Cafferty with your e-mail, that's coming up as well.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Here is Jack Cafferty. Let's check in with him.
Hi, Jack.
CAFFERTY: The question, Wolf: Is Nuri al-Maliki the right person to lead Iraq into the future?
Jeremiah in San Francisco wrote this: "I think al-Maliki could be the right leader for Iraq, but only if he's friendly to Bush's oil agenda and pro-Western occupation without end in sight, and if he can rule with an iron fist, as Saddam did, after he was installed in Iraq by the United States. We only need him in there for 20 years or so, until we dispose of him for a new best friend in the Middle East."
Kathy in Georgia writes: "Are you sure you want to ask Americans if al-Maliki is the best person to lead Iraq? We put George Bush in office twice. Look where that got us."
Tom in Maine writes: "There's no such place as Iraq. It was a figment of the English and French imaginations after World War I. The Shia need to be reunited with the Shia of Iran. The Sunni need to be governed not by their enemies, but by either Jordan or Syria. And the Kurds should be allowed self-government and independence."
Paula in New Mexico: "Such a question wouldn't have been asked if Iraq had been left alone to sort out its own problems, rather than be invaded by the United States. Saddam Hussein was strong enough to keep the various disparate factions in Iraq apart and coexisting peaceably."
Brian in Florida writes: "Jack, it all depends on what future you are talking about. What is to stop him, al-Maliki, from forming an alliance with Iran and Syria, and telling us to get the hell out? In that case, he may just be doing us a favor.
And Bob in Sherman Oaks, California: "No. The only good thing about al-Maliki is that his name is worth 23,000 points in Scrabble" -- Wolf.
(LAUGHTER)
BLITZER: Twenty-three..
(LAUGHTER)
BLITZER: Good. That's a good thing to know. I like that game. Thanks, Jack, for that.
Still to come: Senators of both parties sound impressed with Robert Gates' performance today at his confirmation hearings. But what about the reviews inside the Pentagon? We are going to have a full report on that in our next hour.
And Democrats and Republicans already are drawing lines in the sand in the early race for the White House. But could someone score by finding middle ground?
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Top Democrats and Republicans are scrambling to position themselves for 2008, and to win their party's presidential nominations. But could there be a third way to the White House?
Let's turn to our senior analyst, Jeff Greenfield -- Jeff.
JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST: Wolf, as the presidential wannabes begin their declarations and explorations, a specter is haunting the process, the possibility of a well-armed credible independent candidate. It's only a possibility, but one with more credibility than usual.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GREENFIELD (voice-over): The possibility? New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, whose image graces the cover of this week's "New York" magazine, along with quotes from him and some aides, suggesting that the presidency has at least produced a fleeting thought, or two, or 10.
If he did try, Bloomberg would be fighting a strong historical tide. Ever since the first Republican president in 1860, fellow name of Lincoln, we have had only Republicans or Democrats. The only second-place finish belonged to Teddy Roosevelt, a former president, and his running mate, California Governor Hiram Johnson. They got 28 percent of the popular vote and 88 electoral votes.
In fact, over the last 80 years, only two Southern segregationists, South Carolina's Strom Thurmond in 1948, Alabama Governor George Wallace in '68, got any electoral votes at all. Ross Perot got 19 percent of the popular vote in '92, but he flunked out of the Electoral College.
So, why would this independent effort be different from all others? Well, for one thing, money would be no object. Multibillionaire Bloomberg could drop half-a-billion dollars into the race without breaking a sweat. For another, it is much easier to get on the ballot these days, thanks to Ross Perot, who spent millions in '92 fighting the two-party-only rules.
(MUSIC)
GREENFIELD: Then, there is the capacity of the Internet to help with organization and mobilization. Howard Dean's campaign showed that in 2004.
And, unlike most past third-party candidates, who have tended to come from the ideological hot zones, Bloomberg is relentlessly centrist. This past year, he helped Republicans, Democrats and independents alike with money and troops.
Maybe most significant, if least appreciated, Americans have moved away from traditional choices all over the place. We used to have three networks, three auto companies, one telephone company, two soft drinks. Now, a company that didn't exist two years ago is watched by millions and worth more than $1 billion.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GREENFIELD: Sure, it's unlikely. Bloomberg would need a credible running mate with national security credentials. And he would need to show that a Jewish, vertically challenged, blunt- speaking billionaire had real national appeal.
It's just that, not so long ago, the whole idea would have been not just unlikely, but impossible. Not now -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Jeff Greenfield, reporting for us, thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
