MTP Transcript for Dec. 31

MR. RUSSERT: Gene Robinson, you think the Democrats will go along with the president sending more troops to Iraq?

MR. ROBINSON: Well, you know, it’s, it’s interesting. It looks, at the moment as if they will. I would take issue only with the, the assertion that it will be down from 160. I’m not sure it will be. I’m not sure the troop level will be down from there. It could be 160 or more, depending on, on what the “surge” is, because, from what I hear from President Bush, he does not seem to see this as a two- or three-month deal, and, in fact, what can you do with 20,000 or 30,000 additional troops in just a few months? The military analysts seem to say, basically, not very much. It, it takes much longer than that to pacify a megalopolis like Baghdad. And, and so I think troop levels could be quite high at the end of the year.

MR. RUSSERT: Kate O’Beirne, we expect to hear from the president next week or two about his decision on Iraq. He has said repeatedly, “If the generals want more troops, they get them; they want fewer troops, they get that.” We’ve seen published reports of the chiefs—Joint Chiefs of Staff, of military people on the ground opposing this surge. How does he deal with it? How does he finesse that?

MS. O’BEIRNE: Well, of course Bill Safire had a lot of company, well-informed company, when he was predicting that there’d be a drawdown by the end of this year. General Casey predicted a drawdown by the end of this year. And what we’ve learned since Don Rumsfeld left the Pentagon is that he was very much in step with his field commanders, because there’s resistance on the part of General Casey and others to increasing the number of troops, owing to their conviction. True, they, they buy the Rumsfeld theory, that the lighter footprint is better, that the—they need more troops, but they should be Iraqi troops, and that the military is simply stretched too far.

The most hawkish voices president’s listening to, including former vice chief of staff of the Army Jack Keane, says minimum 30,000, minimum 18 months. So I think Gene’s right. I, I wouldn’t expect, if there is this surge, that it, that it would be temporary.

MR. RUSSERT: E.J., how do Democrats handle this?

MR. DIONNE: I think it’s going to be difficult for them in a technical sense, because the president does have this power. And there’re only so many things that Congress can do. They can cut off the funds, which a lot of Democrats say they don’t want to do. I think most of them are going to come out against the surge, and I think they’re going to do so for this reason: that, first of all, this is the first time the president’s going to have to publicly break with some substantial number of people in his own military who’re saying, “We don’t think this works.”

Secondly, I think the surge is premised on the idea, “Well, those who supported the war can’t think of anything else, so let’s surge.” But I think it’s based on the same false optimism that misled us right from the beginning of the war, that this was going to be easy, that there would be no civil war, the famous Cheney interview on your show. And I don’t yet see the surge connected to a political program to change Iraq enough to create more security. Maybe Bill will be right and they’ll have some sudden coming together of so-called moderate forces. I’m just very pessimistic about that happening. And I don’t think the surge helps that political outcome.

MR. RUSSERT: Think in—back in history, Michael Beschloss. If a president steps forward and says, “I’m going to send more American troops to Iraq,” which now is approved about 15--by 15 percent of the American people...

MR. BESCHLOSS: Right.

MR. RUSSERT: ...you assume that when he gets behind the issue and tries to go around the country and campaign for it, that margin may go up a little bit. But there’re probably be very strong opposition from the Democratic Party. How does history look upon a president taking on an issue like that, that is so unpopular, when it involves the young men and women of the military?

MR. BESCHLOSS: Ultimately, if it works in the end, he’s honored; and if it doesn’t, he’s reviled, as Lyndon Johnson was in Vietnam.

MR. SAFIRE: That’s exactly right.

MR. BESCHLOSS: And you know, the other thing, Tim, you know, I’ve just been thinking as we’ve been talking about this, presidents fight wars much more effectively when you have a big risk opposition. Franklin Roosevelt before World War II, huge isolationist worry about getting involved in World War II. And also, during the war, a lot of people in Congress holding Roosevelt’s feet to the fire.

That really hasn’t happened with George Bush. In 2002, there were too many Democrats who, you know, we would all hear in Washington, who privately were saying, “I’m really worried about this war, I wish I could be against it, but I’m terrified to vote against it because it might defeat me next time.” That has been one reason why this war has been not as well prosecuted as it, as it should be.

MR. RUSSERT: And now the Democrats are lining up, those who are running for president, saying, “My vote was wrong.”

MR. BESCHLOSS: Right.

MR. RUSSERT: It was a mistake.

MR. BESCHLOSS: Right.

MR. DIONNE: Except for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

MR. RUSSERT: So far, the one exception. Which I want to turn to presidential politics, and we can continue to weave in Iraq into that.

But two questions in the office pool for Mr. Safire involve the Democrats and the Republicans. Who will lead amongst primary voters at the end of 2007? Mr. Safire lists Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Gore, and then Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Dean. He predicts Hillary Clinton will lead by the end of ‘07.

MR. SAFIRE: She’s organized, she’s ready, and we’re going to see all these “of the month” candidates. All of a sudden we see the emergence of the number one best seller on The New York Times’ Best Seller list, Obama—Barack Obama.

MR. RUSSERT: And John Edwards had a very good roll-out. Big crowds in New Hampshire...

MR. SAFIRE: Right, right, right.

MR. RUSSERT: ...Iowa, Nevada, his home state of North Carolina.

MR. SAFIRE: But, you see, what will, will—what we have to do is come up with somebody new every couple of months. And we all swarm all over him. In a couple of months, I’m sure, it’s going to dawn on somebody that the Hispanic vote is very important. And then we’ll look around, and there the Democrats will have Bill Richardson. And he’ll be on the cover of Time and Newsweek.

MR. RUSSERT: Gene Robinson, is Obama simply the candidate du jour, or do you think that he will run, and has real political legs in a tough primary battle?

MR. ROBINSON: I think he will run, and I think—I think he does have legs. I’m not sure he will win the nomination or win the presidency. I think that’s a—that’s tougher for him in many ways than Hillary Clinton. I mean if—you know, look at the fascinating race, you’ve got, you know, the first really, really credible black candidate, the first really, really credible female candidate. We don’t have historical precedent to look back on to see how blacks and women do in national elections. But if you look at statewide elections, women do a lot better than, than black people do. There are currently, what, eight or nine female governors. There have been two in our—two black governors in our history. There are 16, I think, female senators. There’s one black senator, Senator Obama. So you’d have to say the hill is higher for him than it is for Hillary.

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

Nov. 8: Casey, Barbour, Rendell, roundtable, Brokaw Nov. 1: Tim Geithner, David Plouffe, roundtable Oct. 25: Cornyn, Schumer, Burnett, Sorkin, roundtable Oct. 18: Jarrett, Dodd, Kyl, Shriver, Podesta Oct. 11: Levin, Graham, McCaffrey, Myers, roundtable Oct. 4: Ambassador Susan Rice, roundtable Sept. 27: Bill Clinton, Paterson, Kyl, Webb Sept. 20: President Obama, Sen. Graham, Rep. Boehner, roundtable Sept. 13: Durbin, Cornyn, Dean, Gingrich, roundtable Sept. 6: Axelrod, roundtable Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: