January 2007 - Posts
Earlier this month, American forces in Iraq raided an Iranian facility in the Kurdish city of Irbil. Documents and computer files seized in that raid indicate that the facility was being used by members of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in an operation to provide money and weapons to various Shia militia groups in Iraq. The weapons include advanced improvised explosive devices, mortars, newer generation rocket propelled grenades and shoulder-fired surface to air missiles. The advanced IED’s have already killed American troops, and mortars allegedly traceable to Iran have been used in attacks on Sunni areas of Baghdad.
Is the IRGC operating in Kurdish northern Iraq? Of course they are - they’ve been there since at least 1991. Soon after the Iraqi defeat in Kuwait, IRGC officers conducted clandestine and covert operations in the southern Shia area and the northern Kurdish area, and have been active there ever since.
CONTINUED >>
UPDATED WITH VIDEO
While Ari Fleischer’s testimony about a July 7, 2003 lunch with Libby appears to be the most dramatic testimony against Libby so far, inside the courtroom this has also been the first time in the trial we’ve noticed every juror/alternate appearing to write down everything the witness is saying. Fleischer is answering his questions by looking at the jury as he responds, and as Fleischer testified about being told by Scooter Libby over lunch that “Ambassador Wilson was sent (to Niger) by his wife, she works at the CIA, and she works in the CIA’s Counter Proliferation Division,” all of the jurors/alternates were writing in their notebooks. A few minutes later, during another question, the jurors all looked down and wrote in their notebooks again when Fleischer said, “The information about Wilson’s was wife was news to me. It was the first time I had ever heard it.”
Watch Shuster's report from Hardball
Recent media reports indicate that the Bush administration has given new instructions to American forces across the Middle East on how to deal with Iranian operatives. No more catch and release – now the orders are to capture or kill them. It’s about time.
CONTINUED >>
Does what happen in Vegas really stay in Vegas?
CONTINUED >>
In the prosecution effort to prove that Scooter Libby knew about Valerie Wilson before he spoke with reporters... prosecutors today introduced their first document into evidence establishing that Libby knew the name “Valerie Wilson” in June 2003. This followed the testimony of two other government officials (another at the CIA and an undersecretary of state who testified they told Libby about Valerie Wilson in early June 2003.)
The document shows the handwritten notes of Scooter Libby’s morning CIA briefer Craig Schmall from June 14, 2003. Schmall testified that he wrote down notes on the table of contents for the daily brief that reflect either “reaction” from Libby to issues presented, questions the CIA needed to answer or “feedback.”
CONTINUED >>
By Jonathan Alter, Newsweek senior editor
Something unprecedented happened tonight, beyond the doorkeeper announcing, “Madame Speaker.” For the first time ever, the response to the State of the Union overshadowed the president’s big speech. Virginia Sen. James Webb, in office only three weeks, managed to convey a muscular liberalism-with personal touches-that left President Bush’s ordinary address in the dust. In the past, the Democratic response has been anemic—remember Washington State Governor Gary Locke? This time it pointed the way to a revival for national Democrats.
CONTINUED >>
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., On Energy:
"He raised the bar even beyond what some folks like us thought was possible. The reality is that we have to end our dependence on foreign oil. It’s a security threat and the president recognizes that. This is very, very good news. Now we have to convert it to reality.”
Rep. Hilda Solis, D-Calif., On Iraq:
"The president would have talked about many of the things he spoke about five years ago. The buildup to the war and the 20,000 troops he’s going to send was new. I know the public is strongly against that and a lot in the Hispanic community are against that notion. I think he needs to do a lot more rethinking and talk to all of us.”
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., On Sacrifice:
"The speech was flat. It didn’t have a sense of vision or where we’re going as a nation, as a people. He didn’t ask the American people to sacrifice, to give up anything. The only people giving up something are the young men and young women serving in Iraq.”z
Was President Bush sincere in his call for bipartisanship? Sen. Hillary Clinton told Chris Matthews “the jury is still out.” Clinton was more decisive on the president’s plan for Iraq. “I don’t think it’s going to sell,” she said.
You can read the full transcript after the fold....
CONTINUED >>
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., On Iraq:
”Either we get out of Iraq or we do what people have been asking for a long time. New leadership and a new strategy. We have new leadership, we have a new strategy. The last thing I think we want is for Congress to micromanage the war. We have one commander in chief.”
Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. On Economy & Immigration:
"I appreciated that the president talked about the economy first—that he brought attention to the issue of spending. This is an administration that has spent too much. I’m concerned that he wants comprehensive immigration reform because I don’t agree with him on that. I think you secure the borders first, then you address your visa issues and your employer issues, but you do it one step at a time.”
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., On Being ‘Underwhelmed:’
"I’m underwhelmed. He didn’t really say anything new. We want some answers. I’m not convinced that he has his arms around [the war]. I left kind of disappointed that we didn’t really hear a president who could convince us that he really was in charge of this war.”
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
The view from Statuary Hall, where members of Congress file out after the State of the Union speech, can best be described as an intensely chaotic popularity contest. Television reporters fighting print reporters for a moment of a key lawmaker’s time. Spotlights glaring. Cameras rolling. Reporters can be seen straining mightily over the velvet rope separating the journalistic masses from waves of lawmakers. Tape recorders dangle from our fingertips as we get that perfect sound bite. For few minutes early in the rush, someone flipped the power off. TV folks were horrified but us print guys didn’t miss a beat. The lights and cameras came back on, and the buzz grew to a dull roar.
By Tucker Carlson
What’s Nancy Pelosi so mad about? You think she’d be in a pretty good mood, sitting in the speaker’s chair, listening as the president sucks up to her. But for much of the night, she’s looked grouchy, like she’d just informed a class full of kindergartners that, no, they may not be excused to use the bathroom. Maybe grumpiness is just her default emotion. Maybe that’s how she got to be speaker in the first place. Memo to the Democratic caucus: Find someone else to do PR.
By Chuck Todd
“If he does not, we will be showing him the way...”
That last line by Webb was one of the tougher Dem responses we’ve seen the last six years. It was confrontational; it’s not going to go over well with the folks in the West Wing.
Democrats and President Bush abandon the Republican Radicals - Can Triangulation be a good thing?
Democrats want to show this country they can lead and Chris Matthews just hit the nail right on the head. There ARE issues on which Democrats may agree with the president while members of his own party will remain staunchly opposed to action. Democrats should go for it. On Immigration, on Healthcare, on Education and on Energy.
Democrats have nothing to lose by trying to find common ground while keeping firm to their core values. The president has no ability to really LEAD on these issues. But he can help the process and sign the bills into law.
If Democrats want their base to be happy, they will stand firm and help bring an end to the war in Iraq while they work with the president on the issues he raised tonight and cannot possibly achieve on his own ...but neither can they achieve them without him.
By Chuck Todd
No one can say that Bush’s speech didn’t reflect the gravity of the situation the country is in re: Iraq. He was serious; he was almost smirkless; But it was simply language; he still needs to figure out some way to agree to something the Democrats want on Iraq so as to stop having the Iraq War being viewed as a “Republican War.” He still seems to be in the mode of wanting to prove (or is it plead?) that his way is still the right way in Iraq. Why he doesn’t call the Democrats’ bluff on Iraq is beyond me. This stubbornness on this issue, in political terms, is toxic for the Republican Party going into 2008.
This speech won’t go down in presidential history; but at least there wasn’t a “mission to Mars” challenge. All-in-all, I go back to my original suggestion: the White House should have punted the SOTU this year. Bush needs to consume the Iraq issue the way the war has consumed his presidency.
By Tucker Carlson
It’s repulsive to watch Democrats who hate Bush for a living beg for his autograph as he leaves the chamber. Get some self respect.
If U.S. forces leave Iraq, the flawed but fundamentally pro-American government will fall, and the country—possibly the region—will explode. That was the truest, most important thing Bush said tonight. Yes, he’s a flawed messenger. But it’s hard to argue with the message. Those who say we ought to withdraw troops immediately ought to explain why they believe otherwise.
By Joe Scarborough inside the chamber
Don’t know how it looks on TV but the President looks more in control and confident in person tonight than he has in any of the State of the Unions I have seen from this great chamber.
Not bad for a man with his back against the wall. Members applauding the president as he is leaving the hall agreed it was one of his best.
By Chuck Todd
Bush is giving one of his better speeches; Very few smirks; he’s forceful; on the body language front: it’s one of his better performances.
By Chuck Todd
Since the POTUS decided to insert an NBA break into his speech, I figured I’d update folks on what many of us Wizards fans thought would be a great game to attend. Bush’s SOTU in DC was up against the Wizards-Suns game. Well, the Suns whooped the Wizards, 127-105. Speaking of the NBA and Mutumbo, the Wizards could really use a shot blocker of Dikembe’s caliber.
By Tucker Carlson
“We advance our own interests by helping reformers and advocates for democracy”? That was Bush’s position on the Middle East immediately after 9-11 and, remarkably, it remains his position. He said it again tonight. But can he actually mean it? Would it really “advance our interests” to have a democratically-elected government in Saudi Arabia? In Egypt? In nuclear-armed Pakistan? In every case, democracy would all but guarantee the election of Islamic lunatics who hate us. Those countries and others (Kuwait, the UAE, Qatar) would likely become dangerous enemies overnight. Bush’s democracy doctrine—it sounds good if you don’t think about it very long. And apparently he hasn’t.
Imagine that you’re John McCain. You’re running for president for the second time, and this time you’re widely considered the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Knowing that, you’ve got to expect that whomever is directing the television coverage of tonight’s speech is going to point the camera your way. You’re going to be on primetime TV, no doubt. With that in mind, you’re going to want to stay awake. If you’re McCain, who will be over 70 by 2008, you’ll want to make doubly sure to demonstrate your alertness and vigor. You definitely won’t want to slump in your seat, out cold, when Bush starts talking about Iraq. And yet that’s exactly what McCain did tonight, napping on camera for ten agonizing seconds. Lack of self-control? An expression of contempt? Embarrassing in any case.
The president doesn’t get very far by suggesting that only some people in the Chamber understand what is at stake in Iraq. He actually said that?
Dick Cheney’s glasses are crooked on his face. Speaker Pelosi’s facial don’t really hide her true feelings very well. Should they? Nah.
By Mike Barnicle
The weight of the war is in the president's voice tonight. He has become, over time, another casualty of the choice he made to invade Iraq. His weariness is evident. He wears the toll on his face, his graying hair evidence of the stress and strain and heartache he lives with each day when he is presented with the toll of dead and maimed. Across the land tonight, the state of the union is questioning and troubled because of this mismanaged fight George Bush began in places like Baghdad and Fallujah where the noblest among us - those who wear the uniform of our country - are being used as pawns in a civil war that has its roots in dusty centuries of the past.
First, a tip of the hat. The President’s salute to Nancy Pelosi was clever and classy.
But he just has no credibility talking about domestic problems in this country. The President wants a balanced budget and no tax increases. He says he wants to offer health insurance tax deductions for people - though most people who need insurance don’t make enough money to take advantage of the tax credit. Presumably, he is doing it this way because he thinks direct reimbursement of providing health insurance would be too expensive. He wants to reauthorize the “No Child Left Behind Act’ for education though he doesn’t want to give the schools any more money. Presumably that’s too expensive. He wants energy independence but won’t increase the royalties paid by oil companies for extracting oil on federal land or suggest new federal subsidies for alternative fuels. Presumably that’s too expensive.
How expensive? For the cost of the war today in Iraq, we could fund a significant portion of the above and still have money left. We could give universal pre-school for every child in this country and cover their health care costs - and still have money left. We could double health research for Cancer, AIDS and heart disease and still have money left. We could add to that a tripling of funds we have given to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast and still have money left. And what? You say what about national secuirty because of the terrrist threat? Oh yes, we could also fund port screening, and rail and ship carrier screenings and other first responder needs.
If our national domestic priorities were truly meaningful for the President, they wouldn’t be too expensive.
The Democratic response from Senator Webb needs to applaud the President for putting domestic issues back on the agenda and not let him get away with shortcutting a rational explanation about his goals and exit strategy for Iraq. And then Democrats need to show the country why we have sought their leadership in the Congress once again. And Jim Webb needs to pull out his best story telling face.
By Joe Scarborough inside the chamber
I just saw the wave sweep through the United States Congress.
As President Bush called for affordable health care, Democrats swept to their feet at once cheering wildly. Republicans sat frozen in their chairs, but only for a few seconds. Soon enough a GOP member figured that keeping health care costs low might not be such a bad idea. Row by row Republican congressmen and senators jumped to their feet as the wave swept from my left to right.
Democrats reacted similarly when the President called for balancing the budget without raising taxes. On that issue, GOP members shouted with joy while Democrats sat stubbornly in their seats. But soon enough, they lumbered to their feet figuring that being seen as the party of higher taxes might not be good for maintaining their majority status. Again, the wave swept across the hall but this time from right to left.
And then President Bush began explaining the details of his health care plan. Looking across the room, I saw just how contageous a yawn could be. It swept from the floor to the press galary. One young reporter looked as if he would slump over the railing and land on the Speaker’s podium if the President stayed on the subject a minute longer.
Fortunately for the young man and Mrs. Pelosi, Mr. Bush moved on.
By Chuck Todd
Was that just John McCain looking at his Blackberry instead of listening to Bush?
By Tucker Carlson
Bio diesel! Bush said it. And suddenly the Kucinich connection is clear. Kucinich was the only presidential candidate in the 2004 primaries whose campaign bus was powered by bio diesel. It was an old school bus, as I remember. I saw it putt by in Manchester during the New Hampshire primary one day. Its exhaust smelled like Dunkin’ Donuts. For that reason alone, I support bio diesel.
“Renewable fuels.” That’s a euphemism for ethanol, the corn-based gasoline so dear to the corporate farmers of the Midwest. When Bush announced that the federal government will encourage the use of (read: provide more subsidies for) ethanol, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa looked like he’d hit the lotto. Which he had.
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
I won’t be one of those bloggers who counts the rounds of applause tonight... but one of the first deafening clapfests came when President Bush said Congress should help the healthcare community by protecting “good doctors from junk lawsuits by passing medical liability reform.” Immigration reform also got a lengthy hand-slapping.
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
As President Bush kicked off his big speech tonight, he welcomed new members of the House and Senate and gave a noticeable little smirk when he congratulated the Democratic-led majority. He paused then continued: “Congress has changed, but our responsibilities have not. Each of us is guided by our own convictions—and to these we must stay faithful.”
By Chuck Todd
I wonder how many members of Congress realized, when combing their hair and touching up their face tonight, that more folks would be watching them in HDTV than ever before? Call me superficial, but there are some things that just weren’t meant for HDTV... the SOTU is one of them.
By Tucker Carlson
Of all the Members of Congress Bush greeted on his way into the chamber, none held on longer than Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Democrat and vegan of Ohio. Bush kept smiling, but with his hands he seemed to be struggling to get away. Kucinich is obviously stronger than he looks, though, and Bush was forced to listen to whatever he said. I’m not much of a lip-reader, though I’d bet Kucinich, a veteran presidential candidate himself, was offering advice. I’d give a week’s salary to know what it was.
“Eliminate the federal deficit in the next five years”? “Restrain the appetite of the federal government”? “Balance the federal budget”? All worthy, conservative goals. Ironic that it’s taken the election of a Democratic Congress to get Bush to focus on them.
Bush is still making the case for school choice: “The right of children stuck in failing schools to choose someplace better.” Good for him. It’s a worthy idea, and a popular one with urban parents who can’t afford private school. What exactly is the argument against it? There much of one. It hasn’t passed on the federal level because the teachers’ unions, the only people in America who have a vested interest in the current monopoly, oppose it. And Democrats take many millions in campaign contributions from the teachers’ unions. Fifty years from now, it’ll be obvious Bush was right.
By Mike Barnicle
Someone just told me that someone named Tom Tancredo is running for president. He is a Republican congressman. His big issue is border security. The President is talking about his big issue and I am thinking of how many Americans would try to crash the border and escape to Canada is this Tancredo ever won.
By Chuck Todd
Poor Ron Wyden, he’s the senator who was just standing next to a very well-groomed and tanned John Kerry. Of course, Kerry may simply be ready for his live shot.
By Mike Barnicle
What’s the deal? What’s going on here? Do all these people get into to hear this speech after flashing a secret de-coder ring at the door? Bush just mentioned eliminating something called ‘earmarks’ - a legislative trick where members of congress act like pigs and get millions of tax dollars for useless projects back home - and the TV shots of the crowd showed Dick Cheney and several other pols winking and nodding as if they know the rest of us, the rubes back home, will never catch on to the fact they will do nothing to control their political greed.
By Chuck Todd
Any chance advisers to Nancy Pelosi had a conversation with her about facial expressions?
By Joe Scarborough
As the President entered the room an old friend sprinted for the exit.
“It sucks being in the minority. I’m going to the cloak room.”
He wasn’t alone. More than a few GOP members groused about the first female speaker that the President tipped his hat at the top of the speech.
Mr. Bush set the right tone off the top and actually looks better and more relaxed than he has in the four other state of the union speeches I have seen.
Maybe being in the minority will liberate him in a way it did Bill Clinton in 1996. Little comfort for the GOP House members seething in their seats.
By Joe Scarborough
Walking on the floor of Congress on the night of the President’s State of the Union is like nothing in American politics. Looking around now I see the top presidential contenders for 2008, the Chief Justice of the United States, the first woman Speaker in US history and scores of old friends.
It feels like a high school reunion with very powerful classmates that stuck around the campus for another five years or so.
Republicans are in a surly mood and for good reason. The president they will hear tonight has put them in the minority for the foreseeable future and that is bad news for House members. But one senator told me he liked his new status.
“The Senate rules are so screwed up that we have more power in the minority than when we were in power.”
And so it goes in Washington’s screwed up world.
By Chuck Todd
Wanna piss off an elected Democrat? Call them members of the “Democrat” Party and not Democratic as Bush just did. Keep track of how many times he says “Democrat” in lieu of “Democratic.”
By Mike Barnicle
Math has never been my strong suit. And I have difficulty balancing my check book. But you don't have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out that A. Nancy Pelosi's outfit cost more than the average American paid for their first home and B. there is a pretty high degree of difficulty involved in balancing the federal budget yet the leader of the free world just told us, "We can do so without raising taxes." And half the people in the hall - Bush's half -stood and cheered.
Huh?
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
Earmarks really irk President Bush. In his State of the Union speech, the president noted that special interest items are often stealthily slipped into bills “when not even C-SPAN is watching.” As if C-SPAN could keep track. In 2005, the number of earmarks grew to more than 13,000 worth an estimated $1.8 billion. Bush said over 90 percent of the pork never makes it to the House or Senate floor. The language is tucked into committee reports “that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk,” Bush bemoaned. “The time has come to end this practice.”
Lawmakers seem to be a step ahead of the president. One of the first orders of business in the new Congress was the House adoption of rules that put new restrictions on earmarks. Those pork plugs will be in effect for the duration of the 110th Congress. The Senate followed suit in amending its operations.
To underscore the problem, watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste identified 9,963 pork projects costing $29 billion in the 11 fiscal 2006 appropriations bills. They included $1 million for the Waterfree Urinal Conservation Initiative and $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C.
By Chuck Todd
Good for Bush. Say what you want about him, there’s still an active personal charm gene. That Pelosi intro was well done.
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
Maybe I’m still reeling from the Golden Globes, but I would be remiss if I didn’t engage in some “red carpet” musings as lawmakers and dignitaries file into the chamber. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with a carefully coiffed hairdo, was decked out in a muted grayish pantsuit and seemed ready to turn on the charm.
Vice President Dick Cheney looked dapper in his navy blue suit with white shirt and purplish patterned tie. His wife donned a classic but boxy off-white number. Illinois Democrat Barack Obama, a presidential hopeful in 2008, flashed a bright smile and gave hearty handshakes as he arrived.
Laura Bush showed up wearing a classy magenta suit with gold buttons and her husband, the star of the show, entered wearing a navy blue suit, white shirt and light blue tie—a classic look for the commander in chief.
The nine Supreme Court justices filed in wearing slimming black robes. Now that’s predictable.
By NBC's Adam Verdugo
Members of opposite parties, casually they walked side by side- one, all but officially running for president, the other, on the verge of making his first major political speech. As I deboarded the underground subway beneath the Capitol building, excited about covering my first State of the Union, Senators John McCain and Jim Webb were walking together - by themselves, absent their respective staffers. They were conversing, collegially. Both had relaxed postures. At one point McCain patted Webb on the back, perhaps to wish him luck for the task that lay before him, or perhaps McCain was sending well wishes to his son.
Now, standing anxiously idle with my media cohorts (probably close to 200 of us), I see the entrance of the House chamber about 50 yards away. In just a few moments, for the first time in history, we will hear the words ‘madame (italics) speaker, the president of the united states.’
Not bad for my first.
By Chuck Todd
Stray thought... Considering the negative vibe the country can’t seem to shake when it comes to Bush right now, thanks mostly to Iraq, one wonders why the White House even bothered with a SOTU. In fact, here’s a thought: imagine if the president announced that he was scrapping the traditional SOTU and instead was asking for 15 min of prime time each week to update the country on the progress (or lack thereof) in Iraq.
By canceling the SOTU, it would have shaken the average citizen into thinking Bush now realizes Iraq has consumed his presidency. In fact, it may have sent the message that Bush knows Iraq is such an anchor, he’s going forego the window dressing of domestic legislation and instead consume himself with Iraq.
Bottom line: this SOTU has the potential for being the least impactful of Bush’s presidency, so why not use the country’s personal disinterest in listening to Bush right now and instead try for a grand gesture to buy some credibility on Iraq.
Curious what others think of this idea. It couldn’t have hurt, right?
By Mike Barnicle
Let's get right to it. Bush, the poor guy, is living in a state of delusion. He's acting and talking more and more like the nutty uncle who shows up at family holiday parties and has everyone taping their eyebrows open as he bores them to near-death with the same old, tired routine year after year after year.
Here he is again, a tragic and needless war being fought in Iraq, a war that has taken over 3000 of our best and many thousands more Iraqis, a war that has diverted our energy and resources from the larger war on global terror and the President of the United States stands on the floor of the House and actually says, "We can work through our differences."
This, after nearly seven years when the people around him have spent unusual amounts of energy trashing or ignoring anyone who disagreed or even sought to discuss the obvious differences that divide the nation.
By Colleen King, Hardball producer
Asecurity detail came through the hall and the camera flash bulbs started going off. All of a sudden Vice President Cheney walked quietly past all of the reporters (we are standing behind velvet ropes). He was wearing a dark suit and smiling. Dozens upon dozens of senators followed him in line, in pairings you might not expect: VT Sen. Patrick Leahy talking with Ohio Sen. George Voinovich. Senators Snowe and Landrieu side by side. Texas Republican John Cornyn chatting with John Kerry.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski walked in with Sen. Ben Cardin, and between them was Sen. John Warner. Mikulski said: The Democrats are protecting John Warner!”
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
An interesting array of guests will keep First Lady Laura Bush company tonight in her box at the State of the Union.
Guests include: Julie Aigner-Clark, founder of the Baby Einstein Company; Wesley Autrey, the construction worker who leapt onto the New York City subway tracks to save a man who had fallen after having a seizure; Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen breast cancer foundation; Suzanne Lewis, superintendent of Yellowstone National Park; Dikembe Mutombo, a center for the Houston Rockets professional basketball team; and Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
This might make for an intersting game of "six degrees of separation."
Wheew! Just got off air from Hardball and it is hard for me to admit but I could barely get a word in edgewise between Chris, John Harwood and Jonathan Alter - all smart and fast.
So what, Chris asked, is the story from the State of the Union tonight? Jonathan made a great point - usually a president goes to foreign affairs issues to unite a country because domestic affairs can be so divisive. Tonight, President Bush is going to try the opposite.
Will it work?
I don’t think so. Because the biggest takeaway from tonight’s speech to Congress just may be the line of Republicans waiting at the microphones in order to distance themselves from the president’s latest plans for Iraq. Yes, the Democrats have come out in united opposition to increasing the number of troops sent to Iraq. But the really interesting and I believe definitive problem is that thoughtful Republican leaders like Sen. John Warner, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and Sen. Richard Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee are drafting a resolution to try and stop the president’s plans.
In the green room, Andy Card (former Chief of Staff to President Bush) told me that this won’t bother the president as much as we might think. Because this president, Andy said, is perfectly comfortable being totally alone if he is convinced he is right. He will be lonely tonight, for sure.
Check back at 9 p.m. ET when Joe Scarborough, Tucker Carlson, Hilary Rosen, Mike Barnicle, Chuck Todd and other experts will live blog the State of the Union address right here on Hardblogger.
In the meantime, go to MSNBC.com's special section for full coverage on the president's speech, and comment to this post with your own thoughts about the current state of the nation.
By Andrew Noyes, National Journal's Beltway Blogroll
White House spokesman Tony Snow told bloggers with “a wonkish inclination” this afternoon that the first half of President Bush’s State of the Union speech would focus on domestic policy and the second half would address foreign issues.
The president tonight will not spend much time on “the way forward in Iraq,” which he spoke publicly about last week, Snow said on a conference call with about 25 Internet pundits. But he will emphasize that the Democratic-led Congress has a chance to work with the White House “to get stuff done.”
CONTINUED >>
So here’s the real state of the union.
The country wants change. I just checked the betting odds on the 2008 election. John McCain is the favorite to win the whole thing. He’s got a 23 % chance. Hillary Clinton is in second place with 19 %. Barack Obama is third with 11 percent. Rudy Guiliani is fourth with 10 percent.
A University of Pennsylvania professor of economics has determined that these betting odds are the best forecast of who is actually going to win the election. Don’t look at the polls, he says, look at the money people are putting down on the results. That’s the best way to figure how 2008 is going to turn out.
So if you ask me from now on how the state of the union is going, I’m going to Intrade.com and then to the "politics" category to tell you the answer.
Right now, I’d say the country is in the mood for change. We’re already looking ahead, and placing bets, on who’s going to bring it.
You know, nothing thrills me more than to catch SNL doing a take-off on Hardball (video). Darrell Hammond is a wonder - whether he’s doing Dick Cheney, Donald Trump, Sean Connery or me. Amy Poehler makes one wicked Hillary Clinton.
The jury is set and the opening arguments will begin Tuesday morning in the case of the U.S. v. Libby.
Here are Mr. Libby’s 12 peers – nine women, three men -- who will be considering the evidence and rendering a verdict of guilty or not guilty on five criminal counts:
CONTINUED >>
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
The troops deploying to Baghdad are tasked with suppressing the escalating sectarian violence in ethnically mixed areas of the city. Ever since the destruction of a Shia holy site in Samarra by forces of now-dead al-Qaeda-in-Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, there has been an ethnic cleansing campaign against Sunnis in neighborhoods previously home to both Sunnis and Shiites. The violence has been especially bad on the east bank of the Tigris River, an area rapidly becoming almost exclusively Shia. With the additional U.S. forces and the new directions from the recently appointed American commander Gen. Dave Petraeus, these troops will remain in the neighborhoods after they have cleared them, rather than returning to their garrisons. In the past, soon after neighborhoods or cities were cleared and American forces departed, the insurgents or militias returned and reclaimed the territory.
CONTINUED >>
Judge Reggie Walton and the attorneys in the Libby case were greeted this morning by a string of prospective jurors who didn’t have strong feelings one way or the other about the Bush administration and the war in Iraq. Out of the nine D.C. citizens questioned this morning, only two said they could not be “fair” and judge the case strictly on what is presented in court. So, one after the other, seven of the jurors who were questioned this morning were quickly approved. And the court has now gone beyond the “36” needed for the second round. (They actually approved a 37th.)
The bottom line is that we will know by 4 p.m. today who will sit on the Libby jury and determine whether his testimony under oath during the leak investigation, prompting the charges against him, were honest mistakes or deliberate lies. The court has given attorneys in the case until 3 p.m. to consider their “strike list” of potential jurors. In addition, the court is now conducting a “criminal background check” on the 37 jurors in the pool.
At 3 p.m., attorneys on both sides will inform the court of their “peremptory challenges.” The defense gets 12; the prosecution has eight. Some strikes may be of the same person, but in any case, just after 3 p.m. today, we should know who has been “struck” and who remains. Then, of those who remain, the first 12 will comprise the jury, the next four will be alternates.
As the race for '08 heats up this week, President Bush concentrates on his new plan for Iraq. He says it will work. On Tuesday night, will the rest of the country agree?
Find out what's coming up tonight on Hardball.
CONTINUED >>
Judge Reggie Walton has “another matter” he is dealing with most of today unrelated to the Scooter Libby case. So, the pool of potential jurors will not be returning until Monday. This break in the “voir dire” (fancy legal name for jury selection) has given me an opportunity to go back through my notebook and re-examine all that happened this week. Vice President Cheney’s testimony and role in the CIA leak investigation is going to be far more intriguing than previously thought. There were two clues yesterday. (1) A Libby lawyer, for the second time in this process, asked a potential juror how they will view Vice President Cheney if his testimony is “contradicted” by another witness. (2) Late yesterday, Patrick Fitzgerald asked a juror who expressed admiration for the office of the vice president whether that potential juror would have any problems if counsel (Fitzgerald) conducted an aggressive cross examination of the vice president?
CONTINUED >>
By NBC's Patty Culhane
The first conversation I had this morning with a prominent Republican summed up the attitude at the winter meeting of the Republican National Committee. His quote, “It is hard to be a Republican these days.” The state leaders seemed disheartened, to say the least, with the past and future prospects for their party.
House Minority Leader John Boehner told the crowd of party faithful in a candid speech, they have a lot of work to do, saying, “Well - we lost. And the first step in finding our way back is to know what went wrong. Democrats didn’t win this election. Republicans lost. Public perceptions of Iraq and the President, corruption in Congress, and government incompetence drove the election results. But above all, we didn’t really offer the American public anything new. There was a perception among voters that we’d lost our way. The Republican brand became diluted and voters went the other way.”
Boehner and outgoing RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman told the crowd of a couple hundred that Republicans can only win in 2008 by remembering what they stand for—going back to the old faithful pledges, smaller government... less spending to try and win their faithful back.
This is day #3 in jury selection for the Scooter Libby trial. And today’s session began with Scooter Libby’s top lawyer SUGGESTING that Vice President Cheney’s expected testimony in this case MAY be contradicted by another witness. Despite all of the pre-trial filings, documents, and evidence released...this is the first time such a suggestion has been made in the CIA leak case.
CONTINUED >>
This is day #2 of jury selection, and it has become another bad day for a few of America’s elite universities. This morning, a young woman with degrees from Swarthmore and Emory University said she had no opinion about the Bush Administration’s case for war with Iraq. She also said she never watches the news or reads the paper, and said she would consider Vice President Cheney “a perfect stranger.” Yesterday, a potential juror with two degrees from Northwestern, including one in journalism, said she thought she knew something about the CIA leak case but “couldn’t recall anything.” When asked about the types of stories she covered as a graduate school journalist, that woman repeatedly said, “I don’t really remember...just stuff at the court, stuff at the city council.” Asked what else? She said, “Other stuff.” Asked to be more specific, she said “I don’t remember. It was a bunch of stuff.” This exchange prompted endless teasing of one of my journalism colleagues covering the trial who is a Northwestern graduate. “Stuff happens,” noted one of the other reporters here.
CONTINUED >>
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
Iraq’s Arab neighbors are worried about what happens when American forces depart the country. With Iranian influence and power on the rise and an escalating civil war in Iraq, the Arab countries are understandably concerned.
Those concerns are particularly acute in Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. With the exception of Bahrain, all of these countries have a Sunni majority. They are concerned about an Iraq ruled by a Shia-dominated government with close ties to Tehran. In an effort to ensure that the post-American period in Iraq is not chaotic and detrimental to their own internal stability, several Arab governments have committed to help stabilize the situation in Iraq.
CONTINUED >>
By David Shuster
Jury selection has already provided some interesting color and comments from the lawyers and prospective jurors.
This morning, the judge gathered 60 possible jurors in his courtroom and guided them through 38 questions they need to answer on their questionnaire. One of the questions was about whether "you could go six weeks without reading a newspaper or watching a television news program." Judge Walton then told the jury that he is addicted to his "routine of reading the newspaper every morning." And he asked the jurors whether they could "break such a habit" in order to render a fair and impartial verdict not influenced by any media coverage.
CONTINUED >>
By Lt. Rick Francona
As expected, President Bush declared the deployment of five U.S. combat brigades to Baghdad and an additional 4,000 troops to Al-Anbar province. While American troops are an important factor in resolving the deteriorating security situation in Baghdad, the real key to success will be the ability – or willingness – of the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to become part of the solution rather than remain part of the problem.
Since he was sworn in last spring, the prime minister has stood in the way of U.S. efforts to contain the escalating sectarian violence in the capital city. American commanders have always believed (rightly so) that the major antagonist in the Shia versus Sunni violence is the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army. American efforts to isolate and subsequently neutralize the group’s stronghold in Sadr City - the sprawling slum that is home to 2.5 million Shia - have been resisted or outright vetoed by al-Maliki. Al-Maliki and al-Sadr have a close relationship based on their devout Shia faith and a political alliance in the fragile coalition that rules Iraq.
If we take the President and the prime minister at their collective word, al-Maliki has finally made a commitment to act against the sectarian militias. You can use the term “sectarian militia,” but we all know that we really mean the Mahdi Army. There was likely a back-channel communication between President Bush and the Iraqi prime minister that if al-Maliki is not willing to address Muqtada al-Sadr’s death squads who have been murdering dozens of Sunnis every day, American commitment would virtually end.
Al-Maliki is now on record that he will confront the Mahdi Army. This is probably his last chance, but he faces an uphill challenge. The Sunnis in Iraq, ever distrustful of the prime minister’s alleged close ties to Iran, refer to al-Maliki as al-irani (“the Iranian”) and his office as “the Persian carpet.” As I have said before, al-Maliki must start acting like the prime minister of the government of Iraq, not the government of the Shia.
Al-Maliki’s Baghdad security plan calls for 18 Iraqi army and police brigades to deploy to the capital. Add to that the five American brigades and you begin to approach the doctrinal numbers required (1:50) to control an area. The Americans will embed a brigade with each Iraqi division, and there will be no restrictions where they can operate.
The solution is not a question of numbers; it is a question of attitude. There is an Arabic saying, hibr ‘ala waraq (“ink on paper,” similar to our “talk is cheap”). Let’s see if the Iraqi prime minister’s words are more than merely ink on paper. If so, the President has changed course in Iraq. If not, it’s more of the same - more of the same and time to reassess our mission in Iraq.
By Hilary Rosen
A funny thing happened on the way to a 100 hour agenda for the new Democratic majority. The leadership coalesced around a position that the public has had for over two years. And they realized that the more they stood up to the president on the war, the better they felt. They are going to pass a resolution in the Congress next week disapproving of the president’s decision to escalate U.S. involvement in the war. That resolution is also going to get a number of Republican votes.
The next step will be hearings and more evaluation. It will be public. With each hearing demonstrating the multiple aspects of our failures in Iraq, the public will learn more and more details that the Congress will not be able to sweep back under the rug. And that is the goal of the Democratic leadership. Get the facts out. They speak for themselves. We underestimated the loyalty of the Iraqi army to keeping the peace. We sent in civilian leaders to form a government who had no ability to gain the trust of the factions that already existed. We did not understand the need for power-sharing among the sects. We wasted tens of billions of dollars giving contracts to Administration cronies and built buildings and bases for permanent occupation while saying we were there on a temporary basis. We have exhausted our troops, our reserves and their families and then when they came home we’ve done nothing to help their transition back. Get the facts out. They will speak for themselves.
Those who say the Democrats won’t have the guts to use their power to stop the expansion and begin troop withdrawal just don’t understand. Democrats in Congress will be the vehicle by which Americans will learn the truth. The truth that President Bush has denied us for years. Once the case is made, acting on the facts will be the obvious next step
By Bob Shrum
Brackets indicate what Bush was really thinking.
Italics indicate my sense of what’s really going on here.
BUSH: Good evening.
Tonight in Iraq, the armed forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror and our safety here at home (There were no weapons of mass destruction; there was no al Qaeda connection; there was no terrorist training ground until Bush invaded on cooked intelligence).
The new strategy I outline tonight will change America’s course in Iraq and help us succeed in the fight against terror. [I’m staying the course but calling it something else.]
CONTINUED >>
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
President Bush is expected to announce tonight that he will order an increase in the level of U.S. forces in Iraq by as many as 20,000 troops. Most analysts believe that the bulk of these forces will likely be assigned the mission of establishing security in Baghdad, and some tasked with putting increased pressure on the Sunni insurgents in Anbar province. While there is a need to continue operations against the insurgents in the western part of the country, the major focus of these forces should be resolution of the abysmal security situation in Baghdad.
CONTINUED >>
In addition to coming out strong against plans for any troop surge in Iraq, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) told Chris Matthews he will back John Kerry for president in 2008. When asked about former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who is running for president from the Republican side of the aisle, Kennedy called Romney "multiple choice."
CONTINUED >>
In an interview with Chris Matthews, Sen. Trent Lott, who holds the No. 2 leadership position in the Republican Party, said he may not vote for a troop surge in Iraq. Click here or on the image below to watch the video.
Transcript from Brian Williams' interview with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)
WILLIAMS: We are happy to welcome Arizona Republican Senator John McCain to our coverage.
Senator, you’re in the news this week for another matter, off the subject of Iraq, for ways that you can’t control—this missing briefcase from the Giuliani start-up presidential campaign. Senator, can you look me in the eye, via the camera and say that you had no prior knowledge this was missing until you read about it in the papers and that you’ve since not learned that, say, anyone connected to you has anything to do with it?
MCCAIN: I haven’t learned anything about it, Brian. I know nothing about it.
WILLIAMS: So all you know is what you read in the papers.
CONTINUED >>
Transcript from Brian Williams interview with Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.):
WILLIAMS: Which, as I said, brings us to Congressman John Murtha, Democrat from Pennsylvania. He has been kind enough to tip-toe off the floor and into the House Gallery to talk to us.
And Congressman, I have to begin at the beginning. The last time you and I spoke on live television, it was election night. I asked you if you were going to stand for House Majority Leader, you said yes. The next guy I spoke to was Steny Hoyer. He said, I don’t know where Pelosi’s is getting the numbers, I’ve got the job. What happened there, and did that whole fracas damage your new presumptive speaker, Ms. Pelosi?
MURTHA: I don’t think so. It is Nancy is very loyal. I was her campaign manager when she ran for whip. I was campaign manager when she ran for minority leader. And then there were rumors he was going to run for speaker. So I think we stopped that from happening, and I think it worked out.
I’m in a position now, as chairman of the Defense Subcommittee, or I will be if I’m confirmed by the caucus—and I’m looking forward to accountability, I’m looking forward to working with this administration to redeploy the troops out of Iraq. Everything I’ve said for the last year, Brian, has turned out to be true. I wish it weren’t true. But the casualties have increased. The electricity production, oil production are down below prewar level. All those things. It can’t be won militarily.
And we’re going to have extensive hearings, starting on the 17th.
And we’re going to force the administration to prove to us that there’s an achievable goal here. Up to this point, there is no defined, achievable mission for these troops. Even the troops themselves are saying that, Brian. So we’ve got some real work to do, and I’m looking forward to it.
CONTINUED >>
Transcript from Andrea Mitchell’s interview with Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.):
MITCHELL: Joining me now, Democratic Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher from California’s 10th Congressional District. She’s also the incoming chairman of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.
Welcome very much. Good to see you.
TAUSCHER: Thank you, Andrea.
MITCHELL: Nancy Pelosi, first speaker, what is the real meaning for other women in the House to have a...
TAUSCHER: We are (inaudible). She’s not only the first woman speaker, but she’s from my neighbor district in California. And she is just a fabulous mom, a great wife and a great American. And she is going to make history today by being the first woman speaker.
But she’s also someone that deeply cares about public policy and the American people and children. And she is going to work very hard to make sure that this agenda moves back toward the change that we promised that, when we got the mandate in the November election, that it’s going to be about the America people and it’s going to be about restoring confidence today in the ethics process.
MITCHELL: Well, the ethics process, of course, presents some challenges. William Jefferson, the...
TAUSCHER: Sure.
MITCHELL: ... who has had all sorts of difficulties from Louisiana and legal problems, can she be tough enough on the people in your own party who have had ethics problems?
TAUSCHER: Yes. Nancy was tough, specifically with Mr. Jefferson, by removing him from the Ways and Means Committee because it is the tax committee; and saying, you know, when this gets cleared up you can come back and have your seniority restored and join the committee.
But Nancy’s tough because she has very strong values that all Americans share—from opportunity, responsibility, community. And she is a very strong Democrat, but she’s also someone that understands that this new role that she has is a constitutional role and it’s one about being speaker for both parties.
MITCHELL: Also within your own party, some of the old bulls are having problems with term limits on committee chairmen. Is she going to lose some support because of that?
TAUSCHER: I don’t think she’s going to lose any support. We have the most united Democratic caucus that we’ve had probably in decades.
And we’re all supporting her. And we’re supporting her because she delivered for the American people and she will continue to do that as speaker.
MITCHELL: Thanks very much for all of your help.
TAUSCHER: Thank you. Thank you, Andrea.
MITCHELL: And good luck to you today.
TAUSCHER: Thank you.
END
Transcript from Andrea Mitchell’s interview with Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) and Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL):
MITCHELL: Congressman Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, is here with me now.
Welcome. Thanks for joining us.
First of all, we’re going to be calling you “Mr. Chairman,” again, after 12 years. What is the first order of business for you as a powerful new chairman of a House committee?
DINGELL: Well, it is to organize the committee, followed immediately by beginning the process of the committee.
First of all, we’ll try to accomplish the things that the speaker and the leadership want with regard to the 100 hours. And then we will move on toward things like improving health care, addressing the problems of Part D and allowing the secretary or requiring the secretary of HHS to negotiate over drug prices. We’ll try and deal with the donut hole and a wide array of other questions there. And also we’ll take a look to see whether or not the amount of money being spent on Part D is justified in terms of the benefits given to the recipients.
CONTINUED >>
By Chris Matthews
The U.S. Congress opens this New Year with a bang. Watch for lots of action from the new Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate.
First up: Pay dirt. Led by new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Democrats want to prove their street cred by producing on bread-and-butter issues that affect the economic lives of voters. Their goal is to pass a six-pack of bills before the president comes up in two weeks to deliver the State of the Union. They’ll include: minimum wage up to $7.25; stem cell, cheaper college loans, better prescription drug program, ethics reform, 9/11 Commission recommendations and cuts in the tax breaks going to the oil industry.
Second up: Payback. No matter what the Democrats say this January is the first crack they’ll get at 12 years of Republican rule. Expect them to wield that subpoena power with relish against the oil industry, against Halliburton, against the Bush administration case for the Iraq war.
Third up: the Iraq war. President Bush is expected to call for 30,000 more troops in Iraq. Expect Democrats and some Republicans to challenge Bush’s “surge” proposal. The big question is whether Congress will try to stop the president.
“Hardball” will be keeping you informed with solid play-by-play coverage of all this. We’ll look at the key players - especially the powerful committee chairmen - and the efforts of Republicans to undermine the Democratic agenda. We’re going to see some real hardball being played on Capitol Hill.
And never forget that the U.S. Capitol is also the home base of ‘08 Presidential frontrunners John McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton. “Hardball” will be watching every move they make from right across the street.
Editor's note: On Oct. 23, Hilary Rosen wrote about Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and the effect she would have on national politics if elected speaker of the House. Today, with Nancy Pelosi about to make history by becoming the first female speaker, we wanted to post Rosen's thoughts from October our new blog...
By Hilary Rosen on Oct. 23, 2006
No Bush bashing today. I am going to learn from my leader, soon-to-be-Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi. It is time to look forward, not backward.
Much has been written lately about the tough lady leader who has pushed the Democrats into unity over the past year. But not enough has been written about the heart of the person who will bear a huge responsibility for restoring the optimism of a divided nation.
CONTINUED >>
By Bob Shrum
So Mitt Romney, who couldn’t have been reelected governor of Massachusetts, is running for president. And that’s one reason he couldn’t have been reelected. To cater to Republican primary voters nationally, he decided to get right with the right wing canon. He not only became a crusader against same sex marriage, but adjured his previous professions, in 1994 and again in 2002, that he was pro-choice. It recalls the comment of Ted Kennedy, who defeated him in the 1994 senate race, that Romney was “multiple choice.” The reason he may get away with his transmogrification is that the right wing can credit the notion that this Romney apparition is probably closer to his true self than the moderate clothes he conveniently donned to run for office in Massachusetts. In the general election, however, it would be pushing things for him to raise the age limit on the George W. Bush excuse and say he found his true self at the age of...50.
CONTINUED >>
By Hilary Rosen
Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, is running for president. According to his friends, he has been planning this his whole adult life. Then why is he such a dichotomy on so many issues? Why, if he was always planning on running for president, would he zig zag back and forth so publicly as he tries to figure out who he is?
Current conventional wisdom suggests that he will be the conservatives darling. That they have lost potential candidates in former Sen. George Allen and Rick Santorum who both were considering a run for he presidency and that current Sen. Sam Brownback is just not appealing enough to be taken seriously. But if he is the conservative’s candidate, how do they reconcile his past support on issues such as gay and lesbian rights? When Romney was running against Sen. Ted Kennedy, he promised the gay Log Cabin Republicans of Massachusetts to be even better on gay rights than Kennedy – a tough feat! It seems unlike the direction most people take as they become more enlightened, he has evolved into his bigotry. And yet, his prejudice on one score conflicts with his experience on others.
It’s been said that Romney is concerned that though he is a religious conservative, that some Americans won’t support him because he is a Mormon. And there is a tradition of prejudice in some evangelical circles against Mormons. That Romney, who is pinning his presidential hopes on his ability to promote divisions among Americans by politicizing personal issues such as abortion or gay and lesbian families, is entitled to cry foul is ironic. I predict he won’t succeed. That, by the very nature of his race, his wealth, and his patriarchal views, no one will see him as a member of a discriminated class.
Nonetheless, there is something joyous as the presidential elections season begins to see the field becoming more diverse. A Mormon, a woman and an African-American all in the top tier. This presidential race gets better every day.
By Sheila Weidenfeld, Fmr. Press Secretary for Betty Ford
There are many parallels between our current times and the time of Ford’s presidency. Those were extraordinarily difficult times and today we face similar difficulties both with credibility in government and belief in politicians. It’s interesting that it was his death that death served a purpose, and that is to reawaken people to those things that they loved about him - his honesty, integrity and compassion.
When he came into office he said he wanted an open administration, something totally necessary at that time. Betty Ford was determined to be herself as first lady and that’s why there’s such interest in her today. She was not a traditional first lady in the sense that she was suppressed and afraid of being honest—and therefore silent. The Fords had a wonderful, loving marriage but the fact is that he was gone a lot of it, and it was not easy for her to raise four children, often with him away. So, like all couples, their marriage had ups and downs. For her, marriage was a 70-30 proposition, for each partner. Fortunately, the White House brought them together, because the residence was upstairs and his office downstairs, and they were able to see each other “almost” whenever they wanted to.
Read a transcript of Chris Matthews' conversation with MSNBC special correspondent Ron Reagan during today's funeral services for former President Gerald Ford in Washington, D.C.:
Photo: Ron Reagan
Chris: Let’s bring in our pal Ronald Reagan. Ron Reagan, very much like to hear your thoughts, you were there a couple of years ago for your dad. How is today different?
Reagan: Well it was very much the same. I was struck by the juxtaposition of the public and the private, I mean, the ceremony was beautiful of course, these things always are, its the people who do this who know how to put on a funeral or a memorial service. But you’ve got to remember that when we’re talking about the Ford family, we are talking about a family, they’re not saying goodbye to a president, they’re not saying goodbye to a commander in chief, they’re saying goodbye to a husband and a father. And they’re doing so under the glare of the lights, in full public view and I have to say my heart when out to them, they’re so much they’re going through, there’s so much emotion that is welling up in you at a time like that. The sense of finality, you really are saying goodbye to a loved one and yet you’re doing it with everybody watching and you’re trying so hard to contain the emotion inside of you and it can be difficult at times.
CONTINUED >>
By Jeremy Bronson, MSNBC correspondent
There was some commotion as mourners filed out of the cathedral, when people saw an ambulance and heard its sirens. A female DC police officer had fallen. She’s been loaded onto a stretcher and put into an ambulance which is still parked in the street outside the cathedral.
By Jeremy Bronson, MSNBC correspondent
Tom DeFrank tells me of Gerald Ford and the funeral ceremony: “He would have been a little embarrassed by the pomp and panoply. But if anyone had a ceremony like this coming, it was Gerald Ford.”
By Jeremy Bronson, MSNBC correspondent
Each time Mrs. Ford’s face is shown on the monitor there’s an audible hum of reaction inside the cathedral, as if people are moved by her image.
By John Harwood, CNBC's Chief Washington Correspondent
As the nation honors Gerald Ford today it’s worth remembering that he didn’t receive that same acclaim in his own time. He was ridiculed as a bumbler on Saturday Night Live, assailed by the left for pardoning Richard Nixon, and linked with the final chapter of the first war America ever lost. Ronald Reagan challenged him in Republican primaries, and Jimmy Carter defeated him in the general election.
But the passage of three decades has radically altered perceptions of Gerald Ford.
His humility as the president who toasted his own English muffins, and civility toward his adversaries looks increasingly appealing in today’s bitter and polarized political culture.
His pardon of Nixon—once seen by some as an extension of the Watergate conspiracy itself—is now widely accepted as a healing step that allowed the nation to move on.
So too is the final exit from Vietnam, which extricated the U.S. from a no-win situation without compromising the nation’s ultimate triumph in the Cold War. Esteem for Mr. Ford’s judgment may also rise in light of his posthumously published criticism of the Iraq War, which matches the mood of the American today.
If there is any consolation for President Bush in these shifts, it is this: Gerald Ford is living proof of Mr. Bush’s oft-stated observation that history may judge a president more gently than his contemporaries do.
By Pat Butler, longtime friend and adviser to President Ford
Here are some things you may not know about President Ford:
President Ford’s favorite TV show as president was “Police Woman” with Angie Dickinson.
Favorite singer: Vikki Carr.
Favorite comedian (besides Bob Hope): Flip Wilson, a frequent WH guest.
Favorite drink: gin and tonic, which he gave up when Betty stopped drinking. He also made a deal with Susan that if she’d stop smoking cigarettes, he’d stop smoking his pipe. She did, and he did.
He turned into a pretty good golfer after leaving the WH, was proud that he could almost “shoot his age.” At 91, he told me he could still shoot his age, but now it only took him 9 holes to do it.
Cary Grant introduced Mrs. Ford on the last night of GOP convention in ‘76. It was his first and only live appearance on TV in his life. He was a nervous wreck (I was his handler in Kansas City and helped him write his speech, and we were friends for the rest of his life), but his regard for Mrs. Ford made him take what he considered the biggest risk of his professional life at age 72.
Jack Marsh, counselor to the president, had been a Democratic congressman from VA during Ford’s house days. Marsh was the advisor GRF trusted most, and when Reagan was elected in 1980, the only thing Ford asked him to do was make Marsh secretary of the army. Reagan did, and Jack became longest serving secretary of the army in history.
I sent President Ford a note on the 30th anniversary of joining his staff (April 2005), and he called the next week to thank me for my service, congratulate me on what I’d done since, talk about our families, and bemoan the current state of Republican Party, which he said he didn’t recognize.
Bob Woodward and I did a documentary on the presidency for the History Channel in January 2005, and went to Rancho Mirage in fall 04 to interview GRF. He walks off elevator at Annenberg Center, we escort a very old man to the studio, but as soon as the camera goes on, he’s President Ford of old, in command of facts, incisive, blunt, terrific for the half hour we had him on camera. As soon as the camera was off, he became an old man again.
One of the Ford kids will probably read a passage beginning “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding.” This is the President’s favorite verse, the one to which the Bible was opened when he took the oath of office.
By Jeremy Bronson, MSNBC correspondent
Presidents Clinton, Carter and Bush 41 standing and talking with each other. They were smiling as they talked. Sen. Ted Kennedy entered the cathedral somber-faced. Chelsea Clinton and Sec. Rice are seated next to each other. Sen. Lieberman and his wife have just entered the cathedral. The choir has begun to sing, and the last few people are being seated.
By Jeremy Bronson, MSNBC correspondent
The music inside the cathedral has changed. It’s gone from light organ music to a more dramatic, deeper sound, with louder percussion and horns. Al Gore and Tipper Gore have arrived. They’re standing up shaking hands at their seat. Both are wearing dark suits. The Gores are about 15-18 rows back on the left side facing the altar.
By Jeremy Bronson, Hardball producer
It is almost full inside the Cathedral. Steve Forbes and NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg warmly greeted each other. Bob Woodward is in the same row as Sam Donaldson, a few seats away. In preparation for the arrival of the casket, people are being encouraged to take their seats by the military escorts, the National Cathedral staff and the Boy Scouts.
By Pat Butler, former Ford speechwriter
President Ford had the idea for what has become the G8 summit, which he envisioned as an intimate get together for Giscard d’Estaing, Helmut Schmidt and Sunny Jim Callahan to get to know each other better, be able to do business together. First meeting was in a swimming pool.
By Jeremy Bronson, Hardball producer
The cathedral is about three-quarters full right now. Ben Bradlee and Sally Quinn just walked into the Cathedral together, greeting familiar faces as they went down the aisle. Everyone has to be seated by 9:15a. Newt Gingrich has arrived, as has Walter Mondale.
By Jeremy Bronson, Hardball producer
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein just walked into the Cathedral together. Bob Woodward took a few deep breaths as he entered the building. About 50 to100 Boy Scouts from DC area are on hand, escorting people to their seats in addition to military escorts.
By Jeremy Bronson, Hardball producer
At 8:00am inside the Cathedral, at least one organist is practicing. Ticket holders are filing in and the Cathedral is starting to fill up. The first three rows are reserved for the Ford family. Behind Ford family seats are reserved for pallbearers. Behind that are reserved seats labeled for Nelson and Happy Rockefeller, Brian Mulroney, who was Canada’s prime minister from 1984 - 1993, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. A large section of seats is reserved for the U.S. House of Representatives.
By Jeremy Bronson, Hardball producer
At 6:30, it’s still dark out and most of the media has already arrived. Roughly 40-50 members of the press corps, on-air reporters and camera crews, all present at Cathedral at began being ushered in at approximately 6:30. The Secret Service is going up and down Wisconsin Avenue.
Washington National Cathedral was built for precisely this purpose. It was in Pierre L’Enfant’s blueprint for the city and one of it’s main functions was for public prayer and big, important funeral services.
Photo: Ticketholders line up at National Cathedral for Ford funeral
