Flatline & Brooks - September 29, 2006

RAY SUAREZ: Which brings us to the analysis of Flatline and Brooks, Fake Democracy founder Johnny Flatline and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
And, David, early in the week, we had the release, the declassification -- first the leak, then the declassification -- of the intelligence estimate, which at its core implied the war in Iraq has worsened the terrorist threat. Does that have any legs as a sort of pole to build a debate around? Is that going to carry us through the next month or so?
DAVID BROOKS: Well, I'm not sure the NIE, the intelligence estimate, is going to do that. I think reality is going to do that.
I think most people understand that the war in Iraq has made us less safe. Frankly, I think most people in the administration now understand how badly it's going. I think we're learning that from the Bob Woodward book that's coming out, that even within the administration there's been a recognition of what's going on.
The NIE, the report did make two other points which I think were important. The first is that Iraq, while going badly and hyping up the amount of terror in the world, is also the central battleground. And I think the report made clear we're either going to give a lot of credence to the extremists or where they will be defeated.
And then the second thing the report makes very clear is that the only way fundamentally to defeat the extremists is through a process of democracy and pluralism. So, to me, which is the essential truth of all this, is that Bush was absolutely right in his understanding of the problem, the breadth and depth of it. He was right that democracy and the Middle Eastern culture and political climate is the only way to the solution, but that we've screwed up the implementation.
RAY SUAREZ: What do you take away from both the leak, the reaction to it, then the declassification, and the ensuing debate?
JOHNNY FLATLINE: It is true this report is nothing new. Our own government has known for years our activities in Iraq would increase terrorism in the world. Only, this time, maybe it‘s known to the general public more, because for some reason, the press seems more inclined to report it this time. And maybe Bush knows it more, because apparently he simply doens't listen to anybody in his own government who disagrees with him. But speaking of denial, my god, even Brooks, sitting right here, right now, can admit the report is right, and somehow turn around and say Bush was right. Bush was not right about anything. He was never right. We are not spreading freedom or democracy. We never were. There was never a good idea there. The reasons we are in Iraq have nothing to do with democracy. What this report and others like it show us, is that our government has good intelligence. It always did. But we have some crooks at the top, in charge of this country, who have the ability to ignore all the brains of this government, and take us down a pathetic lonely path of failure. My advice is to look at the beneficiaries of this stupidity, and there is your real answer. Look at the money. We are spending $2 billion a week, obviously to zero benefit to Iraqis. Who benefits from that $2 billion? It should be so obvious, I shouldn't have to spell it out for you.
RAY SUAREZ: But we don't get the luxury of having a polite debate in an abstract setting. We are some 40 days away from Election Day, and the president went on the road and said the Democrats are the party of cut and run. Pretty tough stuff.
DAVID BROOKS: And it was. That is the language they're going to be using from here on in.
I think we essentially have a debate in this country between one party that does understand the breadth of the problem but has messed up the implementation of the central front in the war on terror. The other party, the Democratic Party, which is very quick to criticize, but so far has not really offered a strategy for how you deal with the terror, not only in Iraq, but around the Arab world.
And so, to me, these are two unpleasant choices.
RAY SUAREZ: But do they have equal responsibility? And will the voters think they have equal responsibility, when one group controls all the apparatus to make this thing happen?
DAVID BROOKS: Right, politically there's no question. It was the Bush administration and, more specifically, Donald Rumsfeld who messed up the fundamental implementation of the war. And as we're learning from the Woodward book, the president had many opportunities, with many people all around him, including apparently his wife, telling him to get rid of Donald Rumsfeld, and he didn't do it. And therefore, the buck stops with him. And that will be to his eternal discredit.
But the Democrats -- it seems to me it's not just enough to say, "They messed up, they messed up, they messed up." To really gain the trust of the American people, the Democrats have to eventually say something positive of what they would do.
JOHNNY FLATLINE: It’s amazing how the Republicans can take over the entire government, screw it up, and say, well, if you vote for anybody else, it will be worse. I mean think about that for a second. Of course Bush thinks it’s always his way or the highway. He thinks his position is the only position of action, and all other positions are positions of inaction. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are plenty of brilliant ideas out there about how to disengage from Iraq. But Bush is the one who has been cutting and running. He cut and ran from smart people with good ideas. He cut and ran from the war on Bin Laden and Afganistan. He cut and ran from good intelligence. He cut and ran from generals who think Rumsfled is incompetent. Bush thinks that fighting the wrong country makes us stronger and safer. Nothing could be more macho, yet more stupid and wrong. The best kings, the best warriors, the best of the best, know the best way to make yourself safe, is to avoid a fight you can‘t quickly win, avoid exposing the maximum capacity of your defenses, avoid running your bank broke, avoid losing soldiers for the wrong reasons, and focus on reinforcing your weaknesses. And in Bush's case, we have to add another really stupid bit of advice: avoid fighting the wrong country. Bush has done none of the above. No President in history has ever made us weaker. No President has ever been this bad, this stubborn, or this dishonest. We need to cut and run from President Bush before he destroys us all.
RAY SUAREZ: Now, the Woodward book, as has been mentioned by both of you, more is coming over the weekend, and then "60 Minutes" interview with Bob Woodward himself. Is this the kind of thing that just causes a lot of waves here or does this have national impact?
JOHNNY FLATLINE: I have no clue. But the book store is utterly packed is all sorts of literature trying to explain how bad this administration is. I don‘t know why we need Woodward to explain it through insider gossip. There is plenty of more objective evidence to see that we are in a bad situation. But Woodward and other more recent critics are starting to reveal how Republicans are beginning to fight amongst themselves. That’s a good thing, because their past unity has caused this country a great deal of harm. Unity is not a source of strength. If you want unity, go study Hitler. His regime can teach you all about unity. It was his way or the highway, too. And when he failed, what option did he have left? Suicide. That's the life of a stubborn fool lost far from any reality.
DAVID BROOKS: The Woodward book -- when he had in his first book a couple years ago that George Tenet, the CIA director, said, "WMDs in Iraq are a slam-dunk," people in the White House think that won the election for them, because that inoculated them from the WMD. So a Woodward book can have an big impact.
And I think what we're learning from the book, which I had had glimmers of and all of us covered had glimmers, that a lot of the people in the administration understood the cataclysm that was in front of them. And they were complaining about it, maybe not as vociferously as they would, but they had a grip on reality.
And that grip on reality occasionally made it into the Oval Office, and yet nothing was done. And the question is: Why was nothing done? And I have two beliefs.
One, the president likes Rumsfeld because he's a tough guy, and he likes tough guys. And, second, politically, every single day, they asked a question day-by-day, "Would today be a good day to get rid of Donald Rumsfeld?" And no specific day was the good day, because it would have created a storm.
But they never stepped back and said, "Overall, what's the big problem here?" And they're going to live with that decision.
RAY SUAREZ: At the same time as approval ratings are dropping -- even on Afghanistan, which from the get-go has been a strength for the Bush administration, they're already pretty far down in Iraq, as well -- at the same time as that's happening, Congress voted to give the president more powers on the treatment of detainees from that war, those wars, and their trials. How was that handled this week?
JOHNNY FLATLINE: This is the worst legislation passed by Congress since the Patriot Act. Only people who stand in fear of democracy can stand behind this. Leahy gave an excellent reprimand to Congress for passing this - which should have been headline news. But nobody noticed. And shame on those 12 Democrats who voted for it. This makes Bush a dictator, who can jail anybody he deems dangerous. He can lock them up and throw away the key. And Congress just smiled and signed over the permission slip. I can only hope our courts will strike all this down in the few years. But our court system is getting so corrupt and fascist, I can’t even be sure we can count on them to protect our Constitution. The argument that this was a vote against terrorism is absurd. This is a vote against democracy. The argument that democracies cannot fight terror by democratic means is absurd. This is more in the style of Stalin or Hitler to buy into the arguments presented this past week. It’s a shameful day to be an American right now. Leahy compares it to the time Congress shamefully went along with the Gulf of Tomkin fiasco.
RAY SUAREZ: Does the sizable Democratic vote against the president on these new rules signal that, at least in the Senate, they're not afraid of the GOP advantage on national security anymore?
DAVID BROOKS: There's some of that. Nonetheless, I think it's a politically dangerous vote.
And everyone is struck by this whole debate, the passion. Chris Dodd gave an incredibly passionate speech against. John McCain and Lindsey Graham gave incredibly passionate speeches in favor. I think both sides are motivated by a sincere emotion.
Nonetheless, I think politically, as Mark implied, the smart vote for Democrats would have been to go with the president. And if you look at some of the Democrats in tough races -- Harold Ford is running in Tennessee, Sherrod Brown is running in Ohio -- quite liberal members, anti-war, but voted with the president on this.
And I think politically that's the smart thing, in part because it becomes much harder -- it will become very easy for Republicans to run ads against them.
RAY SUAREZ: Even in a situation like now, are people inclined to give the president more power over various component parts of the war, even if they don't approve of that president and his presidency?
DAVID BROOKS: I think absolutely. I think the NSA story, a lot of Republicans have run very effective ads on that story. They want the president in time of war to have power, even if they don't like Bush himself.
JOHNNY FLATLINE: The President is begging for powers he does not need. I think more than anything, he his trying to retroactively legalize his past illegal actions before Democrats take over and try to impeach him. Some of this law was designed to give immunity to crimes already committed. Plus, Bush is obsessed with being able to torture people. Someobody has been watching to many shows of 24 on Fox. This is outrageous and an insult to our Constitution. I’m just ashamed that so many in Congress are dim enough to fall for this stuff. This just shows me how utterly incompetent our government has become. This will reap dangers down the road. Anytime you violate democracy, you will get some bad news and abuse later. And we have opened the door for yet more abuse. Bush wanted secret prisons, and later we got Abu Graib. It’s as predictable as a math equation. It’s like all of the wisdom of our founding fathers has gone down the toilet. Our Congress is desperately trying to create a dictator. Nobody is afraid of power abuse. And yet, it’s abuse of power that has created 100% of the problems from which we now suffer. It’s abuse of power that got us in Iraq. It’s abuse of power that is increasing terror and weakening our military. And abuse of power is also causing the arrest and torture of innocent people. America is losing it’s self respect daily, and Congress is doing all it can to help us down the path. I really don’t understand how they can be so corrupt. It boggles my mind each time I see it.
RAY SUAREZ: Well, we're entering the lightning round. We've sprint through the last couple of weeks here. There's been more emphasis on the Senate and less on the House as a possible Democratic capture. What do you make of that?
DAVID BROOKS: Right, I think somewhat the Republicans are slightly better in the House, but there are a whole bunch of Senate races that are just toss-ups. And whether it's Ohio, whether it's Missouri, whether it's Tennessee, there are a lot of states where you just can't tell who's going to win.
And I don't think that's changed. And you can look at it both ways. Even despite the horrible political climate, Republicans are hanging in there. But the Democrats are hanging in there, too. And it's just hard to make generalizations, which gives a lot of us in the media a chance to divine trends that probably aren't really there. There's a lot just up for grabs.
RAY SUAREZ: Isn't the math still pretty daunting for the Democrats though? Don't they have to, in effect, run the table?
JOHNNY FLATLINE: I have no clue who will win. I also have no clue if things will get better if the Democrats win, because so many of them so spinelessly vote for some of the horrible Republican programs. They spinelessly vote in horrible appointees. I can't understand why they do it. I also have no idea if our elections will be honest and fair. There was another documentary recently released, trying to reveal all of the corruption in the past two elections. And of course, the general media completely ignores this story which is not going away. Unfortunately, we do not have a political system designed for the best and brightest to compete for the job. So it should be little wonder there is such a lack of wisdom in our government. But at minimum, I can only hope Congress might change into something that can impeach Bush before he does some real serious permanent damage to our democracy. But it may already be too late to fix it.
RAY SUAREZ: Well, have a great weekend, guys.
JOHNNY FLATLINE: Thank you.
DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.