Posted on 07/09/2006 5:06:16 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, July 9th, 2006
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns; Wendy Sherman, counselor for the State Department in the Clinton administration; Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich.; former CIA Director James Woolsey.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns; Robert Galluci, dean of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns and Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.; Sen. George Allen, R-Va., and Democratic opponent James Webb; NBA star Alonzo Mourning.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Burns; Iraqi Ambassador Samir Al Sumaidaie; former Secretary of State Alexander Haig and former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.
LOL...did you see that thread about McCain's temper that was on here tonight??
Maybe he's been taking lessons from Sean??
Then his visit to SunCity in April (I'm pretty sure it was April) where a lady (who had tried to ask questions in Mesa and was denied entrance because it was a controlled group of people) managed to ask the kind of questions you would get from someone here on FR and he grew red in the face and very, very angry that she got into the venue...
Sooo, he can deny until the cows come home, the man is a loose cannon.
I was very calm and understanding until they started all the crappola, and have gone pretty much the other way, and the more BS they and their supporters pull the less likely they are going to be to get any support. They have jumped the shark and he is chewing on their butt right now. I am past angry, I want our Country and language back now.
I sure wish the MSM on TV would do a segment about his temper...but, all they ever do is call him a "Maverick" who works well with BOTH sides....blech.
Yeah he does...like that unconstitutional Gang of 14 that he helped cobble together.
Yeah...I am still angry..and will stay that way, until they just close the border..and do things right..
But, I still won't get on the immigration/border threads...it stresses me out.
I do not think Carter is crazy, he is just a big fat egotist that loves dictators,and craves attention. He will search the entire rest of his life like he has the last two decades begging for recognition. I have visions of him running down the street shouting to faceless people in skyscrapers "I am somebody". He will say or do anything to get face time on the talk shows. He may go down in History as the worst President ever. He is jealous of GHWB,GWB,WJC, and got cozy with that 400 pound sicko Mickey Moore.
Right after the NewsMax article came out I happened to be switching channels and accidentally landed on Olberman (not for long) and HE is defending McCain.... THAT should tell everyone all they need to know about McCain, when Keith Olberman is defending him, we are in real trouble.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1516436/posts
I know what you mean...
I saw an article yesterday that said that Clinton was praising Bush for his stance on immigration, and I thought, "Oh, no, it is worse than I thought".
RE: McCain and Olberman..I could see them being buds..they are both crazy.
They are stressful.... on the bright side (for Arizona) Sheriff Joe has pretty much chased them elsewhere with his send em to jail policy... all but our veto-happy Governor are really making things hot (in more ways than one) in this part of the country.
Worse than that -- CARTER praised him, too. Only one that hasn't is Gore, he's too busy with Global Warming to notice anything else.
Yeah, from what I have read, your Governor is a piece of work....I never can figure out where she is coming from..
What I want to know is...from the state that produced McCain and Napalitano...how did you guys also end up with Kyle and Flake?
Carter has a lot of people fooled,but I think Evil is a good word to describe him. He may sound like he is religious,but his behavior is anything but, and his late sister was a sort of Preacher. The whole family died of Pancreatic Cancer except him and his Mother. Miss Lillian died from old age, and was quoted that if she had it to do over again she would not have had children. If he was my son, I might have the same attitude.
Some old local guy who is a died in the wool democrat called in (calls all the time to the station) and he proceeded to rake this guy over the coals asking tough questions, particularly about immigration and Colorado City....
When he was done he said for the first time in HIS life he was going to vote for a Republican because our current (Dem) AG hasn't been doing his job in either regard.... the radio commentator (also a dem) said at the end of the show that this guy would get his vote...
What was funny was our local State Senator (GOP, very conservative) and the candidate and the commentator were all joking about how Janet carries her veto pen wherever she goes so she can whip it out at the drop of a hat to veto anything the senate sends her on illegal immigration... they are starting to do what Arnold did in California and put these things on the ballot for November.
The list of evils in this world today attributable to Carter is long.
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=2&subID=578&WT.srch=1
It sounds like SOME things may be changing for the better...but the Republicans have GOT to find someone to beat the Governor next time...and WHEN McCain loses the GOP primary..and has to go back to the Senate..
A TWO TIME loser, you have got to find someone conservative to take his place.
BTW..I heard that some of the lib sites are saying that Kyl's seat may not be secure...I am SURE they are wrong, right?
I am off to bed also...will check it out in the morning, thanks.
Nicholas Burns, Bill Richardson, Richard Haas, Robert Gallucci
Excerpts of Bill Richardson Exchanges with Russert:
MR. RUSSERT: Coming next, the view of three former Clinton administration officials who spent years dealing with the North Korea problem: former Assistant Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter; chief State Department negotiator, now at the Georgetown University, Robert Gallucci; and former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., now governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson. They are all right here next only on MEET THE PRESS.
MR. RUSSERT: More on North Korea with three men who’ve dealt firsthand with this situation after the station break.
MR. RUSSERT: And we are back. Welcome all.
Governor Richardson, should the United States negotiate directly, one-on-one, with North Korea?
GOV. BILL RICHARDSON (D-NM): Yes, it should. Our policy so far is not working. What you have is North Korea has quadrupled its enriched plutonium since 2002. The six-party talks are going nowhere. We should talk directly to the North Koreans to discuss what is next. They need to dismantle their nuclear weapons. They need to destroy their missile capability. The only way to do that, in my judgment, is face-to-face talks at a level of Christopher Hill. He is a competent diplomat. The successes we’ve had with the North Koreans have been through direct engagement: when I got some pilots out of North Korea, when Bob Gallucci negotiated the agreed framework, Secretary Albright close to having an agreement on reducing or terminating their missiles.
What North Korea is seeing right now is Iran getting a nuclear reactor. They see Iran getting a nuclear fuel cycle that is assured, economic incentives. On the other hand, what they want to see is treated with respect, direct talks with the United States, but also they want to see an effort by the United States to give them the recognition that they feel they deserve. I don’t believe they do. They are a desolate, isolated regime, but right now our policy is not working. It makes sense to talk directly with the North Koreans.
MR. RUSSERT: But wouldn’t the world then say, “Oh, I see. You test the missile on the Fourth of July, you get the U.S. attention and you bring them to the bargaining table”?
GOV. RICHARDSON: Our policy right now has not worked. Look where we are right now. Asia has destabilized. We are trying to outsource our foreign policy to China. I believe China is not necessarily interested in helping us on North Korea. They don’t want to see a bunch of refugees go into their country. I believe that China is a competitor. They control a lot of our debt. Right now we do not have leverage over China. The best effort, in my judgment, is face-to-face talks, hard negotiating, get that agreement that was signed in September that North Korea has not abided to—a timetable for North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons. Efforts to set up benchmarks in exchange for that armistice agreement where we don’t attack North Korea, they get economic assistance. But our objective should be firm: to get them to dismantle their nuclear weapons. The best way to do it is face-to-face talks.
MR. RUSSERT: If the president now changes course, won’t the headlines be Bush’s—“Bush blinks”?
GOV. RICHARDSON: No. I believe the headlines would be “Bush deals realistically with North Korea. He reverses a policy that is not working.”
MR. RUSSERT: Governor Richardson, how do you think the North Koreans would react if we took out their test missile?
GOV. RICHARDSON: Well, I respectfully disagree with Assistant Secretary Carter there, but at least he’s got a new idea, which the administration has not put forth. I think if we are seriously attacked or threatened, that missile—which was a test—was geared to the United States or to our allies, we have allied responsibilities with the South Koreans and Japan—you do take that step. But the fact is that you risk the South—the North Koreans shooting missiles at South Korea, we’ve got 37,000 American forces at the DMZ.
But, Tim, I think another reason for the face-to-face talks is that there are two issues that are separate from the six-party talks that are a serious grievance in our relationship. One is the fact that we have frozen financial assets of the North Koreans—I believe rightly so—but that is a separate bilateral issue. The second is our objection to dealing with North Korea’s request for a light water reactor, which I believe has boggled down the six-party talks, which, by the way, I believe you could have a separate, bilateral, face-to-face negotiation with the United States and also continue the efforts of the six-party talks, because it is the South Koreans and the Japanese that are providing financial and fuel incentives, so you can’t cut them out. But I think it’s essential to have face-to-face, private bilateral talks between the United States and North Korea.
MR. RUSSERT: But in the end, it’s a judgment of North Korean intentions. You’ve been there five times; you know them. And yet a few weeks before the missile launch, you said, “I don’t think they’re going to test,” and they did.
GOV. RICHARDSON: Well, no, Tim, I said, “I believe that they were going to test.” I did say that. And what I sense in my negotiations in dealing with North Koreans...
MR. RUSSERT: You said, “As days go by, I don’t believe they’re going to do it.”
GOV. RICHARDSON: No, but early on, I said that they, they did, on CBS. My point is that when you deal with North Korea, you’re not dealing with individuals like you and me. They don’t believe in compromise. They believe in their only way or the highway. Their view is that their cause is right, and they’re going to wait you out. So they’re totally unpredictable, and I believe the only way to deal with them—and we have shown that effectively in past dealings in the Clinton administration—is direct engagement, to get them to curb their nuclear weapons, as Bob Gallucci did. Secretary Albright almost got a missile agreement. Jimmy Carter got an agreement, which was later violated, regrettably, with the father of Kim Jong Il. My point is that face-to-face discussions with the United States directly, I believe, is a precursor. The continuation of the six-party talks is the best way to go.
MR. RUSSERT: But do they keep their word? Here’s Madeleine Albright toasting Kim Jong Il in North Korea, October of 2000. She appeared on this program four years later, and this was our exchange:
(Videotape, September 12, 2004):
MR. RUSSERT: But didn’t North Korea develop a nuclear bomb on Bill Clinton’s watch?
MS. MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: No. What they were doing, as it turns out, they were cheating. And the reason that you have arms control agreements is you don’t make them with your friends, you make them with your enemies. And it is the process that is required to hold countries accountable.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you all two presidents, Bill Clinton back in 1993, George Bush 10 years later, talking to the North Koreans, in effect. And I’m asking you to put your mind in place of a North Korean watching this.
President Clinton, President Bush:
(Videotape, November 7, 1993):
PRES. BILL CLINTON: North Korea cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear bomb.
We have to be very firm about it.
(End videotape)
(Videotape, May 23, 2003):
PRES. BUSH: We will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Governor Richardson, draw a line in the sand and step back? The North Koreans watch that, they observe that, they know what their own...(unintelligible)...has been. How do you have any strength in negotiating with people like that?
GOV. RICHARDSON: The North Koreans in, in my dealings with them, they care more about form than they do substance. In your earlier segment, you showed President Bush calling him a tyrant, but then later he called him Mr. Kim Jong Il. I was in North Korea when that happened. The North Koreans were delighted because they felt they’d been treated with respect. They care deeply about protocol. And this is another reason why I think, for a relatively cheap price, a face-to-face negotiation at the level of Chris Hill—who, again, is very competent—I believe would set the stage for a final agreement at the six-party talks, which is essential, which is basically a good agreement.
In exchange for North Korea dismantling its nuclear weapons, its missiles, they get an armistice agreement where they’re not attacked. They get food, fuel, energy assistance.
MR. RUSSERT: Security assurances, we will not topple their regime.
GOV. RICHARDSON: That’s right. Yeah, that’s right. That’s in, that’s in that September agreement that Chris Hill negotiated.
My point is, if it’s just going to be a face-to-face meeting that serves as a precursor that also deals with this frozen assets issue, which has directly hit the North Korean regime, because it controls the foreign expenditures of Kim Jong Il, and you deal with this light water reactor, especially now after we’ve promised it to Iran and economic incentives to Iran, I think the timing is right for this new stage of direct negotiations.
MR. RUSSERT: We hear so much talk about Kim Jong Il, tyrant, spoiled child, others have said madman. You’ve been in that country five times. Who is he, what is he?
GOV. RICHARDSON: Well, I, I’ve never met him. I met the number two in command. He is the entire nation. He is basically a cult of personality. He runs everything. He knows everything that’s happening. All power flows through him. What that causes, unfortunately, is an isolated North Korea. His people are in terrible shape economically. I’ve been there five times, I think I’ve seen one tractor. I see people weak and drawn out. They look like they need nourishment. A lot of people are starving there. They have human rights violations.
He is a mercurial character, but I think he’s crazy like a fox. He is not somebody that is out of his mind. He’s, he may be totally unpredictable, isolated, but he’s calculating, and he’s used the Fourth of July. Every time he’s backing—he feels he’s backed down, he moves and does something irrational. He, he, he shoots missiles off. He’s done it twice. He cancels agreements, he gets the nuclear inspectors out in 2002. This is the way he operates, and what we should do is, is take advantage of his vulnerability. He also is vulnerable in the sense that the country is weak economically, it desperately needs an elimination of sanctions, they need food, electricity. He’s realistic, too, I believe.
MR. RUSSERT: Bill Richardson, Robert Gallucci, Ashton Carter, thank you all for a very sobering but important discussion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.