Broder on Politics

Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and Washington Post columnist David S. Broder was online Friday, Dec. 8, at noon ET to answer your questions about the world of politics, from the latest maneuverings on Capitol Hill to developments in the White House.

Broder has written extensively about primaries, elections, special interests and the business of politics. His books include "Democracy Derailed: The Initiative Movement & the Power of Money," "Behind the Front Page: A Candid Look at How the News Is Made" and "The System: The American Way of Politics at the Breaking Point."

The transcript follows.

____________________

Memphis, Tenn.: Is President Bush treating the press differently since the midterm elections? More accessible or less? More frank or less?

David S. Broder: The president has had more frequent news conferences since the midterm election. I cannot say that he has been more frank.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: Mr. Broder:

Can you think of another president who stuck to his guns on a policy in spite of incredibly high public disapproval?

David S. Broder: Yes, of course. Many wartime presidents have found themselves in a similar position, including Lincoln during the 1864 campaign and the dark days of the Civil War.

_______________________

Tampa, Fla.: What's the risk of the Republicans becoming a regional, southern party? I would think the religious right winning the civil war for control of the GOP would increase the chances of this should they force the GOP to focus on their social issues. Further, would the Democrats be able to redistrict the GOP to long-term weakness in the Midwestern and other states outside the south in which they control the state legislatures?

David S. Broder: There is a risk to the GOP of exactly that happening. But the 2008 nomination for president and election offer them an opportunity to broaden the base of the party to other regions. We will see if they take advantage of that opening.

_______________________

Richmond, Va.: In the Iraq Report it is suggested that we talk to Syrian and Iran yet a number of senators oppose that option even though, as the report authors state, we talked with the Soviets for 40 years even though they were an enemy.

Why do you suppose they oppose this? Is it just posturing for the presidential elections in '08 and they're appealing to their respective bases?

David S. Broder: I think there is genuine skepticism that two countries which have done so much to damage U.S. interests in Iraq as Syria and Iran can be expected too help stabilize the country. But I think the Iraq Study Group is right in suggesting that it does not hurt to test their intentions by seeking to engage them in talks.

_______________________

Pacific Northwest: Isn't ISG's report a near total rejection of Bush, Cheney, and the Neocon's reasoning and actions in going into Iraq? And, how do they explain (spin) this ?

David S. Broder: Near total, is right. The ISG finessed it by describing current conditions,, not looking at antecedents. But the antecedents are clear; they lie in the White House.

_______________________

Seattle, Wash.: George Will recently wrote a column about Jim Webb that has come under fire because it omitted a few key phrases in a conversation that Will wrote about. Could you shed some light on what sort of journalistic ethics bound columnists and how they differ from regular reporters.

David S. Broder: When words are omitted, Washington Post policy and journalistic ethics require the use of ellipsis marks to alert the reader to what has happened.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: Do you think that utterances from McCain are often given to much gravitas? For instance, although we all should honor his military service, he was not at a strategic rank as colonel or general. So when he says that the ISG report is a "recipe for defeat" why is that taken as gospel?

David S. Broder: I don't think that remark by Senator McCain or any other is taken as Gospel. But he is correctly regarded as a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination and he is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. That is why his views are quoted.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: Where have all the centrists gone? Outside of the ISG, I don't see any in Washington these days? Most Americans think the war was a mistake but that those who opposed were also wrong, that we should get out immediately but that we shouldn't cut and run, and that Bush is misguided but that Democratic efforts to rein him in are also misguided. Most Americans believe all of this -- how come no one in Washington, aside from a few centrist pundits (like you, for example), seems to?

David S. Broder: It is always tempting to think that one's own views are moderate and sensible, and if others weren't so stubbornly opinionated, they would agree with us. Iraq is difficult; public opinion is complex. Don't be impatient. The American people are figuring this one out,, and as they do, the commonsense solutions, to a bad situation, will become inevitable.

_______________________

Memphis, Tenn.: Which Democrat considering running for president in '08 do you hear the most buzz about in Washington?

David S. Broder: Barack Obama

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Good morning and thanks for having this chat.

First, does it look as if John Dingell and John Conyers will chair their respective committees? No offense, but they seem a bit creaky, and after the Reyes pick, I was just wondering how settled this was.

Also, any further word on the replacement for U.N. Ambassador? Jim Leach (nice column, btw) would signal quite a change in attitude, and I think a salutary one. Are there others on a short list?

David S. Broder: Mr.Conyers and Mr. Dingell have been formally appointed as chairmen of Judiciary and Commerce, respectively. As for the UN job, there is no word at the moment about the president's intention.

_______________________

St. Paul, Minn.: The Post is reporting that the President is cool to the Commission Report on Iraq. What would happen if he totally defied Congress and the Commission Report and went his own way with the war?

David S. Broder: I think he would pay a serious political price for such an action, but I think he has fundamentally rejected its analysis of the Iraq problem. That is the subject of my Sunday column.

_______________________

Plano, Tex.: Where do you think this administration will go down on the "dishonesty scale"? It amazes me that Bill Clinton is remembered by so many (mostly partisans)as being fundamentally dishonest, when most of his lies were about his private life, and that Bush is still regarded by over 40% as being "trustworthy", when his administration has misled the public almost exclusively on matters that affect us all (Iraq, "revenue-producing tax cuts", etc.).

David S. Broder: You will have to forgive me. I am really tired of questions trying to vindicate Clinton's lying by comparing it to Bush's. Presidents ought not lie. It's as simple as that.

_______________________

Vermont: I can't help feeling that the ISG Report, which comes on the heels of an overwhelmingly anxious election message from the American people, leaves the Bush administration with few options and few friends. If they continue on their present course, perhaps with a couple of meaningless but PR-driven alterations--and if things get worse, who else steps forward to save the day? Is it politically tenable for the Administration to continue this way for another two years?

David S. Broder: Like you, I think the answer to that question is no, and if the president makes the effort, he will bring down further damage to himself and his party.

_______________________

Orange, Calif.: What about Vilsack?

He's an experienced Governor/executive, wins as an underdog at the ballot box after being ignored by the press, he's Midwestern, he's a centrist, and he isn't Hillary Clinton.

Are you not mentioning him in the MSM because he hasn't got the money of Hillary Clinton?

David S. Broder: I interviewed Governor Vilsack last week and will be writing about him soon. I share your admiration for him.

_______________________

Oklahoma City, Okla.: In light of the ongoing failures in foreign policy, election outcome and now the ISG report, changes need to be made in the State Department?

David S. Broder: I think the critical need is for change of policy. And that starts with the president. The State Department is not an independent agency; it serves, and perhaps guides, the president.

_______________________

Plano, Tex.: Not trying to "vindicate" anyone. I agree presidents should not lie. just wondering why it is that some seem to have "teflon" and others do not. Reagan told his share too but had such a likable "grandfather" image that no one seemed able to believe that he wasn't just mistaken. Was just looking for your "insider" insight as to why some are viewed one way and others the other.

David S. Broder: perhaps because of the reputation they bring with them to Washington. Reagan was the Gipper, the straight-talking cowboy conservative. Bush was as he often said, "a plain-spoken fella.." Clinton had been nicknamed Slick Willie--a name I never used--long before he ever set foot in Washington.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Exactly how much political pressure would it take for Bush to accept the ISG's recommendations? Bush seems so unhinged from reality and Iraq is quickly becoming an uncontrollable disaster. The election, while eliciting some changes from Bush, doesn't really seemed to have gotten through to him. How can we have hope here?

David S. Broder: I have no cheery news to report. For the next two years, Bush is, as he says,, the decider, and we have to hope he comes to grip with reality

_______________________

Hartford, Conn.: How much has McCain differed from Bush on policy at home? I know on some social issues, (i.e. constitutional amendment for same-sex marriage)he's distanced himself. But, did he ever speak out against tax cuts or social program spending cuts?

David S. Broder:

senator McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2991. And he has offered environmental legislation that goes far beyond administration policy.

_______________________

Anonymous: Have you heard the rumor about U.S. troops returning to Saudi Arabia ?

David S. Broder: No, I have not.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: If "reality" means talking to the nut who is the head of Iran, I want no part of it. How about a real effort to topple his regime?

David S. Broder: I'm for that, if you can tell me how.

_______________________

Frederick, Md.: If Bush does continue to "stay the course" is there some way for Congress to present legislation that could force him to change his Iraq policy?

David S. Broder: Congress could in theory refuse further funding for military operations in Iraq, but Democrats have ruled that out as long as U.S. troops are fighting there.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Something that seems to be missing from the discussion on ISG is that none of its members had publicly opposed the decision to go to war. I believe that is a serious omission and calling the group bipartisan is very disingenuous. Even some Democrats supported the war, half of the Democratic Congressmen and a significant minority of Senators delegation opposed it. So, it probably should be called ISG by THE party that once supported the war.

David S. Broder: As far as I can judge, the makeup of the group adds to the force of its recommendations. These are people looking at a realistic assessment of a policy they once supported but that has gone way off tracks. This has to bee my last answer today. I've enjoyed the chat.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.