Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and Washington Post columnist David S. Broder was online Friday, Feb. 2, at 2 p.m. 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."

washingtonpost.com: Senate Firefighters (Post, Jan. 11)

The transcript follows.

____________________

Sequim, Wash.: Do Sen. Hagel and like-minded people think that we can merely walk away from Iraq and it all will be over? If not what do they propose? Since at least 1983 at the Marine Barracks bombing our enemy has been killing our people -- do Sen. Hagel and the like-minded think the enemy is ready to stop?

David S. Broder: Senator Hagel must speak for himself to answer probing questions such as yours. I think he would say that he believes the war on terrorism is real and will continue but that Iraq has tied too much of our army down in what has turned into a religious civil war.

_______________________

Appleton, Wisc.: Do you believe President Bush -- and especially his war policy -- would benefit if Vice President Cheney were to resign?

David S. Broder: No, I do not. First of all, that is not going to happen, and second, I think the driving force behind the policy comes from Mr. Bush, not Mr. Cheney.

_______________________

Overseas: David: What would be the impact if Iran were to use Iraqi pipelines across Iraq to Syria then onto the MED in lieu of the current distribution down past the Straits of Hormuz?

David S. Broder: I don't know the answer to that question, and I don't know whether that is a realistic option.

_______________________

McKinney, Texas: The Justice Dept, in response to the suit over warrant-less surveillance, says the suit "should be considered moot because the case 'no longer has any live significance.' " Am I the ONLY one who finds this response absurd? Perhaps an oversimplification but if I am sued for stealing but haven't stolen anything in the past few months, do I get a "free-ride" for past transgressions? Your thoughts?

David S. Broder: I agree with you. It strikes me as a device for allowing the administration to escape responsibility for a policy which I thought -- and still think -- was plainly unlawful.

_______________________

Lincoln, Neb.: At the present time about 75 percent of Republicans still support President Bush and the war in Iraq. In my opinion this creates a difficult dilemma for Republican presidential and congressional candidates -- they must support the war in order to maintain the support of the GOP base. Do you believe that the GOP base will continue to be loyal to President Bush and his policies and perhaps drag down the GOP in the 2008 elections?

David S. Broder: I don't think it is possible for anyone to tell in February of 2007 how the Iraq war will figure in the election of 2008. What happens in Iraq in the next 12 months will change many minds -- one way or the other. I am not hopeful about the new strategy but it will be tested in Baghdad more than in the arguments here at home.

_______________________

McPherson, Kans.: Hi, David, great to talk to you. I'd like to say I'm a young Republican who strongly believes a country that is divided falls. Are we going to let the liberals take care of us from cradle to grave? The Ombamas and communist Hillary want big government -- something that the liberals in the country are blinded by. I know the war is not popular but in this country alone more people die from incorrect prescriptions than the war has taken. The far left and liberals think everything is negotiable -- have they seen the barbaric way terrorists beheaded Paul Morrison and Nick Berg? You can see it on Savage Nation -- terrorists do not negotiate. It sounds to me like any Democrat or liberal would be more then willing to hand us to the terrorists or Communist China. Thank you. Please comment, I'd greatly appreciate it.

David S. Broder: I understand your passion about the defense of the country, but I think you exaggerate the domestic differences when you argue that critics of the Iraq war are ready to surrender to the terrorists. There was no opposition to the strike on Afghanistan, where al Qaeda was headquartered -- the liberals were as much in favor of that as you conservatives.

_______________________

Anthem, Ariz.: Mr. Broder, how do you see the Iraq War Resolutions playing out next week in the Senate? How much Republican support will Warner's resolution get, and what effect will it's passage have on the war in Iraq?

David S. Broder: At this moment it appears likely that the resolution will come to a vote -- that it won't be blocked by a filibuster -- and that it will get a majority vote, something more than 50 votes. But there is still a lot of wheeling and dealing going on so that could well change by next week.

_______________________

Washington: Do you really think Sen. Biden has ruined his chances in the Presidential race with the comments he made about his fellow candidates, especially Senator Obama? I was at the DNC meeting this morning and found many to be critics of him when just last week the same people were singing his praises. Do you think his comments have bolstered Senator Obama's campaign and allied him more with the African-American vote? Thanks.

David S. Broder: Sen. Biden certainly hurt himself with those comments, and when you are a long-shot starting out slipups may be fatal. I thought the incident helped Senator Obama, if only because Senator Biden found himself spending the next day citing all the wonderful qualities of Obama rather than making a case for himself.

_______________________

Portland, Ore.: Are we likely to see the same blue state-red state divide in 2008? Can any candidate pull us above our differences, or are we just too divided politically now?

David S. Broder: You're asking me to be much more of a prophet than I'm capable of being. Several candidates are portraying themselves as "uniters not dividers," to quote President Bush, but that's easier said than done.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Has there been any resolution to the Sarasota missing-votes fiasco in the Florida congressional election? I saw that the new governor came out in favor of a voter-verified paper trail now that the horse is out of the barn.

David S. Broder: The complaint of the losing Democratic candidate in Florida still is being investigated but no resolution is in sight.

_______________________

Colorado: Good lord. Four months ago, you told us your "moderate" heroes were going to stop the Military Commissions Act. Every single "moderate" you named -- John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Shays, Lieberman, Salazar -- voted to sanction torture and virtually abolish habeas corpus. They have at best stood by and more often cheered as Bush has led a lamentably successful assault on the separation of powers. With the very recent exception of Chuck Hagel every single Republican Senator has been putting the interests of their party before those of the country for the past six years. One party -- the Bush party -- is dead wrong: "bipartisanship" is not a virtue.

David S. Broder: Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion and you express it very well, but I think your indictment of those senators is off-base. The problem was not the legislation they wrote -- the problem is what the administration did with it.

_______________________

Laurel, Md.: What was the name of the Democratic senator who was driven to suicide by Republicans back during the McCarthy era?

David S. Broder: I think you're referring to Senator Hunt of Wyoming.

_______________________

Global warming: Hi Mr. Broder. I get the sense the rest of the world is worrying about global warming while we either worry about Iraq (which indeed is deadly serious) or spin our wheels worrying about the upcoming election. Maybe I missed it but where are all the pundits talking about the dangers of global warming and the politicizing of science?

David S. Broder: I think there has been growing attention -- as is well-deserved -- to the issue of global warming. Al Gore and his movie deserve much of the credit but it also has been a favorite topic for much newspaper commentary.

_______________________

Nashville, Tenn.: When the retired generals called for Rumsfeld to be fired in the so-called "revolt of the generals," the most frequent question asked of them by the press was why they didn't speak out when they were in-theater and it could have benefited the war effort. Back in July 2004 Gen. Petraeus, who was in charge of standing up the Iraqi Army, appeared on the cover of Newsweek with the title "Can This Man Save Iraq?" I think we got our answer, so why are we sending him back again? The press seems to ignore that he is the man responsible for the Iraqi Army we have today.

David S. Broder: I disagree -- General Petraeus' role in training Iraqis was noted in almost every article about him I read, and you can get a good argument as to whether the training would have had a better outcome if he had not been ordered home by Secretary Rumsfeld in the middle of that mission.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Do you think Gov. Richardson has any chance to get some traction? He's my favored candidate but with Obama and Hillary using up most of the oxygen and getting all the free press, the second-tier guys seem to be out of luck before the game even starts. Do you think He would consider a VP slot?

David S. Broder: It is likely there will be a third candidate who attracts a significant vote in the early contests; whether it will be Gov. Richardson or someone else is beyond my powers to judge.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Ah, yes, those small-government Republicans who just ran up the national debt to record levels and tried to fund that Bridge to Nowhere. Whatever happened to them? This notion that liberals and Democrats are the big spenders and the Republicans are not is a stereotype that just won't die I guess -- at least not among Rush and his listeners anyway.

David S. Broder: We'll have another chance to test the stereotype on Monday when the new budget comes out. Judge them by their deeds.

_______________________

Costa Mesa, Calif.: What do you think: Obama can't win -- not because he wouldn't be a fine candidate and President but because nobody knows who he is, nobody possibly can think they do. We just have to have some feel for a person before voting them into the nation's highest office. Running is a good idea for him because next time he could win; He might be a good VP choice for either Clinton or Edwards.

David S. Broder: I speak as a neutral observer -- not an advocate of Senator Obama, though he comes from my home state -- but I would remind you that in February of 1992 few Americans knew who Bill Clinton was or what he stood for. Nine months later he was elected president. People learn fast when the primaries begin.

_______________________

Northern Virginia: When you first started knocking on doors and listening to voters in 1960 could you ever have imagined that voters one day would be able to have such fast access to campaign news and analysis as they do now with YouTube, blogs, etc.? Has this increased access been generally good for voters and the Republic or not?

David S. Broder: What a good question. I think the ease and speed of political information is a benefit -- if people are sensible about how they use all the resources now at their fingertips. You still have to test the sources for reliability by measuring what they say against other information -- and your own common sense -- otherwise you can drown in junk journalism and end worse off than if you had known much less.

_______________________

Weapons in Iraq: Mr. Broder -- why does it matter if Iran is manufacturing weapons used in Iraq? Weren't we just figuring out the Israelis used weapons we made in their foray into Lebanon last summer?

David S. Broder: I don't think the comparison works -- the U.S. is publicly allied with Israel. Iran does not acknowledge shipping arms to those fighting in Iraq.

_______________________

Washington: Re: Global warming. I find it amusing that the Al Gore faction of the global warming debate wants to shut off any debate about the science (how much is man-made, how much do we blame developing countries, how much has the Earth been warming for more than 200 years) yet the same folks are always trying to decry the "politicization of science." They seem to want it both ways.

David S. Broder: I am no expert in this field but my impression is that Al Gore has been encouraging a debate on what to do about global warming -- while denying the credibility of those who argue that the problem doesn't exist.

_______________________

Democracy vs Republic: The current debate on Iraq seems the perfect time to remind everyone that the United States is not a Democracy; it is a Republic. The two terms are used like they are the same, but they are not. In a Democracy the people decide. In a Republic the people decide who they want to decide -- and the office that gets to decide what happens in Iraq wasn't on the ballot in 2006. This past decade has given us plenty of opportunity to show how the country truly works instead of how "everyone" thinks it works. Let us use our words carefully and enlighten our fellow citizens in the process.

David S. Broder: I completely agree with you on the importance of distinguishing between a Republic and a Democracy, and on pointing out that the United States is the former, not the latter. But the Constitution that makes the president the commander in chief also clearly gives war powers to the Congress -- as we are being reminded by the debate this week. I think that is a healthy exercise, not a perversion, for a Republic.

_______________________

Crestwood, N.Y.: Good afternoon. In your experience is this, in historical terms, an incredibly large pool of people to be running for president at this stage of the proceedings? If so do you attribute it to national hostility to President Bush, with more than 50 percent disapproval for several years now, or to some other reason?

David S. Broder: I think the large field -- and it is big -- is attributable to several things: The parties are at near equal strength so both sides think they can win; the president is weak and entering his final two years; and rarest of all the vice president is not seeking to move up, so no successor is "anointed" in either party.

_______________________

Seattle: What keeps Iowa and New Hampshire at the beginning of the primaries, election cycle after election cycle? Do you see that changing in the near future? It seems the other 48 states are getting tired of waiting for their turn to be first, which is leading to the front-loading of primaries.

David S. Broder: Those states established their primarily (New Hampshire) and caucus (Iowa) early and were explicitly given priority in the calendar approved years ago by the Democratic and Republican National Committees. Now the Democrats have added Nevada and South Carolina, and a whole bunch of other states are champing to move up. I lament the front-loading and the rush to judgment it implies but this is something the parties have to settle; the press only can watch.

_______________________

Sarasota, Fla.: I'm curious what Congress expects commanding military officers to do about following civilian direction in Iraq. Although it is reasonable to expect the military to offer guidance, the overall direction of Iraq was led by the civilian leadership and to hold Gen. Casey responsible for this would be unreasonable. Do they expect him to pick and chose which orders to follow?

David S. Broder: Your point is well taken and I think the senators share it -- for the most part. That is why Gen. Casey is likely to be confirmed as the Army chief of staff.

_______________________

Seattle: In response to Colorado's question about the Military Commissions Act, you said that the problem was not the bill but what Bush has done with it. Do you see Congress -- especially those "moderates" cited -- as taking on the issue of Bush's signing statements? What do you think Congress can do about them without starting a constitutional crisis?

David S. Broder: Sen. Leahy and the majority of the Judiciary Committee are watching the Cincinnati court case before deciding what they need to do. I appreciate your impatience for action, but I think they are serious -- and prudent -- in their approach.

_______________________

Bloomsburg, Pa.: In your view has the current administration admitted any responsibility for destabilizing the Middle East? Or is it just accepted as fact? Why will Bush and Co. not speak with other nations in the region (Syria and Iran)?

David S. Broder: The answer to your first question is no. The answer to the second is harder -- for an outsider. So many Republican and Democratic voices have urged direct talks with all the countries neighboring Iraq that the rejection must come from one place -- the president. Only he can tell you why.

_______________________

Iowa: In the collection of columns from your colleague Mary McGrory I see that her last column was written just before the start of the Iraq war in 2003. I wonder what she would be saying now? (It would be bit more polite than what Molly Ivins was saying but no less pointed.) We'll miss those two voices.

David S. Broder: I will miss those voices, and equally I'll miss those two good friends. They were unique and wonderful.

_______________________

Goleta, Calif.: I was curious if the legislation to make earmarks visible will succeed. In particular, if a committee chairman simply includes all the other member's earmarks as part of his initial working bill (the chairman's mark, ironically), the members can shelter their de facto authorship. If a chair is willing to put his name to the hundreds of earmarks, as in essence is now done, the bill will have no influence except stop amendments to the chairman's mark that reflect individual earmarks. Unless there is a restriction on content of the chairman's mark (in terms of earmarks) I would guess the goal of transparency is unfulfilled. Correct?

David S. Broder: Your scenario could offer an escape hatch, but for the moment at least the climate on Capitol Hill is pretty hostile to earmarks, so I doubt we will see chairmen playing the games you suggest.

_______________________

San Francisco: Hello Mr. Broder -- Who are the Democrats attending the Lieberman/Alexander breakfasts, aside from the endangered Mary Landrieu? Are there Senate Democrats who'll confess they attend these events?

David S. Broder: I have seen the list of those who attended the first breakfast; there are 40 of them from both parties, too many to name here.

This has to be my last one for today. I've enjoyed visiting with everybody. Thank you.

_______________________

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.