‘Meet the Press’ transcript for Sept. 9, 2007

MR. BRODY:  Well, I talked to a prominent Obama supporter who was at that event last night, got off the phone with him late last night.  He indeed said that Oprah came out and said she wants to help the campaign.  The question is, how will that transfer later on?  I can tell you, besides burgers and corn on the cob that were served, Obama went and spoke for about 30 minutes to that crowd, Oprah spoke for about 15 minutes.  What this prominent Obama supporter says is that there was an electric moment, that they talked about the belief in possibilities and in hope, and that there was Stevie Wonder, Obama and Oprah all onstage, and that there was this electric moment and that the crowd went wild.  So, I mean, you know, at the end of the day, how much can Oprah cut in, so to speak, to Hillary Clinton’s women vote?  And I think that’s going to be very interesting, and we’re going to need to watch that.

MR. RUSSERT:  Do you expect Oprah to go to Iowa and New Hampshire and have town meetings and try to actually campaign for him?

MR. HARWOOD:  I expect if she is—means to help Obama, she’ll do what the campaign wants her to do.  And she’s an asset symbolically, financially. Symbolically, she’s the kind of transcendent figure in our culture that Barack Obama hopes to be.  But remember that Barack Obama doesn’t—isn’t hurting for campaign money.  I think he would gladly trade the $3 million he raised last night in return for a free endorsement from Jim Clyburn in South Carolina, where he’s trailing Hillary Clinton, needs to make up some ground.

MR. RUSSERT:  It does underscore the differences in the campaign.  Hillary Clinton emphasizing strength and experience, relying on the eight years of her husband’s presidency as an example of what she could possibly do.  Barack Obama saying “I’m different.  I’m turning the page.  I am possibilities.  I am hope.  I’m inspiration.’ And Obama linking himself with Oprah does that, and you’re going to really have—people are going to have to make a choice.

MR. BRODY:  Well, there’s going to be a push-back at some point with the Edwards and Obama campaign about whether or not Hillary Clinton’s qualifications are transferrable from Bill Clinton.  I mean, she’s trying to kind of wedge the two together.  But the reality is, at some point, they’re probably going to need to go public on that.  I know the Republican rivals will already do that to her.  But I think that’s very important as well.

MR. HARWOOD:  And they’re beginning to do that to some extent.  Bill Clinton’s a huge asset to her—great communicator, great brand with suburban voters, with African-American voters, constituencies that would be important to her.  The downside of Bill Clinton is that, to some degree, that casts Hillary Clinton as a candidate looking backwards, looking to the past.  Barack Obama’s trying to be the future-oriented candidate.  And the problems with this donor, Norman Hsu, is another thing that evokes the issues that arose in the past about Bill Clinton, some of the campaign finance stuff.

MR. RUSSERT:  So the message to Hillary Clinton from her fellow Democrats will be if you’re going to claim the successes of the Clinton administration, you’re also going to have to accept responsibility for the shortcomings?

MR. HARWOOD:  No doubt.  And you’re also going to claim responsibility for Washington, how Washington is now, how it was before George Bush got to town. And Barack Obama and John Edwards both beginning to sharpen that argument, that they’re the ones who are really going to come and turn Washington upside-down far more than Hillary Clinton would.

MR. BRODY:  But let’s also remember that John Edwards and, and Barack Obama have the tougher hill to climb here, there’s no doubt about it.  Because with change and experience, we keep hearing these words over again—I mean, Hillary Clinton pretty much at this point—perceptionwise, at least—has the experience thing down.  It’s a matter of Edwards and Obama both trying to convince the American public that they have—that, that they’re the agent of change and they have the experience.

MR. HARWOOD:  (Unintelligible)

MR. BRODY:  It’s a tougher hill to climb.

MR. RUSSERT:  You remember at the end of the 2004 presidential race, suddenly Osama bin Laden released a tape which many people thought brought him back into the public consciousness and may have helped President Bush.  We hadn’t heard from Osama bin Laden for some three years.  Here was a tape that was released on Friday.  There he is, his beard a little bit darker and dyed than it was three years ago, but nonetheless, CIA analysts said that’s his presence, that’s his voice.  John McCain responded to that tape this way: “Osama bin Laden and his henchmen must be hunted down, and as president, I will.  My presidency will be al-Qaeda’s worst nightmare.”

Every debate, David Brody, the Republicans have, they make the point, “we understand Islamofascism.  We understand the terrorist threat; the Democrats don’t.” That is going to be their issue in 2008, as it was in ‘04 and in 2000.

MR. BRODY:  There’s no doubt about it.  I mean, I think it’s somewhat of a, on the Republican side, a testosterone convention, in essence, is what it is. I mean, because, because you have John McCain following him to the gates of hell, and you have Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani and, and Mitt Romney now saying Osama bin Laden’s crazy and a little cooky.  They’re going to push this all the time.

What’s interesting, though, I think the bigger issue is on national security. We notice that the Democrats, in all of these poll numbers we see, that they trump the Republicans in many areas.  When it comes to national security, it’s roughly about even now.  Well, of course, before it was more with the Republicans.  Now it’s more even.  But still, at the end of the day, the Republicans, this issue helps the Republicans more than the Democrats because they’re going to be able to enforce this idea that it’s—that the Democrats want to go with this with law enforcement, and, and the Republicans don’t. And I think that will be the key difference as we move ahead.

MR. RUSSERT:  Can the Democrats say, “Excuse me, Republicans, you had your chance.  You decided the Iraq war was the way to go after the war on terror, and that was wrong.  We have a different way, a better way”?

MR. HARWOOD:  There’s no question that Osama bin Laden and the war on terror is much more a double-edged sword now, the appearance of this tape.  And first of all, I’m surprised bin Laden is that vain that he would feel the need to dye his beard.  But he is—he, for Democrats, reinforces the argument that the Bush administration has been incompetent at finding bin Laden; reinforces for the Republicans the argument that it’s a dangerous world.  And keep in mind, in our NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, we’ve shown recently that Americans now say we’re less safe as a result of the war in Iraq, less safe than we were before 9/11.  So this is not a clear advantage for Republicans.  And on that, on Iraq, even though the president appears to be winning, he’s going to be able to keep troops in substantial numbers in Iraq through the end of his presidency.  That is not good news for Republican presidential candidates next year.  They don’t want that overhang.

MR. RUSSERT:  Hillary Clinton said that the Republicans will play the terrorism card and—even though they have not had a, “a good track record on it.” But she is the one Democrat that can deal with that because of her experience.  Her opponents pounced on her saying, “Hey, wait a minute, you criticized Rove, you criticized President Bush for playing that card, why are you playing it now?”

MR. HARWOOD:  Well, first of all, I think she’s right.  She probably does have stronger bona fides than the other two candidates on that issue.  And I don’t think there’s anything wrong pointing that out, nor did I think there’s anything wrong about the Bush administration trying to argue that they were superior on national security to the Democrats.  That’s why we have elections, decide big issues.  There’s nothing bigger than national security.

MR. BRODY:  And I think what you’re going to see is that the Democrats are going going to say, “OK, well, wait a minute, Osama bin Laden and that tape, well, he’s still out there.  Why aren’t we in Afghanistan, and we’re, we’re in Iraq?’ And I think you’re going to see that argument framed that way.

MR. RUSSERT:  Rudy Giuliani, pro-abortion rights, pro-gay rights, pro-handgun control, pro-stem cell research, and yet he’s leading the national polls amongst Republicans because of security?

MR. BRODY:  Because of security, also because of his straight-shooter perception or reality or whatever you want to call it.  I mean, the bottom line is, is that you at least get a sense of where Giuliani stands on an issue.  And with Mitt Romney—and he’s—and with Mitt Romney, you’re not quite sure, at least, you know, back in the past.  So I mean, Giuliani’s been able to capitalize on that, and I think that’s helped him a lot.

MR. RUSSERT:  Larry Craig, the senator from Idaho, had a news conference a week ago Saturday.  Seems like an eternity now.  And he used these carefully chosen words.  Let’s listen.

(Videotape)

SEN. LARRY CRAIG (R-ID):  It is my intent to resign from the Senate effective September 30^th.

(End videotape)

MORE FROM TODAY

Today Section Front

New treatment improving burned triplets’ scars Victims relieved ‘Ether Man’ may be in custody Rihanna says album helped recovery Dad lost his job, so this family lives on the road ‘Going Rouge’ offers roguish reply to Palin book Living on the road full-time: Is it right for you? Lupica’s latest book: ‘Million-Dollar Throw’ Grisham: Printed books are endangered species Racing to save Earth’s most endangered species Obama’s half brother: Our father was abusive Today Section Front   Add Today headlines to your news reader: