Shields and Brooks Weigh Obama’s Troop, Budget Plans

Read the Full Transcript

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  And to the analysis of Shields and Brooks, syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.

  It's good to see you both, gentlemen.

  Mark, let's turn back to the president's Iraq troop withdrawal announcement today. Most troops, he's saying, won't come out until next year and that he's going to leave as many as 50,000 troops there even after combat operations are over. What do you make of all this?

• MARK SHIELDS, Syndicated Columnist:

  Well, in a military sense, I mean, it is not what the left — the liberal part of the Democratic Party expected. And that's why you got the mild criticisms from Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid and then more strident and more vocal criticism from Dennis Kucinich and other members of the Democratic left.

  The president, I thought, watching him today make that announcement and that decision, he has a confidence in making the decision that is a direct consequence, in my judgment, of his having been against the war.

  He doesn't have to explain or defend the results, as John McCain would have or Hillary Clinton would have or Joe Biden would have, as supporters, or to say, "I was misled on this."

  And so he can lay down the terms in a way that, as he said in his interview with Jim, "I don't want to re-litigate." I mean, there's a tremendous compulsion in Washington to go back and to say, "Who was right in 2003 on the debate to go to war? And were you wrong?" He's freed from that, in a…

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  But you're not saying he's not responsible for the policy going forward?

• MARK SHIELDS:

  Oh, no, I'm saying — no, but it's a great advantage not to spend time, effort and energy re-arguing that. And I think that's what he did today, and he does it over and over again.

  I mean, we've mentioned that he's not re-arguing the cultural wars of the baby boomer generation, he's not re-arguing or re-litigating who was right and who was wrong about — I mean, he says, quite frankly, he thinks he was right, but he's not going to spend time, effort and energy or goodwill and political capital arguing about that.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  David, the Iraq plan, is it a realistic plan?

• DAVID BROOKS, Columnist, New York Times:

  It seems to be a consensus plan. I mean, it's got a wide support. Not all — I mean, there are some on the left who oppose it, but a lot of Democrats — Jack Reed — a lot of Democrats who know the most about military affairs support it, a lot of the Republicans, you get a sense of that.

  I mean, the basic fact is, the reality changed. Because of the surge, Iraq is now like the bright spot in the Middle East, if you can believe that, and there's just a sense that it's a lot more peaceful. Progress has been made. I mean, President Bush signed a SOFA, which I think would get all troops out by 2011…

• MARK SHIELDS:

  Status-of-forces…

• DAVID BROOKS:

  Status-of-forces agreement.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  Status-of-forces, right.

• DAVID BROOKS:

  Which is an agreement with the Iraqi government to get all troops out one year after the 50,000 that President Obama has assigned. So, you know, this is where U.S. policy was moving regardless of who won, so it's become sort of de-politicized because the reality on the ground has changed.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  Does the fact that the Republicans are saying, like John McCain is saying, well, this is actually dramatically different from what he said during the campaign? And some of the Democrats — and Barack Obama, the president, is saying, no, it's exactly what I — does that debate even matter anymore…the consistency question?

• MARK SHIELDS:

  Probably not. I mean, in some precincts it does, and I'm sure there will be some criticism of him from the most strongly anti-war elements in the Democratic Party.

  But he changed — he kind of nuanced as he went along during the campaign. He kept saying, "I will consult with military commanders," and that's what he hung it on today.