CBS "Face The Nation" - Transcript

Interview

By:  Evan Bayh Lindsey Graham
Date: March 7, 2010
Location: Unknown

BOB SCHIEFFER: Today on FACE THE NATION, is Washington broken?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: At stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem,
but our ability to solve any problem.
BOB SCHIEFFER: We'll talk to Evan Bayh, the Indiana Democrat. He's become so disillusioned
with the Senate he's leaving. But he's still trying to find a way to ease the partisan rancor by
teaming with conservative Republican Lindsey Graham, who's also here to talk about that. And
we'll get the latest from both of them on the tough questions that have split Washington: health
care, what to do with terrorists, the deficit, and the economy?
We'll also bring in two veteran observers of the Washington scene: Jim VandeHei of Politico,
and Dan Balz of The Washington Post.
Then I'll have a final thought on rumor, fear, and madness of the internet.
But first, can Washington come together on FACE THE NATION.
ANNOUNCER: FACE THE NATION with CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob
Schieffer. And now from CBS News in Washington, Bob Schieffer.
BOB SCHIEFFER: And good morning again. Senator Graham and Senator Bayh are with us in
the studio this morning.
And, Senator Bayh, I must say you really did set Washington on its ear when you said you
would not run for re-election, basically, because you said you thought the Senate had become
dysfunctional. But you and Senator Graham have joined in a new effort, even though you've
decided not to run again, to try to ease the partisan rancor. You sent a joint letter to Senate
leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell this week asking that they convene a lunch of
Republican and Democratic senators once a month on a regular basis. Senator Bayh, why--
why did you do that and do you-- why would that work? Why would that help?
SENATOR EVAN BAYH (D-Indiana): Well, first, Lindsey Graham is my friend and we need
more friendships across the aisle because that's ultimately how you get principled compromise
enacted. And part of this, Bob, was informed by my father's experience where back in the day
he might have philosophical or political differences but you still reach out and try to do the
people's business. So little of that takes place because there's so little action-- interaction
among senators. We have the caucus systems. So the Democrats are over here. The
Republicans are over here. They hardly ever meet to listen to one another. The only two times
since I've been there where we've actually had a gathering of all hundred in kind of a serious
setting to listen to one another was first at the time that President Clinton was impeached, didn't
know how the trial was going to work; secondly, immediately following 9/11. And in both of those
cases, we acted more like Americans than Democrats or Republicans. We need more of that.
That's why I think this idea that Lindsey and I are pushing is a good thing.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Have you had any response, Senator Graham?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-South Carolina): Not that I know of. We probably should
start with plastic forks and knives for the first ones--
(Senator Evan Bayh laughing)
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: --to just see how this works. But he's dead right. You know we
share a locker by the-- by the gym. I get to-- I've got to know Evan when-- when he announced
he was going to leave the Senate. A lot of Republicans said, oh, boy, we can pick up Indiana.
The first thing I thought of was, oh, no. Because at the end of the day Evan has shown a
willingness to reflect Indiana values which is to find middle ground because it's in the middle of
the country. I hope people respond to the lunch and I hope it will over time mean something. I
know it's silly for most Americans to think this is newsworthy but it is.
BOB SCHIEFFER: But it does sort of emphasize how bad the situation has--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Yeah, it does.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --gotten that you would propose this.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: It's almost tribal, Bob. And I think Lindsey is right most. Americans
probably listen to this and go, well, that's so basic it's silly. But the caucus system really is used
as an instrument of control, party control. The information that's provided very often is designed
to lead to a particular result. You spend a lot of time talking about. Well, my first day in the
Senate, literally, my first day, first caucus meeting, we were already talking about the next
election.
(Bob Schieffer laughing)
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: It never stops. And so if-- if things political are constantly at the
forefront of your thinking, it's-- it's difficult to make the kind of policy progress that you need.
BOB SCHIEFFER: I want to talk about some of the issues that have really split Washington, and
I think the country, actually, is split right down the middle on a lot of these things. And-- and the
first thing I want to talk about, I want to talk to you about it, Senator Graham. You have been
working behind the scenes with the administration in an effort to have these terrorists--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Mm-Hm.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --we can't decide whether to put them in civilian trials--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Right, right, right, right.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --or go for military tribunals. You've been working to try to convince the
administration to do that. And just to show you how harsh the rhetoric is, how harsh the situation
is--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Yeah.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --the fact that it has come to light that the administration may be considering-
-
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Right.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --putting them before military tribunals--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Right.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --prompted this ad not from the right--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Yeah.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --but from the political left this morning. A-- a full-page ad in The New York
Times that shows President Obama somehow morphing into George Bush. And that just shows
that whenever there's an issue the people on either side, both sides, don't spare anything. It's
fire all guns on-- on-- on all-- all fronts politically.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Used to be when the nation was at war we were able to get
along better than we are today. Remember, the General Petraeus ad?
BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: That just blew me away. Joe Lieberman got run out of the
Democratic Party. I'm getting a lot of grief because I do believe it's best to close Gitmo safely.
So what I've told the President is that you're now my commander in chief. Detainee policy in this
war is hard, it's complicated, but we must get it right. We would be better off as a nation if we
could close Gitmo safely and start a new prison that he could use that the world would see as a
better way to doing business. And Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he's not an enemy combatant,
who would be? The President is getting unholy grief from the left. But, Bob, I think we're at war.
I don't believe Khalid Sheik Muhammad robbed a liquor store. He's the mastermind in 9/11.
We've have used military commissions before. I'm a military lawyer. I have a lot of faith in the
military legal system. I'm willing to give robust due process. There's a place for civilian court but
I will stand by my President to make rational detainee policy. We've got fifty people at Gitmo that
are too dangerous to be let go that will never go through a normal criminal trial. Let's create a
new legal system, so they'll have their day in court.
BOB SCHIEFFER: So where is this situation right now--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Well, we're-- we're--
BOB SCHIEFFER: --because, basically, as I understand it, what you have said to the White
House is if-- if you will agree to try these people in military tribunals--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Some of them.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --I-- some of them. I-- I will help you in getting the Republican votes that are
needed to close Guantanamo.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Right. President Bush said we needed to close Guantanamo.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Senator McCain said it'd be better to close it. I believe that. We
need a legal system that gives due process to the detainee but also understands they didn't rob
the liquor store. We're at war and some of this information is very sensitive and classified. So
where we're at now is, can this administration reverse course on Khalid Sheik Muhammad,
which I think would be an act of leadership well received by the public. He's getting beat up
badly from the left but the ACLOU theory of how to manage this war, I think, is way off base.
And those who want to waterboard on the right and believe that we should keep Gitmo open
forever and use any technique to get information, I think they're equally off base. We've got to
win this war within our value system. But I understand that it's a war.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Did you think, Senator Graham, that if the administration would agree to
what you want to do, put them before military tribunals--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): At least five.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --do you think-- at least five of them.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Mm-Hm.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think you can get the Republican votes to close Guantanamo and--
and open another facility in this country because that's going to require considerable amount of-
-
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): I can't-- I can't do it by myself. But I think if we
could get Khalid Sheik Mohammed and the co-conspirators of 9/11 back in the military
commission, it'd go down well with the public. But I'm going to need General Petraeus, Admiral
Mullen, people known in public office. I'm going to need people from the Bush administration to
try to close Gitmo, to put aside partisanship, rally around this President, stand by his side and
say, let's close Gitmo safely. With that kind of help, that will reassure Americans we're making a
good, logical decision, we can do the things we need to do to getting in back--
BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): Are-- are you talking to any of those people right now?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I'm talking to anybody that will listen because this is a very
important issue. We will never win this war until we understand the effect that Guantanamo Bay
has had on the overall war effort. And we'll never get the support of the American people if we
can't prove to them that these folks that we're dealing with are not common criminals. We're
going to keep them-- keep you safe from them.
BOB SCHIEFFER: What about that, Senator Bayh? How does that will less strike you?
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, I think this dialogue you just had with Senator Graham illustrates
pretty clearly, Bob, some of the problems we have with our politics today. I mean, here Lindsey
is a card-carrying Republican, thoughtful guy. And, yet, you know, he's trying to find some
middle ground here. He gets excoriated by the, you know, far right. The President is realizing,
you know, wait a minute, if I want to get some of what I want I've got to compromise. He's
getting excoriated in this art-- this ad you put on there by the far left. Everybody has got to check
their ideology at the door and try and find practical solutions. So the President, under Lindsey's
proposal, would get to make some major strides forward in the war of ideas of combating global
terror. John McCain would be for that, Secretary Gates would be for that--thoughtful
Republicans. And, yet, the American public would be reassured that we're going to try these
guys in a setting that's secure, expeditious. It doesn't cot-- cost a lot of extra tax payers' money.
It's kind of a common sense thing but both extremes rebel. And, of course, the public wonders
what the heck are they doing up there.
BOB SCHIEFFER: So you'd be all right with military tribunals?
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: I would under the proposal that Lindsey has outlined. You know, I
think the administration gets some-- something. And, yet, the public gets reassured.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Let's--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Can I just add--
BOB SCHIEFFER: Yeah.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: --one-- one reason that drives my train. I know how images are
used against our troops in the Mideast. When you talk about waterboarding here at home it may
get some applause and make you feel good and make you feel tough. But it spreads like wild
fire in the Mideast. If you're a young soldier walking the streets of Afghanistan and Iraq, you've
just been put in danger. And when you talk about closing Gitmo or giving these guys
constitutional rights as an American citizen and losing the fact that we're at war and reading
them their Miranda Rights as soon as we capture them, you lose the American people.
BOB SCHIEFFER: All right.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH (overlapping): Can I just interject one thing here. The administration
would probably say, well, why shouldn't we have the flexibility to decide civilian or military on a
case-by-case basis? And I would say to you, Bob, in sort of an ideal world I could accept that
argument. But if they want to, you know, make progress in the war of ideas by eventually
closing down Gitmo, then you have to give a little bit on that-- that from their point of view that
perfect scenario. And that's why I think we've got to find some common ground on this thing.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Let's talk-- talk about something else where somebody is going to have to--
(Senator Lindsey Graham laughing)
BOB SCHIEFFER: --find some common ground and that is health care. The President is now
talking about falling back on this seldom used--I hate the bring up this word because it's so
difficult to explain--this seldom-used parliamentary device called reconciliation to get this thing
through the Senate. Bottom line of that is you can pass things in the Senate with just a simple
majority if you go rec-- reconciliation route you don't need the sixty votes that most legislation
requires. You said that if they try to do this by reconciliation, Senator Bayh, there will be a
backlash that will result in nothing else getting done this year. Do you think they're going to use
reconciliation?
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: I think that will probably happen, Bob, and I'm concerned that that
might ultimately be the result. I mean, Lindsey and I've talked about some of the good work he's
doing in energy. There's a chance for a financial regulatory reform bill and that kind of thing. But
I do think that you-- a couple of things, and Lindsey will probably have a difference of opinion
on this one. The bill that's going to come before the Senate is not the large, omnibus health care
bill. It is instead a corrections bill. It gets out to the cornhusker kickback. Nobody liked the
special arrangement for Florida that many states objected to. It treats middle-class families a
little bit better on the-- the tax side of things. So it is a-- it's not one-sixth of the American
economy, it's a much smaller piece of legislation.
And, secondly, my guess is that, you know, a lot of your viewers and Americans are looking at
this thinking, I don't understand all this procedural stuff, let's focus on the substance. And if you
think that it's actually going to be better for the American people, vote for it. And if you think it
will be harmful, don't vote for it. And for me, it was a close call in my mind on this bill. This is not
the way I would have written it. But for me, it eventually came down we need to try something. It
may not be perfect, we need to try something. If it doesn't work exactly the way we'd hope, let's
come back and correct it. But to just sit here year after year and letting things fester that's not
the right way to go.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, reconciliation will be used to co-- clean up the Senate bill
to make House members happy. House members are going to vote for the Senate bill and they
hate it. In the Senate-- and the President saying, okay, we're going to change what you don't
like. And when it comes to the Republicans, you all don't matter anymore. You just need a
simple majority, so reconciliation will empower a bill that was very partisan. We've had
reconciliation votes but all of them had received bipartisan support, the least was twelve when
we did reconciliation with tax cuts. So it is taking a partisan product and making it law.
And I was in the gang of fourteen. Remember the "nuclear option" with judges, when we almost
changed the rules? I was one of seven Democrats, oh-- seven Republicans, seven Democrats
said don't do that. Don't pull the nuclear trigger. I'm glad I was in that gang. I got the heck beat
out of me. We didn't change the rules. This will be the same effect as if you change the rules for
judges, it will be catastrophic.
BOB SCHIEFFER: What will be-- well, let me-- let me ask you that. What will be the result of
that, Senator Bayh? Do you think that there will such-- well, maybe I should ask you, Senator
Graham, will there be such a Republican backlash---
SENATOR EVAN BAYH (overlapping): Right.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --to this.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yes. That-- that not one Republican will vote for the
reconciliation part of this.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: --not one Republican voted for the Senate bill and you are
dealing with one-sixth of the economy and they will see this the same way Democrats saw our
efforts to change the rule on judges unfair.
BOB SCHIEFFER: So what will-- what will Republicans do?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I think Evan's right. I think Republicans will stand up for the
minority in the future. The minority in the Senate, if this happens, is forever changed.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, I'm not in the business of offering. I may offer my friend Lindsey
a lot of advice, usually, it's not--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Please.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: --political advice.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Please.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: But if I were in that business now I'd say, look, if this gets passed, you
know, you're going to have some complaints about it and let's argue over that in November.
That's why you got elections, you know, you want this or do you not want this? But don't stop all
other progress for the country. We got other major issues out there. A, it's the right thing to do
for the American people. B, I think for Republicans, it would run the risk of, you know, playing
into this party of no--
BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): But where--
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: --narrative that's out there.
BOB SCHIEFFER: --let's say that they-- one way they can slow this down, Republicans if they
choose to do it, is to offer endless amendments.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, this could have an interesting end game in the United States
Senate that would be the subject of-- his name Alan Drury or, you know, one of his novels. It
could be the parliamentarians is going to be called upon to decide is there a difference between
a filibuster which you're not allowed to do or endless amendments which would after a while sort
of verge on the functional equivalent of a filibuster. And that poor guy is going to be put on the
spot and then conceivably the vice president could be called in--
BOB SCHIEFFER: Right.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: --to decide whether the parliamentarian should be overruled or not.
And I think that's all going to come down to, you know, look are these legitimate amendments
that after a period of weeks are really designed to--
BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): What would happen--
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: --improve the product or are they-- are they just slowing things down?
BOB SCHIEFFER: What would happen, Senators, if the vice president--
(LAUGHING)
BOB SCHIEFFER: --in an effort to end these debates decided to overrule the parliamentarian?
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, that will be a-- a very interesting moment, Bob. I assume that our
friends on the Republican side will think that they've been violated and people on our side will
say, look, this should be about substance rather than form. We think it's right for the American
public and let's have a debate about that between now and--
BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): What do you think would happen--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (overlapping): Well, it would be--
BOB SCHIEFFER: --because that may well happen, Senator?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, it would be catastrophic for the Senate. The minority's
rights would have been overcome by-- by rank partisanship at a time when the bill itself, the
process led to it wasn't so good. Please don't do this. Just please. I will work with you to find a
smaller bill that the American people feel more comfortable about. Let's do a (INDISTINCT)
health care, let's don't score a touchdown by ramming it down somebody's throat.
BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. We're going to take a quick break and bring in a couple of veteran
observers of Washington to join the conversation in a second.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
BOB SCHIEFFER: Back now with Senators Evan Bayh and Lindsey Graham. Joining us two
veteran observers of the Washington scene, Dan Balz of the Washington Post; Jim VandeHei,
executive editor of Politico.
Dan, I was listening to these two Senators just now and thinking wouldn't it be great if the
Senate sort of operated like these two are-- are talking this morning?
DAN BALZ (Washington Post): Well, it probably would work a lot better than it certainly works
now. But I think neither of these gentlemen are free operators. They're part of a much larger
system that is terribly polarized, very highly partisan, it has outside forces pushing them not to
cooperate but to confront one another. And so it's very difficult for an individual Senator or a
couple of individual Senators to overcome that.
BOB SCHIEFFER: How did it get this way?
JIM VANDEHEI (Executive Editor, Politico): Well, I think part of it is most of the country is
somewhere between the two of you. Most of the Congress is on the other side and I'd-- I'd be
curious for you, Senator Graham, two things--like one, you're one of the few Republicans right
now who is genuinely trying to work on-- on some of the big issues--energy, immigration, and
some of the terror issues.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: There are others, Corker's working on--
JIM VANDEHEI: Corker--
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: --financial regulation.
JIM VANDEHEI: But you put you're probably one of the most prominent, like one thing, how
much flak are you taking from your Republican colleagues? Because when I talk to them, wow,
you know, Lindsey Graham is show boating.
(SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM laughing)
JIM VANDEHEI: Lindsey Graham is just trying to raise his profile. How much flak do you take
and what happened to John McCain who used to be like Lindsey Graham? Now he's almost
indistinguishable from Mitch McConnell.
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, John McCain is the most prominent Republican in the
country and any time he speaks people listen and he's taking the role of basically defending
against the excesses of the Obama administration on the stimulus, on health care, and other
things. What I've tried to do is just continue to be me the best I can. I can throw elbows with the
best of them but when it comes to the war, young men and women are serving overseas. We're
letting them down when we fight about detainee policy and make it irrational when it should be
rational. When it comes to energy and climate, we have got a great chance to do a deal to
create jobs. I'm just going to keep being me. I get a lot of flak. The idea of closing Gitmo upsets
lot of people in our side but I'm convinced that it is the best thing for the country.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH (overlapping): Senator.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Go ahead, Senator.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, I think, Jim mentioned the most important thing at the beginning
when you said there're-- most of the people in the country are somewhere between, you know,
Lindsey and myself, what needs to happen here ultimately is those people who really care about
practical progress, who aren't strident ideologues and partisans need to stand up. And if people
are behaving out here in ways that are excessively pa1rtisan or ideological they need to make a
change so that the folks who are in these kinds of ads aren't the only ones driving this debate.
JIM VANDEHEI: The system doesn't produce those type of politicians in the most cases
because in the House where I got to know you in the mid 1990s. The way the redistricting
process works you essentially guarantee yourself that you're going to get a bunch of ideologues
who are not representative of the country. They're representative of the-- the extremes of both
parties. And because of the unattractiveness sometimes of-- of this Senate to governors and
other folks there's more and more House members, Senator. So it seems the Senate seat has
gotten more--
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: The-- the gerry-- the gerrymandering has really destroyed the House.
There's what fifty seats, sixty seats at most are competitive in the general election. What's done
this to the Senate many things but among them are the campaign finance rules where you have
this perpetual campaign. And you're raising money all the time. And so that's one of the things.
And-- and we got to look at-- and it's about-- about to get worse because of the Supreme Court
decision. You can look at what's hap-- happening to Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas is sort of the
first step in the Senate being pulled to the far left and the far right.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask Dan Balz this question. Do you think that part of this is--
is simply because the President asked the country to maybe digest more than it could digest at
one point? Did he ask for too much in a short time?
DAN BALZ: Well, I think in retrospect he probably did. And I-- and certainly the health care
battle has been a traumatic political event for the Congress and for the entire country. Were it
not for that, we might be talking about a somewhat more collegial--
BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.
DAN BALZ: --set of di-- discussions and negotiations on Capitol Hill than we're seeing. But we--
one of the realities is that since 1994, every election has been about whether control of one
chamber or the other might happen. And when you are-- when you are trying to legislate in that
environment, the political forces and the political calculations take precedence over substantive
discussions.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Does all of this go back to the money? I mean do people have to raise so
much money to get here that they have to sign off with so many interest groups before they
come to Washington, Senator Graham, that they can't compromise once they're here?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: A lot of it is sort of give away your political soul to get here.
You sign pledge after pledge to get the PAC funding. The next thing you know the issues up
here that you signed a pledge on and there's a middle ground and people raise holy hell. But
the worst is yet to come as Evan said with the Supreme Court case. But let's just remember
this, was Ted Kennedy moderate? No. Was he effective? Yes. Was Strom Thurmond
moderate? No. Was he effective? Yes. Joe Biden spoke at Senator Thurmond's funeral. I
worked with Ted Kennedy on one or two things that mattered for the country like immigration.
You can be very liberal, you can be very conservative but you also can be very effective. That's
what we're losing up here--the willingness to be effective.
BOB SCHIEFFER: I will give you the last word, Senator Bayh.
SENATOR EVAN BAYH: Well, we're living in a time, Bob, where we have great challenges
facing our country and many of them are-- are external. The economic challenges, the-- the
debt that is accumulating is unsustainable, our energy challenges that Lindsey is attempting to
work on, all the wealth we're shifting abroad. Our political process is stuck at a time when we
need to be moving. And that is to the great peril of our country. And that's why let's start with the
lunches. Let's look at fundraising reform possibly adjusting the filibuster some of these things
that will allow us to act in pragmatic ways. It's manifestly in the best interest of the country.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Did you think it can change, Senator Graham?
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Absolutely. I'm an American. There's nothing we can't do
together. And if we don't work together, there's nothing we're going to do.
BOB SCHIEFFER: Thank you to all. I have very interesting discussion. I'll be back in a moment
with some final thoughts.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
BOB SCHIEFFER: Finally today, it happens now with increasing frequency. A person with a
twisted mind and a complaint against the government goes to a government building and tries to
kill the people. Last week it was a shooting at the door of the Pentagon. Two weeks before it
was a man who crashed his plane into a Texas IRS headquarters. Any society will always
include a small number of the deranged who pose a danger to the rest of us. But here is the
difference. In this age of the internet such people can now find one another. Talk to one another
and no matter how twisted their view, find those who agree and sympathize with them. As it was
last week at the Pentagon, last month in Austin and last year at the Holocaust Museum and
after that at Fort Hood, men with guns found encouragement, even validation on the internet
where there is no accountability and no editor.
I would be the last person to restrict freedom of the speech but responsible people do recognize
there are limits. They were outlined in the landmark case in which Supreme Court Justice Oliver
Wendell Holmes wrote that free speech did not include the right to falsely shout fire in a theater
and cause panic. Yet there are no such limits on the internet where fire is not only shouted but
encouraged and as we saw again last week by some taken to heart.
I don't know the answer to this. But we must begin to think about the question. Back in a minute.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, that's it for this week. We'll be back right here at the same place, same
time next week on FACE THE NATION.
ANNOUNCER: This broadcast was produced by CBS News, which is solely responsible for the
selection of today's guests and topics. It originated in Washington, DC.