http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/11/kerry_to_cnn_to.html#moreExcerpt:
BLITZER: If the president doesn't do what you're recommending, you're going to be in the majority now, the Democrats in the Senate and in the House. What specifically can you do to force them to take these steps if he in fact refuses?
KERRY: Well you know what I'd prefer to do? I'd really prefer to see all of us come together and work with the president in a cooperative way if we can to sort of have a good discussion about this. Let's not get locked in to positions that are just so intractable that we can't advance American interests.
BLITZER: But if he doesn't do that Senator, are there specific steps the Senate can do to force his hand?
KERRY: There are all kinds of things that the Senate can do. They can change the dynamics here very significantly, not the least of which obviously are serious accountability hearings. Secondly, we have the ability in the Congress to pass one resolution or another, or to put into law certain kinds of policies. I mean, you remember back in the days of the contras in Central America, the Congress passed what was called the Boland Amendment and actually forbade certain activities from taking place.
So Congress has a certain power here. I think before we get into that, it would be so much better if we could sit down with the president, with Condoleezza Rice, and really talk through how we come together, both parties, take the politics out at the water's edge, and get a policy that works for America.
Now, if you wanted to be really optimistic and see the glass half full instead of half empty, you could take the president's comments and say, we're not going to have the troops out until we have the job done, and say, OK, that can still fit with what the Baker Commission might offer, which is, we're going to draw down some troops. We're still going to get the job done. We're going to transfer authority to the Iraqis. We're going to provide enough stability because we get an international diplomatic effort that resolves the real differences, and indeed, the troops come out as the job is being done.
BLITZER: Do you think this...
KERRY: But the only best...
BLITZER: Senator, excuse me for interrupting, but do you think this president is already, though, a lame duck? I ask the question in the aftermath of his visit to Jordan, and what many observers are now
suggesting was a snub by the prime minister of Iraq. He goes all the way to Amman, Jordan. He's supposed to have dinner with the king, King Abdullah, and the prime minister, and the prime minister doesn't show up. Is he a lame duck?
KERRY: I don't think any sitting president of the United States is a lame duck when it comes to foreign policy. There's too much power in the presidency, and the interests of our country are too great. If the president reaches out to us in the Democratic Party and really tries to work together, he has a chance to have a legacy here that could be important for our nation and, obviously, for him personally. I've offered to be helpful to Condoleezza Rice. I've called her. I hope we can all work together, but we've got to be tougher in our approach. I believe personally -- and I've said this publicly -- that you have to set a date for the expectation of when the Iraqis will take over their responsibility. And if you don't get tough and have those kinds of benchmarks, then they have an excuse to avoid it altogether.
Translation of what Kerry is saying: George -- PLEASE, let me save you. I'm BEGGING you! I will come to the White House and save you. All those smears you made against me -- water under the bridge, bro. But, see, saving you means saving troops' lives. So I'm offering this olive branch because it's the right thing to do. But, here's the catch -- if you won't LET me save you, then we're going to have to play some hardball in the Congress. We'll still get what we want -- but then you're not really saved, are you? I've already talked to Condi, so, you know, you've go my number. Give me a call.