    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2006, Book II)]
    [December 20, 2006]
    [Pages 2203-2215]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference
    December 20, 2006

        The President. Thank you all. Good morning. This week, I went to the
    Pentagon for the swearing-in of our Nation's new Secretary of Defense,
    Bob Gates. Secretary Gates is going to bring
    a fresh perspective to the Pentagon, and America is fortunate that he
    has agreed to serve our country once again. I'm looking forward to
    working with him.
        Secretary Gates is going to be an
    important voice in the Iraq strategy review that's underway. As you
    know, I've been consulting closely with our commanders and the Joint
    Chiefs of Staff on the strategy in Iraq and on the broader war on
    terror. One of my top priorities during this war is to ensure that our
    men and women wearing the uniform have everything they need to do their
    job.
        This war on terror is the calling of a new generation; it is the
    calling of our generation. Success is essential to securing a future of
    peace for our children and grandchildren, and securing this peace for
    the future is going to require a sustained commitment from the American
    people and our military.
        We have an obligation to ensure our military is capable of
    sustaining this war over the long haul and performing the many tasks
    that we ask of them. I'm inclined to believe that we need to increase in
    the permanent size of both the United States Army and the United States
    Marines. I've asked Secretary Gates to
    determine how such an increase could take place and report back to me as
    quickly as possible.
        I know many Members of Congress are interested in this issue, and I
    appreciate their input. As we develop the specifics of the proposals
    over the coming weeks, I will not only listen to their views, we will
    work

    [[Page 2204]]

    with them to see that this becomes a reality.
        Two thousand and six was a difficult year for our troops and the
    Iraqi people. We began the year with optimism after watching nearly 12
    million Iraqis go to the polls to vote for a unity government and a free
    future. The enemies of liberty responded fiercely to this advance of
    freedom. They carried out a deliberate strategy to foment sectarian
    violence between Sunnis and Shi'a. And over the course of the year, they
    had success. Their success hurt our efforts to help the Iraqis rebuild
    their country. It set back reconciliation; it kept Iraq's unity
    Government and our coalition from establishing security and stability
    throughout the country.
        We enter this new year clear-eyed about the challenges in Iraq and
    equally clear about our purpose. Our goal remains a free and democratic
    Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself and is an
    ally in this war on terror.
        I'm not going to make predictions about what 2007 will look like in
    Iraq, except that it's going to require difficult choices and additional
    sacrifices, because the enemy is merciless and violent. I'm going to
    make you this promise: My administration will work with Republicans and
    Democrats to fashion a new way forward that can succeed in Iraq. We'll
    listen to ideas from every quarter. We'll change our strategy and
    tactics to meet the realities on the ground. We'll never lose sight that
    on the receiving end of the decisions I make is a private, a sergeant, a
    young lieutenant, or a diplomat who risks his or her life to help the
    Iraqis realize a dream of a stable country that can defend, govern, and
    sustain itself.
        The advance of liberty has never been easy, and Iraq is proving how
    tough it can be. Yet the safety and security of our citizens requires
    that we do not let up. We can be smarter about how we deploy our
    manpower and resources. We can ask more of our Iraqi partners, and we
    will. One thing we cannot do is give up on the hundreds of millions of
    ordinary moms and dads across the Middle East who want the hope and
    opportunity for their children that the terrorists and extremists seek
    to deny them, and that's a peaceful existence.
        As we work with Congress in the coming year to chart a new course in
    Iraq and strengthen our military to meet the challenges of the 21st
    century, we must also work together to achieve important goals for the
    American people here at home. This work begins with keeping our economy
    growing. As we approach the end of 2006, the American economy continues
    to post strong gains. The most recent jobs report shows that our economy
    created 132,000 more jobs in November alone, and we've now added more
    than 7 million new jobs since August of 2003. The unemployment rate has
    remained low at 4.5 percent. A recent report on retail sales shows a
    strong beginning to the holiday shopping season across the country, and
    I encourage you all to go shopping more.
        Next year marks a new start with a new Congress. In recent weeks,
    I've had good meetings with the incoming leaders of Congress, including
    Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority
    Leader-elect Harry Reid. We agreed that we've got
    important business to do on behalf of the American people and that we've
    got to work together to achieve results. The American people expect us
    to be good stewards of their tax dollars here in Washington. So we must
    work together to reduce the number of earmarks inserted into large
    spending bills and reform the earmark process to make it more
    transparent and more accountable.
        The American people expect us to keep America competitive in the
    world. So we must work to ensure our citizens have the skills they need
    for the jobs of the future and encourage American businesses to invest
    in technology and innovation. The American people expect us to reduce
    our dependence on foreign oil and increase our use of alternative energy
    sources. So we

    [[Page 2205]]

    must step up our research and investment in hydrogen fuel cells, hybrid
    plug-in and battery-powered cars, renewable fuels like ethanol and
    cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, clean coal technology, and clean
    sources of electricity like nuclear, solar, and wind power.
        Another area where we can work together is the minimum wage. I
    support the proposed $2.10 increase in the minimum wage over a 2-year
    period. I believe we should do it in a way that does not punish the
    millions of small businesses that are creating most of the new jobs in
    our country. So I support pairing it with targeted tax and regulatory
    relief to help these small businesses stay competitive and to help keep
    our economy growing. I look forward to working with Republicans and
    Democrats to help both small-business owners and workers when Congress
    convenes in January.
        To achieve these and other key goals we need to put aside our
    partisan differences and work constructively to address the vital issues
    confronting our Nation. As the new Congress takes office, I don't expect
    Democratic leaders to compromise on their principles, and they don't
    expect me to compromise on mine. But the American people do expect us to
    compromise on legislation that will benefit the country. The message of
    the fall election was clear: Americans want us to work together to make
    progress for our country. And that's what we're going to do in the
    coming year.
        And now I'll be glad to answer some questions. Terry [Terence Hunt,
    Associated Press].

    Progress in Iraq

        Q. Mr. President, less than 2 months ago, at the end of one of the
    bloodiest months in the war, you said, ``Absolutely we're winning.''
    Yesterday you said, ``We're not winning; we're not losing.'' Why did you
    drop your confident assertion about winning?
        The President. My comments--the first comment was done in this
    spirit: I believe that we're going to win. I believe that--and by the
    way, if I didn't think that, I wouldn't have our troops there. That's
    what you got to know; we're going to succeed.
        My comments yesterday reflected the fact that we're not succeeding
    nearly as fast as I wanted when I said it at the time and that
    conditions are tough in Iraq, particularly in Baghdad. And so we're
    conducting a review to make sure that our strategy helps us achieve that
    which I'm pretty confident we can do, and that is have a country which
    can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself.
        You know, I--when I speak, like right now, for example--I'm speaking
    to the American people, of course, and I want them to know that I know
    how tough it is, but I also want them to know that I'm going to work
    with the military and the political leaders to develop a plan that will
    help us achieve the objective. I also want our troops to understand that
    we support them, that I believe that tough mission I've asked them to do
    is going to be accomplished, and that they're doing good work and
    necessary work.
        I want the Iraqis to understand that we believe that if they stand
    up--step up and lead--and with our help, we can accomplish the
    objective. And I want the enemy to understand that this is a tough task,
    but they can't run us out of the Middle East, that they can't intimidate
    America. They think they can. They think it's just a matter of time
    before America grows weary and leaves, abandons the people of Iraq, for
    example. And that's not going to happen.
        What is going to happen is we're going to develop a strategy that
    helps the Iraqis achieve the objective that the 12 million people want
    them to achieve, which is a government that can--a country that can
    sustain itself, govern itself, defend itself, a free country that will
    serve as an ally in this war against extremists and radicals.
        Caren [Caren Bohan, Reuters].

    [[Page 2206]]

    U.S. Military Forces in Iraq

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. If you conclude that a surge in troop
    levels in Iraq is needed, would you overrule your military commanders if
    they felt it was not a good idea?
        The President. That's a dangerous hypothetical question. I'm not
    condemning you; you're allowed to ask anything you want. Let me wait and
    gather all the recommendations from Bob Gates, from our military, from diplomats on the ground--I'm
    interested in the Iraqis' point of view--and then I'll report back to
    you as to whether or not I support a surge or not. Nice try.
        Q. Would you overrule your commanders----
        The President. The opinion of my commanders is very important. They
    are bright, capable, smart people whose opinion matters to me a lot.
        Bret [Bret Baier, FOX News].

    War on Terror Strategy/Iraqi Government

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You have reached out to both Sunni and
    Shi'a political leaders in recent weeks, and now there's word that the
    Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is supporting a moderate coalition in
    Iraq. Has the U.S. reached out to him? How important is he in the
    equation moving forward? And what do you say to people who say more
    troops in Iraq would increase the sectarian split and not calm things
    down?
        The President. Well, I haven't made up my mind yet about more
    troops. I'm listening to our commanders; I'm listening to the Joint
    Chiefs, of course; I'm listening to people in and out of Government; I'm
    listening to the folks on the Baker-
    Hamilton commission about coming up with a
    strategy that helps us achieve our objective. And so as I said to
    Caren--probably a little more harshly than she would have liked--
    hypothetical questions, I'm not going to answer them today. I'm not
    going to speculate out loud about what I'm going to tell the Nation,
    when I'm prepared to do so, about the way forward.
        I will tell you we're looking at all options. And one of those
    options, of course, is increasing more troops. But in order to do so,
    there must be a specific mission that can be accomplished with more
    troops. And that's precisely what our commanders have said, as well as
    people who know a lot about military operations. And I agree with them
    that there's got to be a specific mission that can be accomplished with
    the addition of more troops before I agree on that strategy.
        Secondly, whatever we do is going to help the Iraqis step up. It's
    their responsibility to govern their country. It's their responsibility
    to do the hard work necessary to secure Baghdad. And we want to help
    them.
        Thirdly, I appreciate the fact that the Prime Minister and members of the Government are forming what you have
    called a moderate coalition, because it's becoming very apparent to the
    people of Iraq that there are extremists and radicals who are anxious to
    stop the advance of a free society. And therefore, a moderate coalition
    signals to the vast majority of the people of Iraq that we have a unity
    government, that we're willing to reconcile our differences and work
    together and, in so doing, will marginalize those who use violence to
    achieve political objectives.
        And so we support the formation of the unity Government and the
    moderate coalition. And it's important for the leader Sistani to understand that's our position. He is a--he lives
    a secluded life, but he knows that we're interested in defeating
    extremism, and we're interested in helping advance a unity government.
        Kelly [Kelly O'Donnell, NBC News].

    Situation in the Middle East/War on Terror

        Q. Good morning, Mr. President. Your former Secretary of Defense,
    Donald Rumsfeld, advocated for a lighter, more

    [[Page 2207]]

    agile military force. Have you now concluded that that approach was
    wrong?
        The President. No, I strongly support a lighter, agile Army that can
    move quickly to meet the threats of the 21st century. I also supported
    his force posture review and recommendations to move forces out of
    previous bases that--you know, they were there for the Soviet threat,
    for example, in Europe. So he's
    introduced some substantive changes to the Pentagon, and I support them
    strongly.
        However, that doesn't necessarily preclude increasing end strength
    for the Army and the Marines. And the reason why I'm inclined to believe
    this is a good idea is because I understand that we're going to be in a
    long struggle against radicals and extremists, and we must make sure
    that our military has the capability to stay in the fight for a long
    period of time. I'm not predicting any particular theater, but I am
    predicting that it's going to take a while for the ideology of liberty
    to finally triumph over the ideology of hate.
        I know you know I feel this strongly, but I see this--we're in the
    beginning of a conflict between competing ideologies, a conflict that
    will determine whether or not your children can live in peace. A failure
    in the Middle East, for example, or failure in Iraq or isolationism will
    condemn a generation of young Americans to permanent threat from
    overseas. And therefore, we will succeed in Iraq. And therefore, we will
    help young democracies when we find them--democracies like Lebanon,
    hopefully a Palestinian state living side by side in peace with Israel,
    the young democracy of Iraq.
        It is in our interest that we combine security with a political
    process that frees people, that liberates people, that gives people a
    chance to determine their own futures. I believe most people in the
    Middle East want just that. They want to be in a position where they can
    chart their own futures, and it's in our interest that we help them do
    so.
        Jim [Jim Axelrod, CBS News].

    Public Opinion on Iraq

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. In the latest CBS News poll, 50 percent
    of Americans say they favor a beginning of an end to U.S. military
    involvement in Iraq; 43 percent said, ``Keep fighting, but change
    tactics.'' By this and many other measures, there is no clear mandate to
    continue being in Iraq in a military form. I guess my question is, are
    you still willing to follow a path that seems to be in opposition to the
    will of the American people?
        The President. I am willing to follow a path that leads to victory,
    and that's exactly why we're conducting the review we are. Victory in
    Iraq is achievable. It hasn't happened nearly as quickly as I hoped it
    would have. I know it's--the fact that there is still unspeakable
    sectarian violence in Iraq, I know that's troubling to the American
    people. But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out
    now. A lot of Americans understand the consequences of retreat. Retreat
    would embolden radicals. It would hurt the credibility of the United
    States. Retreat from Iraq would dash the hopes of millions who want to
    be free. Retreat from Iraq would enable the extremists and radicals to
    more likely be able to have safe haven from which to plot and plan
    further attacks.
        And so it's been a tough period for the American people. They want
    to see success, and our objective is to put a plan in place that
    achieves that success. I'm often asked about public opinion. Of course,
    I want public opinion to support the efforts. I understand that. But,
    Jim, I also understand the consequences of failure. And therefore, I'm
    going to work with the Iraqis and our military and politicians from both
    political parties to achieve success.
        I thought the election said they want to see more bipartisan
    cooperation; they want to see us working together to achieve common
    objectives. And I'm going to continue to reach out to Democrats to do
    just that.

    [[Page 2208]]

        Sheryl [Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times].

    The Presidency/U.S. Military Casualties in Iraq

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, Lyndon Johnson famously
    didn't sleep during the Vietnam war, questioning his own decisions. You
    have always seemed very confident of your decisions, but I can't help
    but wonder if this has been a time of painful realization for you, as
    you yourself have acknowledged that some of the policies you hoped would
    succeed have not. And I wonder if you can talk to us about that.
        The President. Yes, thanks.
        Q. Has it been a painful time?
        The President. The most painful aspect of my Presidency has been
    knowing that good men and women have died in combat. I read about it
    every night. My heart breaks for a mother or father, or husband or wife,
    or son and daughter; it just does. And so when you ask about pain,
    that's pain. I reach out to a lot of the families. I spend time with
    them. I am always inspired by their spirit. Most people have asked me to
    do one thing, and that is to make sure that their child didn't die in
    vain--and I agree with that--that the sacrifice has been worth it.
        We'll accomplish our objective; we've got to constantly adjust our
    tactics to do so. We've got to insist that the Iraqis take more
    responsibility more quickly in order to do so.
        But I--look, my heart breaks for them; it just does, on a regular
    basis.
        Q. But beyond that, sir, do you question your own decisions?
        The President. No, I haven't questioned whether or not it was right
    to take Saddam Hussein out, nor have I
    questioned the necessity for the American people--I mean, I've
    questioned it; I've come to the conclusion it's the right decision. But
    I also know it's the right decision for America to stay engaged and to
    take the lead and to deal with these radicals and extremists and to help
    support young democracies. It's the calling of our time, Sheryl. And I
    firmly believe it is necessary.
        And I believe the next President, whoever the person is, will have
    the same charge, the same obligations to deal with terrorists, so they
    don't hurt us, and to help young democracies survive the threats of
    radicalism and extremism. It's in our Nation's interest to do so. But
    the most painful aspect of the Presidency is the fact that I know my
    decisions have caused young men and women to lose their lives.
        McKinnon [John McKinnon, Wall Street Journal].

    National Economy/Legislative Agenda

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You mentioned a need earlier to make
    sure that U.S. workers are skilled, that U.S. businesses keep investing
    in technology. You also mentioned that you want targeted tax and
    regulatory relief for small businesses in the coming year. Can you
    describe those ideas a little more? And also, can we really afford new
    tax breaks at this point, given the cost of the war on terrorism?
        The President. John, the first question all of us here in Washington
    ask is, how do we make sure this economy continues to grow? A vibrant
    economy is going to be necessary to fund not only war but a lot of other
    aspects of our Government. We have shown over the past 6 years that low
    taxes have helped this economy recover from some pretty significant
    shocks. After all, the unemployment rate is 4.5 percent and 7 million
    more Americans have been--have found jobs since August of 2003. And we
    cut the deficit in half a couple of years in advance of what we thought
    would happen.
        The question that Congress is going to have to face, and I'm going
    to have to continue to face is, how do we make sure we put policy in
    place to encourage economic growth in the short term, and how

    [[Page 2209]]

    do we keep America competitive in the long term?
        Part of the competitive initiative, which I have been working with
    Congress on, recognizes that education of young--of the young is going
    to be crucial for remaining competitive. And that's why the
    reauthorization of No Child Left Behind is going to be an important part
    of the legislative agenda going forward in 2007.
        I also spoke about energy in my opening remarks. In my judgment,
    we're going to have to get off oil as much as possible to remain a
    competitive economy, and I'm looking forward to working with Congress to
    do just that. I'm optimistic about some of the reports I've heard about
    new battery technologies that will be coming to the market that will
    enable people who--people to drive the first 20 miles, for example, on
    electricity--that will be the initial phase--and then up to 40 miles on
    battery technologies. That will be positive, particularly if you live in
    a big city. A lot of people don't drive more than 20 miles or 40 miles a
    day. And therefore, those urban dwellers who aren't driving that much
    won't be using any gasoline on a daily basis, and that will be helpful
    to the country.
        I'm pleased with the fact that we've gone from about a billion
    gallons of ethanol to over 5 billion gallons of ethanol in a very quick
    period of time. It's mainly derived from corn here in the United States.
    But there's been great progress, and we need to continue to spend money
    on cellulosic ethanol. That means that new technologies that--will
    enable us to use wood chips, for example, or switchgrass as the fuel
    stocks for the development of new types of fuels that will enable
    American drivers to diversify away from gasoline.
        I spent a lot of time talking about nuclear power, and I appreciate
    the Congress's support on the comprehensive energy bill that I signed.
    But nuclear power is going to be an essential source, in my judgment, of
    future electricity for the United States and places like China and
    India. Nuclear power is renewable, and nuclear power does not emit one
    greenhouse gas. And it makes a lot of sense for us to share technologies
    that will enable people to feel confident that the nuclear powerplants
    that are being built are safe, as well as technologies that will
    eventually come to fore that will enable us to reduce the wastes, the
    toxicity of the waste, and the amount of the waste.
        I'm going to continue to invest in clean coal technologies. We've
    got an abundance of coal here in America, and we need to be able to tell
    the American people we're going to be able to use that coal to generate
    electricity in environmentally friendly ways.
        My only point to you is we've got a comprehensive plan to achieve
    the objective that most Americans support, which is less dependency upon
    oil.
        I think it's going to be very important, John, to keep this economy
    growing--short term and long term--by promoting free trade. It's in our
    interest that nations treat our markets, our goods and services the way
    we treat theirs. And it's in our interest that administrations continue
    to promote more opening up markets. We've had a lot of discussions here
    in this administration on the Doha round of WTO negotiations. And I'm
    very strongly in favor of seeing if we can't reach an accord with our
    trading partners and other countries around the world to promote--to get
    this round completed so that free trade is universal in its application.
        Free trade is going to be good for producers of U.S. product and
    services, but free trade is also going to be the most powerful engine
    for development around the world. It's going to help poor nations become
    wealthier nations. It's going to enable countries to be able to find
    markets for their goods and services so that they can better grow their
    economies and create prosperity for their people.
        So we've got a robust agenda moving forward with the Congress, and
    I'm looking

    [[Page 2210]]

    forward to working with them. And there are a lot of places where we can
    find common ground on these important issues.
        Elaine [Elaine Quijano, Cable News Network].

    CIA Employee Identity Disclosure Investigation

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. This week, we learned that Scooter
    Libby----
        The President. A little louder, please. Excuse me--getting old.
    [Laughter]
        Q. I understand, Mr. President.
        The President. No, you don't understand. [Laughter]
        Q. You're right; I don't.
        This week, sir, we learned that Scooter Libby's defense team plans
    to call Vice President Cheney to testify in the ongoing CIA leak case. I
    wonder, sir, what is your reaction to that? Is that something you'll
    resist?
        The President. I read it in the newspaper today, and it's an
    interesting piece of news. And that's all I'm going to comment about an
    ongoing case. I thought it was interesting.
        Ann [Ann Compton, ABC News].

    Mary Cheney

        Q. Thank you, sir. Mary is having a baby. And you have said that you
    think Mary Cheney will be a loving soul to a child. Are there any
    changes in the law that you would support that would give same-sex
    couples greater access to things such as legal rights, hospital visits,
    insurance, that would make a difference, even though you've said it's
    your preference--you believe that it's preferable to have one man-one
    woman----
        The President. I've always said that we ought to review law to make
    sure that people are treated fairly.
        On Mary Cheney, this is a personal matter for the Vice
    President and his family. I strongly support
    their privacy on the issue, although there's nothing private when you
    happen to be the President or the Vice President; I recognize that. And
    I know Mary, and I like her. And I know she's going to be a fine, loving
    mother.
        Baker [Peter Baker, Washington Post], I'm not going to call on you
    again. You, like, got too much coverage yesterday, you know? [Laughter]
    Created a sense of anxiety amongst--no, no, you handled yourself well,
    though.
        Don [Don Gonyea, National Public Radio].

    Iran/Syria

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. A question about the Iraq Study Group
    Report. One of the things that it recommends is greater dialog, direct
    talks with Syria and Iran. James Baker himself, Secretary of State under
    your father, says that it's a lot like it was during the cold war when
    we talked to the Soviet Union. He says it's important to talk to your
    adversaries. Is he wrong?
        The President. Let me start with Iran. We made it perfectly clear to
    them what it takes to come to the table, and that is a suspension of
    their enrichment program. If they verifiably suspend--that they've
    stopped enrichment, we will come to the table with our EU-3 partners and
    Russia and discuss a way forward for them. Don, it should be evident to
    the Iranians, if this is what they want to do.
        I heard the Foreign Minister--I read
    the Foreign Minister say the other day that, ``Yes, we'll sit down with
    America, after they leave Iraq.'' If they want to sit down with us, for
    the good of the Iranian people, they ought to verifiably suspend their
    program. We've made that clear to them. It is obvious to them how to
    move forward.
        The Iranian people can do better than becoming--than be an isolated
    nation. This is a proud nation with a fantastic history and tradition.
    And yet they've got a leader who
    constantly sends messages to the world that Iran is out of step with the
    majority of thinkers, that Iran is willing to become isolated, to the
    detriment of the people.

    [[Page 2211]]

        I mean, I was amazed that, once again, there was this conference
    about the Holocaust that heralded a really backward view of the history
    of the world. And all that said to me was, is that the leader in
    Iran is willing to say things that
    really hurts his country and further isolates the Iranian people.
        We're working hard to get a Security Council resolution. I spoke to
    Secretary Rice about the Iranian Security
    Council resolution this morning. And the message will be that you--
    ``you,'' Iran--are further isolated from the world.
        My message to the Iranian people is: You can do better than to have
    somebody try to rewrite history. You can
    do better than somebody who hasn't strengthened your economy. And you
    can do better than having somebody who's trying to develop a nuclear
    weapon that the world believes you shouldn't have. There's a better way
    forward.
        Syria, the message is the same. We have met with Syria since I have
    been the President of the United States. We have talked to them about
    what is necessary for them to have a better relationship with the United
    States, and they're not unreasonable requests. We've suggested to them
    that they no longer allow Saddamists to send money and arms across their
    border into Iraq to fuel the violence--some of the violence that we see.
    We've talked to them about--they've got to leave the democrat Lebanon
    alone.
        I might say--let me step back for a second--I'm very proud of Prime
    Minister Siniora. He's shown a lot of tenacity
    and toughness in the face of enormous pressure from Syria as well as
    Hizballah, which is funded by Iran.
        But we made it clear to them, Don, on how to move forward. We've had
    visits with the Syrians in the past. Congressmen and Senators visit
    Syria. What I would suggest, that if they're interested in better
    relations with the United States, that they take some concrete, positive
    steps that promote peace as opposed to instability.
        Knoller [Mark Knoller, CBS Radio].

    Leak Investigations

        Q. Thank you, sir. Mr. President, did you or your Chief of Staff
    order an investigation of the leak of the Hadley memo before your
    meeting with Prime Minister al-Maliki? And if the leak wasn't
    authorized, do you suspect someone in your administration is trying to
    undermine your Iraq policy or sabotage your meeting with Prime Minister
    al-Maliki a few weeks back?
        The President. I'm trying to think back if I ordered an
    investigation. I don't recall ordering an investigation. I do recall
    expressing some angst about ongoing leaks. You all work hard to find
    information and, of course, put it out for public consumption, and I
    understand that. But I don't appreciate those who leak classified
    documents. And it's an ongoing problem here, it really is, not just for
    this administration, but it will be for any administration that is
    trying to put policy in place that affects the future of the country.
        And we've had a lot of leaks, Mark, as you know, some of them out of
    the--I don't know where they're from, and therefore, I'm not going to
    speculate. It turns out, you never can find the leaker. It's an
    advantage you have in doing your job. We can moan about it, but it's
    hard to find those inside the Government that are willing to give, in
    this case, Hadley's document to
    newspapers.
        You know, there may be an ongoing investigation of this; I just
    don't know. If there is, if I knew about it, it's not fresh in my mind.
    But I do think that at some point in time, it would be helpful if we can
    find somebody inside our Government who is leaking materials, clearly
    against the law, that they be held to account. Perhaps the best way to
    make sure people don't leak classified documents is that there be a
    consequence for doing so.

    [[Page 2212]]

        Jim [Jim Gerstenzang, Los Angeles Times].

    Iraq/War on Terror Strategy

        Q. Mr. President, if we could return to the reflexive vein we were
    in a little while ago----
        The President. The what? Excuse me.
        Q. Reflexive--reflective.
        The President. Reflective stage.
        Q. Part of the process of looking at the way forward could
    reasonably include considering how we got to where we are. Has that been
    part of your process? And what lessons--after 5 years now of war, what
    lessons will you take into the final 2 years of your Presidency?
        The President. Yes, look, absolutely, Jim, that it is important for
    us to be successful going forward is to analyze that which went wrong.
    And clearly, one aspect of this war that has not gone right is the
    sectarian violence inside Baghdad, a violent reaction by both Sunni and
    Shi'a to each other that has caused a lot of loss of life as well as
    some movements in neighborhoods inside of Baghdad. It is a troubling,
    very troubling, aspect of trying to help this Iraqi Government succeed.
    And therefore, a major consideration of our planners is how to deal with
    that and how to help--more importantly, how to help the Iraqis deal with
    sectarian violence.
        There are a couple of theaters inside of Iraq, war theaters. One, of
    course, is Baghdad, itself, where the sectarian violence is brutal. And
    we've got to help them. We've got to help the Maliki Government stop it and crack it and prevent it from
    spreading, in order to be successful.
        I fully understand--let me finish. Secondly, is the battle against
    the Sunnis, Sunni extremists--some of them Saddamists, some of them are
    Al Qaida--but all of them aiming to try to drive the United States out
    of Iraq before the job is done. And we're making good progress against
    them. It's hard fighting. It's been hard work, but our special ops
    teams, along with Iraqis, are on the hunt and bringing people to
    justice.
        There's issues in the south of Iraq, mainly Shi'a-on-Shi'a tensions.
    But primarily, the toughest fight for this new Government is inside of
    Baghdad. Most of the deaths, most of the violence is within a 30-mile
    radius of Baghdad, as well as in Anbar Province. In other words, a lot
    of the country is moving along positively. But it's this part of the
    fight that is getting our attention. And frankly, we have--it has been
    that aspect of the battle, toward a government which can defend and
    govern itself and be an ally in the war on terror that--where we have
    not made as much progress as we'd have hoped to have made.
        Listen, last year started off as an exciting year with the 12
    million voters. And the attack on the Samarra mosque was Zarqawi's
    successful attempt to foment this sectarian violence. And it's mean. It
    is deadly, and we've got to help the Iraqis deal with it.
        Success in Iraq will be success--there will be a combination of
    military success, political success, and reconstruction. And they've got
    to go hand in hand. That's why I think it's important that the moderate
    coalition is standing up. In other words, it's the beginning of a
    political process that I hope will marginalize the radicals and
    extremists who are trying to stop the advance of a free Iraq. That's why
    the oil law is going to be a very important piece of legislation.
        In other words, when this Government begins to send messages that we
    will put law in place that help unify the country, it's going to make
    the security situation easier to deal with. On the other hand, without
    better, stronger security measures, it's going to be hard to get the
    political process to move forward. And so it's--we've got a parallel
    strategy. So when you hear me talking about the military--I know there's
    a lot of discussion about troops, and there should be--but we've got to
    keep in mind we've also got to make sure we

    [[Page 2213]]

    have a parallel political process and a reconstruction process going
    together concurrently with a new military strategy.
        I thought it was an interesting statement that Prime Minister
    Maliki made the other day about generals,
    former generals in the Saddam army, that they
    could come back in or receive a pension. In other words, he's beginning
    to reach out in terms of a reconciliation plan that I think is going to
    be important.
        I had interesting discussions the other day with Provincial
    Reconstruction Team members in Iraq. These are really brave souls who
    work for the State Department that are in these different Provinces
    helping these provincial governments rebuild and to see a political way
    forward. And one of the things that--most of these people were in the
    Sunni territory, that I had talked to, and most of them were very
    anxious for me to help them and help the Iraqi Government put
    reconciliation plans in place. There's a lot of people trying to make a
    choice as to whether or not they want to support a government or whether
    or not their interest may lay in extremism. And they understand that a
    political process that is positive, that sends a signal, ``We want to be
    a unified country,'' will help these folks make a rational choice.
        And so it's a multifaceted plan. And absolutely, we're looking at
    where things went wrong, where expectations were dashed, and where
    things hadn't gone the way we wanted them to have gone.
        Let's see here, Julie [Julie Hirschfeld, Baltimore Sun].

    Legislative Agenda/Immigration Reform

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You said this week that your microphone
    has never been louder on some of the key domestic priorities you've
    talked about, particularly Social Security and immigration. Your use of
    the Presidential microphone hasn't yielded the results that you wanted.
    So I'm wondering--the Democratic Congress, at this point, Republicans no
    longer controlling things on Capitol Hill--why you think your microphone
    is any louder, and how you plan to use it differently to get the results
    that you're looking for?
        The President. Yes, microphone being loud means--is that I'm able to
    help focus people's attentions on important issues. That's what I was
    referring to. In other words, the President is in a position to speak
    about priorities. Whether or not we can get those priorities done is
    going to take bipartisan cooperation, which I believe was one of the
    lessons of the campaigns.
        I will tell you, I felt like we had a pretty successful couple of
    years when it comes to legislation. After all, we reformed Medicare; we
    put tax policy in place that encouraged economic growth and vitality; we
    passed trade initiatives; passed a comprehensive energy bill. I'm
    signing an important piece of legislation today that continues a
    comprehensive approach to energy exploration, plus extenders on R&D, for
    example, tax credits. It's been a pretty substantial legislative record
    if you carefully scrutinize it.
        However, that doesn't mean necessarily that we are able to achieve
    the same kind of results without a different kind of approach. After
    all, you're right; the Democrats now control the House and the Senate.
    And therefore, I will continue to work with their leadership--and our
    own leaders, our own Members--to see if we can't find common ground on
    key issues like Social Security or immigration.
        I strongly believe that we can and must get a comprehensive
    immigration plan on my desk this year. It's important for us because, in
    order to enforce our border, in order for those Border Patrol agents who
    we've increased down there and given them more equipment and better
    border security, they've got to have help and a plan that says, ``If
    you're coming into America to do a job, you can come legally for a
    temporary basis to do so.''
        I don't know if you've paid attention to the enforcement measures
    that were taken

    [[Page 2214]]

    recently where in some of these packing plants they found people working
    that had been here illegally, but all of them had documents that said
    they were here legally. They were using forged documents, which just
    reminded me that the system we have in place has caused people to rely
    upon smugglers and forgers in order to do work Americans aren't doing.
        In other words, it is a system that is all aimed to bypass no matter
    what measures we take to protect this country. It is a system that,
    frankly, leads to inhumane treatment of people. And therefore, the best
    way to deal with an issue that Americans agree on--that is, that we
    ought to enforce our borders in a humane way--is we've got to have a
    comprehensive bill.
        And I have made a proposal. I have spoken about this to the Nation
    from the Oval Office. I continue to believe that the microphone is
    necessary to call people to action. And I want to work with both
    Republicans and Democrats to get a comprehensive bill to my desk. It's
    in our interest that we do this.
        In terms of energy, there's another area where I know we can work
    together. There is a consensus that we need to move forward with
    continued research on alternative forms of energy. I've just described
    them in my opening comments, and be glad to go over them again if you'd
    like, because they're positive. It's a positive development. We're
    making progress, and there's more to be done.
        So I'm looking forward to working with them. There's a lot of
    attitude here that says, ``Well, you lost the Congress; therefore,
    you're not going to get anything done.'' Quite the contrary; I have an
    interest to get things done. And the Democrat leaders have an interest
    to get something done to show that they're worthy of their leadership
    roles. And it is that common ground that I'm confident we can get--we
    can make positive progress, without either of us compromising principle.
        And I know they don't--I know they're not going to change their
    principles, and I'm not going to change mine. But nevertheless, that
    doesn't mean we can't find common ground to get good legislation done.
    That's what the American people want. The truth of the matter is, the
    American people are sick of the partisanship and name-calling.
        I will do my part to elevate the tone, and I'm looking forward to
    working with them. It's going to be an interesting new challenge. I'm
    used to it, as Herman [Ken Herman, Cox News] can testify. I was the
    Governor of Texas with Democrat leadership in the house and the senate,
    and we were able to get a lot of constructive things done for the State
    of Texas. And I believe it's going to be possible here--to do so here in
    the country.
        Michael [Michael Allen, Time].

    President's Legacy

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Merry Christmas.
        The President. Thank you. Yes.
        Q. I've just two questions related to the amazing fact that a
    quarter of your Presidency lies ahead. First, I keep reading that you'll
    be remembered only for Iraq, and I wonder what other areas you believe
    you're building, a record of transformation you hope will last the ages.
    And second, a followup on Julie's question, what is your plan for either
    changing your role or keeping control of the agenda at a time when
    Democrats have both Houses on the Hill, and when the '08 candidates are
    doing their thing?
        The President. Well, one is to set priorities. That's what I've just
    done, setting a priority. My message is: We can work together. And here
    are some key areas where we've got to work together, reauthorization of
    No Child Left Behind, minimum wage. I hope we're able to work together
    on free trade agreements. We can work together

    [[Page 2215]]

    on Social Security reform and Medicare reform, entitlement reform. We
    need to work together on energy, immigration, earmarks.
        The leadership has expressed their disdain for earmarks; I support
    their disdain for earmarks. I don't like a process where it's not
    transparent, where people are able to slip this into a bill without any
    hearing or without any recognition of who put it in there and why they
    put it in there. It's just not good for the system, and it's not good
    for building confidence of the American people in our process or in the
    Congress.
        The first part of the--oh, last 2 years. I'm going to work hard,
    Michael. I'm going to sprint to the finish, and we can get a lot done.
    And you're talking about legacy. Here--I know--look, everybody is trying
    to write the history of this administration even before it's over. I'm
    reading about George Washington still. My attitude is, if they're still
    analyzing number 1, 43 ought not to worry about it and just do what he
    thinks is right and make the tough choices necessary.
        We're in the beginning stages of an ideological struggle, Michael.
    It's going to last a while. And I want to make sure this country is
    engaged in a positive and constructive way to secure the future for our
    children. And it's going to be a tough battle.
        I also believe the Medicare reform--the first meaningful,
    significant health care reform that's been passed in a while--is making
    a huge difference for our seniors. No Child Left Behind has been a
    significant education accomplishment, and we've got to reauthorize it.
    We have proven that you can keep taxes low, achieve other objectives,
    and cut the deficit. The entrepreneurial spirit is high in this country,
    and one way to keep it high is to keep--let people keep more of their
    own money.
        So there's been a lot of accomplishment. But the true history of any
    administration is not going to be written until long after the person is
    gone. It's just impossible for short-term history to accurately reflect
    what has taken place. Most historians, you know, probably had a
    political preference, and so their view isn't exactly objective--most
    short-term historians. And it's going to take a while for people to
    analyze mine or any other of my predecessors until down the road when
    they're able to take--watch the long march of history and determine
    whether or not the decisions made during the 8 years I was President
    have affected history in a positive way.
        I wish you all a happy holiday. Thank you for your attendance. Have
    fun. Enjoy yourself. For those lucky enough to go to Crawford, perhaps
    I'll see you down there.
        Thank you.

    Note: The President's news conference began at 10 a.m. in the Indian
    Treaty Room of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building. In
    his remarks, he referred to James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton,
    cochairs, Iraq Study Group; Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and former
    President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraqi
    Shiite Leader; Minister of Foreign Affairs Manuchehr Motaki and
    President Mahmud Ahmadi-nejad of Iran; and Prime Minister Fuad Siniora
    of Lebanon. A reporter referred to I. Lewis Libby, former Chief of Staff
    to the Vice President.