© 2004 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS CBS TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "CBS NEWS' FACE THE NATION. " CBS News FACE THE NATION Sunday, November 28, 2004 GUESTS: RON CHERNOW Author, "Alexander Hamilton" JOE ELLIS Author, "His Excellency: George Washington" BOB WOODWARD The Washington Post Author, "Plan of Attack" MODERATOR: BOB SCHIEFFER - CBS News This is a rush transcript provided for the information and convenience of the press. Accuracy is not guaranteed. In case of doubt, please check with FACE THE NATION - CBS NEWS 202-457-4481 BURRELLE'S INFORMATION SERVICES / 202-419-1859 / 800-456-2877 Face the Nation (CBS News) - Sunday, November 28, 2004 1 BOB SCHIEFFER, host: Today on FACE THE NATION, our annual Thanksgiving weekend historians' roundtable featuring best-selling authors Bob Woodward, Joe Ellis and Ron Chernow. Just weeks after President Bush's overwhelming victory, we step back for a longer view. What does the president's victory mean? What are the historical parallels? What can we learn from the past that can help us understand what's ahead? These are the questions for historians Bob Woodward, author of this year's best-selling "Plan of Attack"; Ron Chernow, author of "Alexander Hamilton," another best-seller; and Joe Ellis, author of one of the most important books of the year, "His Excellency George Washington." I'll have a final word on what's gone wrong with sports. But first, the three historians 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. SCHIEFFER: And good morning again on this holiday weekend, when we always step back from the news of the day and try to take a longer view. From Oxford, Mississippi, this morning, Joseph Ellis; here in the studio, Bob Woodward and Ron Chernow. Professor Ellis, I want to start with you. You wrote in your book about George Washington, I think, one of the more interesting sentences that I've read in the last couple of years. And I just want to quote part of it. You say, talking about George Washington, "Benjamin Franklin was wiser, Alexander Hamilton more brilliant, John Adams better read, Thomas Jefferson, more intellectually sophisticated, James Madison more politically astute; yet," you write, "each of them acknowledged that Washington was their unquestioned superior." I'd ask you first why was that? And does that tell us something about why people choose the people we choose to be president? Professor JOSEPH ELLIS (Author, "His Excellency"): Tough question. You have to read the full book. You can't sound bite the answer to this easily. But Washington was, I say, the foundingest father of them all for reasons that had to do with qualities of judgment and qualities of leadership. And in his case, they didn't get developed in college or by reading books. They got developed in the crucible of experience and war. And from our perspective now, the credentials that Washington had that made him such a great commander in chief and then great president were not the kind of credentials that would have worked in a contemporary political campaign. In fact, Washington would have refused to run for office in a late 20th, early 21st century political culture. He would have said that anybody willing to put himself through this process is unqualified to serve. And I do think we've created a political culture up here in the present that makes it very difficult to get some of the best people to actually run for public office and certainly the kind of quality leadership that we had back there in the beginning is difficult to get through this primary process. SCHIEFFER: Well, certainly it's become a very bitter process. Now, Ron Chernow, you wrote a book that I must say I learned a lot. I mean, I now have a new appreciation for Alexander Hamilton that I simply did not have. But I want to pick up on Professor Ellis' point. And that is, this has been an extremely bitter year. And year by year we see our politics getting dirtier, nastier, more personal. But I think the one ray of hope I got in all of this was when I BURRELLE'S INFORMATION SERVICES / (202)419-1859 / (800)456-2877 Face the Nation (CBS News) - Sunday, November 28, 2004 2 read your book and I came to understand more fully that bitterness has always been a part of American politics and it probably has never been as bitter as it was when they were writing the Constitution. Yet, as a result, they got a pretty good document out of it. Is the bitterness then like the bitterness now? Is it a different kind of... Mr. RON CHERNOW (Author, "Alexander Hamilton"): Well, you know, I think that people imagine that there was some golden age of political gentility and civility and that everything has been downhill since then. After spending five years with Alexander Hamilton, I sometimes wonder if we haven't crawled up out of the mud because it was a period of the most glorious deeds and the most glorious acts, but it was also a period of the most unrivaled bitter, malicious, partisan slander imaginable. And I think that it was a case of deep, fundamental cleavages, different visions of the country then fueled to an extraordinary extent among the founders by personal animosities. As Joe has written brilliantly, these men were distinguished by tremendous rivalries and jealousies as to exactly which founder/founders were most important. SCHIEFFER: So it was bitter and it was nasty. Was it the same kind of nastiness? Did they argue about the same kinds of things that we argue about today in politics? Mr. CHERNOW: Oh, the charges were even much more acrimonious. The Jeffersonians were accusing Hamilton of plotting to restore a monarchy, of having a secret bank account in London, being in the pay of British goals, secretly speculating in Treasury securities. Hamilton--I love him, but he gave as good as he got. I mean, he--Jeffers--Hamilton said that Jefferson was a fanatic on politics and an atheist in religion. He said that Jefferson was a closet hedonist. He said that Jefferson was a pseudo-Caesar who was going to flatter the public in order to set up a despotism. Actually, I think, things were said face-to-face by these politicians that go beyond anything that one politician would dare to say to another nowadays. SCHIEFFER: Bob Woodward, you write about more recent events, and I think if anybody knows anything about the CIA, I would say you know about it--as much about it as anybody that I know. Mr. BOB WOODWARD (Author, "Plan of Attack"): But would like to know more. SCHIEFFER: Certainly, some of the rancor that we saw in those days and the rancor of this recent campaign carried over to the CIA. I mean, we saw some extraordinary events. We had during this recent campaign a person in the CIA, a CIA agent, writing a book under the name `Anonymous' which was highly critical of the administration that he was a part of. We now see some kind of a big turnover going on out there with the new director. What do you make of all this? Is--are we seeing something at the CIA we haven't seen before? Mr. WOODWARD: Well, no. What happened--the CIA made a tragic mistake on weapons of mass destruction. And when you make a mistake, it is a convulsion for not just the individuals but the institution. And they, unfortunately, have not been in the habit of being direct with the president and the war Cabinet and the public when they don't know something. On the weapons of mass destruction, the problem was they didn't have smoking-gun, ironclad evidence and they did not lead with that. And we know in our business if we try to learn in our business or the world of history--I mean, in Ron's book and Joe's book on Washington, frequently, they will say, `We don't know' or `We are never going to know.' The BURRELLE'S INFORMATION SERVICES / (202)419-1859 / (800)456-2877 Face the Nation (CBS News) - Sunday, November 28, 2004 3 CIA hates to say this, and that's what they need to say more of. And then people can make policy on intelligence that is not overstated. SCHIEFFER: Well, what's going on out there right now? You have Porter Goss, the new man that's been sent out there by the president, to--some people say he's gone too far. Some people say this is what has to be done. What's just your assessment of what's happening right now? Mr. WOODWARD: Well, what's going on--he's been given a very difficult task by history and by the president, namely, get the CIA positioned so we can penetrate terrorist cells. That is the most difficult task. If we as journalists or if historians had to penetrate terrorist cells, it wouldn't happen. And white men like us are not going to succeed at that. And so it's a five- or 10-year program. The problem Porter Goss has is he has come in and attacked the institution and the individuals in a way that has sent shock waves. And so he--you know, in a sense, he's lost the people who might save him.