Late yesterday afternoon, I was listening to an NPR interview between All Things Considered anchor Melissa Block and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The interview had been preceded by a pro-regime segment on George Bush standing up to the Democratic bullies in congress as he threatens a veto of any Iraq supplemental funding bill with an attached non-binding timetable for withdrawal, and certification of unit readiness (prior to deployment) that the president can waive.

While I believe that NPR reporting has improved and become more balanced since the time that Bush appointee Ken Tomlinson was unceremoniously chucked overboard at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the two stories aligned back to back shows me that even with public radio, we have miles to go. Block’s interview with Reid is one reason that, even with Tomlinson long gone, I still will not join or financially support NPR, unless and until their editorial practices change dramatically.

This interview aired before reports were made public of 10 U.S. soldiers and more than 63 Iraqis being killed in Iraq on Monday. The entire transcript of the interview follows - but almost as important, I think everyone should actually listen to the two segments that I reference: the pro-regime segment, and then the interview with Reid. There are very clear subtleties in the inflection and tone of Block’s interview that can’t possibly be conveyed by the mere words in black and white.

Right out of the chute, she is almost combative with Harry Reid - you can hear it dripping in her voice - and nowhere in the interview does she acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans agree with the path being set by the recently passed House and Senate bills (which are still awaiting reconciliation by conference committee). Some of the questions that Block asked were so “loaded” and confrontational that I kept expecting Reid to snap on her. It’s simply the same old thing. Paraphrased, “Why are you picking on Bush, and what are you going to do to compromise with him?”

Needless to say, I was fairly screaming at the radio by the time the interview was complete: WHEN IS BUSH GOING TO COMPROMISE WITH REID? I am pleased, but not surprised, that Reid managed to keep his cool during the course of this one sided interview.

Here’s the transcript (but again, and I can’t emphasize this enough, go listen to both referenced segments):

MELISSA BLOCK, host: In his speech today criticizing the president’s Iraq policy, the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said: our president is wrong and the new Congress will show him the way. Reid also said: winning this war is no longer the job of the American military.

Since Senator Reid says the president is in a state of denial when he sees progress in Iraq, I asked him what sees.

Senator HARRY REID (Democrat, Nevada; Senate Majority Leader): I see statistics that come out, showing that in the three months since the so-called escalation or surge has taken place, things are getting a lot worse, not better. We’re at a rate of killing four Americans a day. We’re wounding thousands - as you know, where 27,000 now or so have been wounded in that war - a third of them grievously wounded with missing limbs. We have 2,000 double amputees from that war. It’s like a balloon you squeeze.

Things have maybe calmed down a little bit in Baghdad, but it’s just squeezed out in other areas. Today, there has been violence in the Kurdish area, which we haven’t seen before, a couple of dozen people killed up there in one bomb blast. So the president simply is headed in the wrong direction, which is the same direction he’s been going for four-plus years and then some more. We’ve got to change direction.

BLOCK: Now, you’re going to be meeting this week with the commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus. If he tells you - as he has said before – that he sees progress with the increase in U.S. troops and that he needs more time, what will you tell him?

Sen. REID: We’ll tell him to show me the facts. I know General Petraeus, and he’s obviously very smart. But he’s got a very, very tough job over there. And I think it’s going to be hard to make the case that things are going to get better to the American people.

BLOCK: Would you be undercutting the mission, though, that he came in pledging to put into effect? And you, in fact, voted for his confirmation. All Democrats who voted unanimously confirmed him as the general there.

Sen. REID: All you have to do is go back and quote what General Petraeus said: “The war cannot be won militarily.” He said 20 percent of the war is military, the other 80 percent is political, diplomatic and economic.

BLOCK: Senator Reid, last week, you told reporters, I believe that this war is lost - words that drew a lot of criticism from many quarters. And you didn’t repeat those words in your speech today. Do you still believe that the war in Iraq is lost?

Sen. REID: I have been saying for several months now that we must change course. We can all talk about a choice of words. But I go back what General Petraeus said, and that’s what I was talking about last Thursday. I and the Democrats have supported the troops without any question. We’re the first one to call for more body armor, for up arming in Humvees. In the supplemental appropriation bill, we’ve put in this bill $4.3 billion for something the president should have thought about a long time ago in putting the bill, and that is military medicine, support for the veterans when they come home.

So we’re supporting the troops. The president needs to change the course of the war in Iraq. It’s not working.

BLOCK: Let’s talk about the bill that Congress will send to the president this week. You said today that it will include a date of October 1st of this year for the start of a troop withdrawal, and then a goal of a complete pullout by April 1st of next year. You’re going to be running smack into a promised presidential veto that you don’t have the votes to override. So what happens, then, after that veto comes?

Sen. REID: Oh, I would hope the president and his folks would read what we’ve put in this legislation. It’s fair. It’s reasonable. It takes care of the troops. It gives us every possibility of being able to win in Iraq to establish that fledging democracy in a permanent basis. If he vetoes this, I would hope the president will sit down and talk to us.

One of the things the president has to realize – he hasn’t had to realize the past six years – there is another branch of government called the legislative branch of government, the Congress. And for six years, he hasn’t had to worry about it because he’s had a big rubber stamp up here that the Republican- dominated Congress are giving him everything he wants. We’re not going to do that.

BLOCK: Well, he has had no timetable, though, so I guess what I’m wondering is how you will get to something that the president will sign that will fund these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sen. REID: Well, I’ve been involved in the legislative process of the government for a long time, and these arrangements can be made here. Legislation is the art of compromise. A person needs to understand that also.

BLOCK: Would it maybe mean that you draw up a timetable and keep in the idea of benchmarks for the Iraqi government, and that would be something that Democrats would sign on to?

Sen. REID: I’m not negotiating with you, but I will be able and willing to negotiate with the president.

BLOCK: Do you run the risk, though, of losing Democrats if you end up with a bill that is too watered down, Democrats who would’ve wanted something stronger?

Sen. REID: Well, we always lose - I guess a better way to say this is: It’s always very hard that you can’t – the people you got one time when you move the ball. But that’s part of our job. That’s what legislators do. So we’re going to have to come up with something that is in keeping with our efforts to make sure the troops get everything they need, that there is hope for success in Iraq, and that change his direction because unless we change direction, that is not accomplishable.

BLOCK: Senator Reid, you talked about the need for compromise on both sides here. But you did deliver a speech today that was very sharply critical of this administration. I wonder, in terms of setting a tone, if the tone for compromise is being set now in Washington?

(Soundbite of laughter)

Sen. REID: Well, I only focused on the Iraq War. You know, we could talk about other things, about this administration that I think is a little awry. We could talk about Gonzales and Medicare and Leave No Child Behind. But I only focused on Iraq. So this administration has not been good for the American people and there was no reason for me to go into this speech that I gave today, thinking it’s all an easy task.

I said that it’s a long road. He has dug a deep hole for us, and we’ll work with him to get us out of the hole. His continually digging it deeper is not helping.

Deep hole, indeed, Senator Reid - and NPR is helping George Bush shovel.

A meta PS: I was so incensed by the interview that I actually broke down and paid for the above transcript. If you’re a blogger and are as mad as I was, and see fit to write about the interview, a link back to this post would be much appreciated.