Guest: Radio host & author Laura Ingraham

"From the very beginning, Senator Edward Kennedy was against the Iraq War. He did not consider Saddam an active enemy in the war on terror. And Kennedy's basic tenet is and always has been negotiation until there's no question military force has to be used. President Bush is exactly the opposite. He believes the war on terror is interconnected. Saddam was a terrorist enabler and the USA must be aggressive in confronting all components of international terrorism. So you can see, there is little common ground between the president and the senator. Today, Kennedy announced he'll try to stop funding for more troops in Iraq. That kind of hard-line stance is probably not going to happen. They will fund the additional troops, because moderate Democrats understand any denial of funding could possibly hurt our military people already in the field. And that could backfire on the Democrats in 2008. So Kennedy will probably not get what he wants. On the other side, President Bush will ask the American people tomorrow night to support 20,000 more troops in Iraq. The problem is the president has little credibility left on that country; Americans are deeply disappointed the situation there is so chaotic. In fact, a Gallup poll says only 12 percent of Americans want more troops in Iraq. "Talking Points" believes at this stage President Bush should try to secure Baghdad one last time without sniping from Ted Kennedy or anybody else. And the president should understand the window in Iraq is closing. But at this point for the sake of those who have been killed and wounded, let's give it one more shot."

Washington radio talk show host Laura Ingraham took a sober view of what the American people want to hear from the president. "I don't think Americans at this point, frankly, care much about what's good for the Iraqi people. Americans want to know that whatever we're doing in Iraq or in Somalia or around the world is making America safer. And if the debate is about that, then I think President Bush has a chance, perhaps, it might be a small chance, of turning things around." The Factor described the president's speech in advance: "Here's what he's going to say. He's going to call for 20,000 more troops in Baghdad and for Iraqis to have control of all 18 provinces by November of '07. That's just 11 months away. And he's got to make it American-centric, because Americans want performance, and they don't want on see our guys coming back dead and wounded for nothing." Ingraham said of the political debate between the left and the right, "in my opinion, it doesn't do anything to confront the reality of the world that we live in today. I mean, Ted Kennedy was essentially saying the same exact thing in the 1980s about the Soviet threat being overblown, they weren't an evil empire, it's all about bunch of hullabaloo from the defense establishment." The Factor agreed: "Kennedy from the very beginning didn't want this war, doesn't believe in the war, doesn't believe in aggressive posture militarily against the jihadists, and wants to negotiate."

Guest: Attorney Nicole DeBorde

The Factor described an interesting case in Rhode Island involving some illegals: "In Rhode Island the ACLU has filed a federal lawsuit against the state police there. Apparently, 14 Guatemalan nationals were detained by Rhode Island state police last July. The cops found them in a van, which had been stopped for a traffic violation, and the ACLU claims that was racial profiling." Nicole Deborde, a criminal defense in Houston, was sympathetic to the ACLU's position. "A police officer still has to follow rules. And you especially want to follow rules on the off chance that something really big is going on. Because if you don't follow the rules, then you can't make your case later. The trick here is that the police officer still has to follow the rules set out by the very Constitution that makes us the fabulous country we are. And essentially, you have to have probable cause in order to stop or detain someone." The Factor said, "They had a probable cause. It was a traffic violation. You got 14 guys in a van who don't speak English. And none of them have ID. And the driver says he doesn't know who they are. That's not reasonable suspicion?! You lose, counselor, but thanks for appearing."

Guests: Dan Silver, Endangered Habitats League & Roger Pilon, Cato Institute

A wildfire swept through Malibu and destroyed the homes of Suzanne Somers and three others. The Factor described the debate: "Almost every year, the dry brush around Malibu ignites. And this area also experiences mudslides and is vulnerable to ocean storms as well. The question is should the state of California prevent people from living in Malibu and other high-risk places? California in the last five years spent a billion dollars on these kinds of disasters. All taxpayer funded. Shouldn't the state say, hey, you can't live in these places?" Dan Silver of the Endangered Habitats League said the state should prevent people from living there. "What happened in Malibu recently is part of a larger problem where local governments approve development in known high risk fire areas. They maximize the danger to people, to homes, to firefighters. They minimize public safety. And then they expect someone else to pick up the tab." Roger Pilon of the Cato Institute disagreed. "You've asked whether they should be allowed to build. It's their property. They should be able to do with it what they want. The real question here is who's responsible for this fire? It's my understanding that the fire began on state land. Now this is land that is notoriously under serviced. The brush is an issue there. The brush was not cleared. If this is indeed negligence on the part of the state, they should be paying Miss Somers and others." The Factor agreed with part of both arguments. "I don't think you can throw these people off their property. But in the future you may have to evaluate where people can live and where they can't live. And the state doesn't do that."

Guest: Fox News vice president of business Neil Cavuto

The Factor described how many, especially in the media, love to hate Wal-Mart: "Wal-Mart is the world's largest retailer and millions of Americans love it. However, many people also hate it, attacking the corporation for exploitation and all kinds of other stuff. FOX News' Neil Cavuto said it all stemmed from Democratic support for unions: "This is really anti-union bashing. It's not a unionized shop. A lot of candidates from Barack Obama to John Edwards have made it a cause celebre to go after the company because of that, ignoring a lot of the good that it does in society and focusing on just that. This is about unions. With success in this country you become a target. In the early days everybody thought the idea of appealing to lower income areas and having a big store for just those folks was a non-profitable non-starter. Now this company is a huge success, 1.4 million workers. Easy target." The Factor asked about Wal-Mart's new ad campaign. "Now Wal-Mart's fighting back. Is this commercial going to change anybody's minds? Are they going to invest tens of millions of dollars in showing it all over?" Cavuto was skeptical. "I would have told them don't waste the money."

Guest: Body language expert Tonya Reiman

Body language expert Tonya Reiman looked at tape of Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "She looks strong. But I notice you can see her hands start shaking. So I'm presuming that's a high level of nervousness." The Factor continued. "So the overwhelming impression that you got was that she's a little tense? Let's go on to the continuing saga of Rosie O'Donnell and Donald Trump. Now Barbara Walters is involved." After a clip from The View, Reiman had this to say of Walters: "So I'm getting the impression that [Walters] knew she was going to have to discuss this and planned it beforehand. No, absolutely did not want to discuss it." The Factor defended Walters: "Barbara Walters is in a very tough spot here. Because she's got a person that she has to rely on, that she hired, Rosie O'Donnell, in the middle of a very vicious feud with Donald Trump, who Ms. Walters knows." Next the Factor rolled a clip of NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell, of which Reiman said, "She was definitely in the hot seat and feeling it. You could tell that there was a high level of uncomfortability. The head was tilted, trying to give you that quizzical look, telling you I just don't understand the question." The Factor didn't think Mitchell was fooling anyone: "Can that be calculated? Or is it genuine? Do you really feel she didn't understand I was basically putting forth that NBC News has gone left big time, and there really isn't anybody over there who's a conservative thinker? It's pretty simple."

Guest: Royal watcher Robin Leach

Robin Leach discussed the Prince William with the Factor. "Prince William, who could be the king of England some day, has a 25-year-old girlfriend, Kate Middleton. Apparently, the British press is giving Miss Middleton a very hard time. Is another example of the British press, which is even worse than the American press, if that's to be believed, hounding a woman just like they hounded Princess Diana?" Robin Leach said, "Absolutely. It's not just the British press; it's the total European press. And to describe their behavior at the current stage as criminal is still not tough enough. It's a repeat performance of the way that the last 30 days Princess Diana lived her life before that tragic fatal crash in the tunnel in Paris. She is being hounded, terrorized, tortured and tormented. The Factor asked about the fame of the princes. "Now Prince William is in the military. Prince Harry is in the military. Harry, as I understand, may be going to Iraq. Now people in England are enthralled with them both. They're the biggest superstars in England right?" Robin Leach confirmed that perception. "That's absolutely true. They are pop star royalty, as it were."

Our investigation into that illegal alien in Brown County, Wisconsin, who skipped his low bail after being charged with molesting a 12-year-old girl led the letters last night.

Jackie Dixon, Vallejo, California: "Bill, I disagree with 99 percent of what you say, but if it were my daughter in that situation, I would be there when that man left the courtroom. And it would not have been a pretty picture."

Ross Sheets, Moneta, Virginia: "I have been a law enforcement officer for 33 years and believe you were unfair to the Wisconsin D.A. If he had known what you found out, he would have locked the guy up without bail."

Dave Kormanik, Crofton, Maryland: "As a career immigration officer, the D.A. had to know that 85 percent of illegal aliens charged with crimes do not show up for their court cases."

Patrick Smith, Brown County, Wisconsin: "I live here, and we have plenty of trouble with illegal aliens. Why no one is doing much about it is beyond me."

And on the future of Iraq:

Corporal Carl Hartmann, Omaha, Nebraska: "I am a Marine who's served three tours in Iraq. We have a problem there because of the rules of engagement are too strict. The media is on a witch hunt for atrocities and Washington is reacting to that."

William Brown, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey: "I am a former Navy Seal and believe the chaos in Iraq is driven by the Iraqis having so many guns and by fanatics like al-Sadr, who has to go."

Sharon Sullivan, Newport, Rhode Island: "I think the billions we've already spent in Iraq is enough. Send the troops home and concentrate on our own borders."

Barbara Johnson, Manhattan Beach, California: "Please, no more troops to Iraq. If there is not a change in policy soon, my Republican days are over."