tv Washington Journal CSPAN September 4, 2014 7:00am-10:01am EDT
join the conversation on social media at c spain. facebook.com, and you can also e-mail us at well, email@example.com. want to get your thoughts on what you specifically think the president should do on these two issues of the threat of the islamic state, as well as russia's aggression against the ukraine. so start dialing in now. we'll get to comments in just a few minutes. this is from "the huffington post" web site. we won't be cowed by barbaric
murders. if terrorists think we will weaken in the face of their threat, they could not be more wrong. countries like britain and america will not be cowed by barbaric killers. this from the op ed coauthored by president obama and prime minister david cameron. what do you think the president should do on these two issues of isis in russia? on isis, front page of the "washington times" this morning with the headline, obama talks tough on terror, shies away from war. this piece written by ben wolfgang. they write, frustration on capitol hill reached a boiling
point. lawmakers are pleading with the president, and must act accordingly. some lawmakers and counter-terrorism analysts say war either started or is inevitable. >> i d so what do you think the president should be doing on these two issues? we'll get your thoughts this morning, tony, we'll begin with you in virginia, democratic caller. go ahead, tony. caller: yeah, i think they should do nothing, because you know one thing, this entire war was started, because what
happened was -- supported isis. she supported the idea that we should go into syria and attack isis, so thank god that president obama didn't follow that, because by now it would be terrible. number one, if -- host: okay. tony. freddie in indianapolis, democratic caller, your thoughts. caller: the president is doing exactly what he should be doing, and he's done it in such away that he's not making any enemies other than the republican enemies in our country, but throughout the world he's doing it without making enemies, without bringing in more people who want to kill us, as the republicans say, and he's doing it in such away that he's getting the -- all other countries involved where they see that he is doing what is
best, in the best interests of their country, and our country. he's getting the people over there in the middle east, they're becoming aware that they need this country more than the country needs them, and that when the united states walks away they're the one who is in jeopardy. so the president is skillful. he is doing exactly what nesds to be done, instead of being hotheaded and going out there murdering people by dropping bombs on them, making more enemies. host: okay. steve, a republican, indianapolis, maryland, what do you think? caller: i appreciate the last call her's thoughts, the problem is the president has known for the past year or so what isis has been up to and he waited and allowed them to grow in strength and power. they took city after city in syria and started attacking iraq, taking city after city, raping, attacking people, and the president did nothing. so what it's amounting to has
received no response from this president, very sad. host: steve, how did you feel a year ago about the possibility of air strikes in syria? when he has known about the chemical weapons they were using, president obama came out and said he was considering air strikes but wanted congressional approval, then russia said let us work to get rid of these chemical weapons, and that is the route they went. a year ago, steve, how did you feel about military action in syria? caller: i think those were two different targets. one was isis, which is one of the components of the rebels, and the other the people who are using the chemical weapons, you know, most of our intelligence was saying it was a syrian government. it's hard to say. i mean, obviously you don't want to have anyone using chemical weapons on people. i think the evidence that it was the syrian government was a little bit shoddy. there were a lot of information that it might have been the rebels. i think the main thing is you
have the syrian government who is secular and who -- although there was this issue with the chemical weapons they were fighting an insurgency composed of a lot of basically terrorists, so you know it's hard to say what we should have done then. but about that, but the issue now is isis is essentially perpetrating a genocide amongst any minorities. and that means that needs to be responded to. host: take a look at the poll, a lot of newspapers are citing. one year later americans back military action in syria. if you go inside the poll you can see this graph, then and now, support for military action in syria, this is from 2013, about the same time in september, 62% opposed, look at it now in late august, 63% support the idea. we're going to keep taking your thoughts on what the president should be doing to combat the threat of isis and also the aggression of russia. we'll keep getting your thoughts
through this morning, but lesley clark, the white house correspondent, joining us on the phone this morning from wales, the site of the nato summit, lesley clark, when it comes to isis, let's begin there, what is on the agenda for the president and separately for nato? >> good morning. yes, today the president has already been at nato this morning, and the first -- his first event of the day was a meeting with other european leaders, with ukrainian president poroshenko, so that sort of started off events today. >> so he began today with the issue much ukraine. what is nato considering when it comes to this -- russia's aggression? >> well, i think at this point they're going to be looking at boosting some sort of defense capabilities. he's also likely to brief
leaders on the latest discussions on a cease-fire talks. host: so and then after this morning, where is he now? what is he doing the rest of the day? what's on his agenda? >> we expect a lot of sideline discussions on the islamic state, but i don't know if you followed that president obama and prime minister cameron had a joint editorial in the times of london today declaring they're united in their intent to confront isis. there wasn't a lot of details, however, on what any of the plans might be. host: and so sideline talks, who is the president going to be talking to? >> well, he appeared this morning, looking to show awe eye nighted front with at least the uk prime minister. they appeared at a school in wales this morning where they visited with kids who were learning about what nato is. and later on, you know, he just met with the ukrainian
president, cameron by his side, and along with french president, and others. host: and so as he continues to have these sideline talks behind closed doors, the president's there today, how long is he there for? when does he return to washington? >> he's got meetings all day today on it, and what they call a working dinner tonight at the castle, which is a couple blocks away from us. and then they have meetings again tomorrow and will wrap up the day at some point tomorrow with a press conference. and head back to d.c., landing late tomorrow night. host: yesterday president obama in estonia his first stop before
the nato summit talked about the threat of isis and addressed for the first time the news reports of the beheading of a second american journalist. here is what he had to say. >> our objective is clear, and that is to degrade and destroy isil so it's no longer a threat not just to iraq but also the region, and to the united states. in order for us to accomplish that, the first phase has been to make sure we got eniraqi government that's in place and that we are blunting the momentum that isil was carrying out. and the air strikes have done that. but now, what we need to do is make sure that we've got the regional strategy in place, that can support an ongoing effort, not just in the air but on the ground to move that forward. and last week when this question was asked --
host: a joint news conference with estonia leader. later in the news conference he was asked about military conference. >> we know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink isil's sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities, to the point where it is a manageable problem. and the question is going to be making sure we got the right strategy but also making sure we got the international will to do it. this is something that is a continuation of a problem we've seen certainly since 9/11, but
before, and it continues to continue in different ways. we got to make sure that -- host: president obama in estonia yesterday, you hear him laying out his thoughts on the threat of isis. the president also at the nato summit today dealing with this issue of russia and what nato should do to try to deter russia. we turn to all of you. what do you want to see from your president, specifically what should the president be doing on these two issues? charles in kansas city, missouri, independent caller, go ahead. caller: okay. i just seen the clips from the last video, but all i really want to say is two things regarding russia and the isis, the isis, i want to touch on first. the isis situation if it's such a threat, we don't want to give
or let the cookie, because they will want the milk, but if it's such a threat we need to try to figure out -- obama should keep doing the same thing he's doing as your last caller said, but for the most part i believe that because it is a severe threat level announced by david cameron, i believe that there needs to be a religious like eternal affairs that deal and suggest what solutions we are to -- but military option, military option is definitely i believe on the table. host: okay. caller: but because there's -- it seems like it's a religious provocation from, you know,
what's -- what has to take place is just somebody is going to have to close pandora's box. host: i'm going to leave it there. reminder to you and others you got to turn down that tv when you're talking. on twitter, call for a meeting of the organization of islamic conference. 56 members, and ask the u.s. and eu to address the meeting. and then you got this from howard who says, how can we on the one hand trust the russians we fly in space with them and on the other hand call them ally ares? catherine, ohio, democratic caller, what do you think? caller: i think the president is correct on everything he's done. we have war mongers who want to get to war like john mccain, who has said for months let's go into syria. my question was then, who do we support in syria? the government who hates us?
or isil that hates us? i think the president was correct. i think that as far as russia is concerned, we need the allies in and around russia to support. they don't want to do that. they don't want to do it militarily, they don't want to do it monetarily. they want us, the big brother, to come in and do it for them. it's over. we're not going to do it for you anymore. we'll go with you. we'll help you, we'll stand with you but we're not going to brunt the cost and do it for you. and i have one more issue i would like to address. host: sure. caller: i urge my congressman to get back to washington, d.c., leave their seven week vacation, and get back and figure out how they're going to pay for all this mess. host: okay. caller: it's not going to be like it was under the last administration. it needs to be paid for. you need to get back to congress and you need to pay for it. host: can i ask you something before you go? you said republicans are
warmongering. what do you make of some of the dream democratic party? dianne feinstein, the chairwoman of the senate intelligence committee, both saying that isis is a threat and the president needs to do something, that isis needs to be destroyed. you got bill nelson, democrat of florida saying he's going to introduce legislation to give the president the authority to take military action in syria against isis. caller: i think right now it's just talk. everybody wants them to come out clean. they don't want to have anything to do with it. they want the president to go outside and to do it for them. i'm urging my democrat, my republican, senators and congressmen, stop talking about what you will do, what you could do, what you want to do, and actually do something. you can stand up and do it if you choose. host: okay. caller: it appears to this point
that neither party wasn't toss do anything. they only want to talk about doing it. i urge them get back to washington and do your job. host: okay. caller: you're being paid to do a job, just simply do it. host: i'm going to move onto a republican, michael in lexington, north carolina. caller: i just think that america has so long had an atmosphere of you can mess with us, you can bully us and our politicians are going to sit there and kick it around for a few months and talk about it. if people do not look at america as much for a helping hand as a correction hand, you mess with us and we'll come and get you, you're friend of us, we'll be a friend of you, and i just -- everybody wants to get a vote out of it or get some pat on the back. there needs to be consequences for messing with us. if you mess with us we're going to come and get you.
if you're friends of us we're going to help you. that's all i got to say. everybody wants to put their own spin on it. host: okay. all right. from the hill news paper a few days ago, lawmakers to obama hit isis as we told you dianne feinstein believes that. you got lawmakers from both parties this week exhorting president obama to broaden the military campaign against the islamic state. the authenticity of the video has been reporting, the hill reporting it had not. the presumed execution of the 31-year-old time journalist steven sotloff demands a forceful american response. you're getting that from both parties from the hill newspaper reporting. we turn to all of you, what should the president be doing, not only on isis, but also this issue of russia? both on part of the president of obama's meetings and his agenda, while in wales for this nato summit. front page of "usa today" has
this headline. can russia be stopped? that's their headline this morning in "usa today." financial times, front page this morning, has the headlines, france has decided to halt the handover of a warship to russia. president halted the the shipment of a warship that france is building for the russian navy in the clearest sign yet that the president is -- that in the financial times this morning. and then on this supposed cease-fire "the washington post"
has the front page story about that. kremlin, russia, ukraine agree on initial peace deal. russian president vladimir putin, that would entrench rebel gains there and had a significant defeat to ukrain ukn leaders who sought to regain full control of the nation. friday is the day when nato will supposedly take action on russia. robin, democratic caller. hi, robin, go ahead. caller: hi.
how are you? this is the first time calling. i am very worried. i never seen the president look like he's looking today. we have so many problems going on. i believe that he doesn't know what he's doing with foreign affairs. i'm very nervous, and i think what's going to happen is we're going to have -- something is going to happen here in america, and then we're going to do something. host: okay. tony, district heights, maryland, democratic caller. good morning, tony. caller: good morning, c-span. i want to piggyback off of that last caller. i want to tell you what, ma'am. nothing is going to happen here. these are falsified beheadings. i don't believe isis exists. i believe we always have to have a boggyman who keeps the defense department budget set. i believe the defense department contracting companies like
boeing, general dynamics, all these big cats, they're the ones that is driving this nonsense besides the government of israel, because we have to constantly support them no matter what. host: okay. make in kentucky, independent caller. hi, make. caller: good morning, and thanks the world for c-span. my comment on the united states going to war anytime, anywhere, is my belief is if we're going to go to war, we need to go to war. and get to war with an idea to win. if that's not our plan, then we shouldn't be there. and you know, they talk about boots on the ground. let them put boots on the ground or whatever, but just go to war to win it. it just doesn't make any sense to me to risk american lives, a little -- a lot of money, i guess, but mostly american lives
to fight something and fight it and fight it and fight it. 10 years, i mean we were in -- in world war ii we were worried for four years. and this thing has -- hasn't cost as many lives, and i'm talking about afghanistan, and iraq, and any of these little flare ups, but you know, we should consult with other governments. if they want our help, let them know we're going to give you help, but we're going to -- there's going to be a lot of innocent people killed besides americans. your people are going to be put at risk. host: okay. david in key springs south carolina, good morning to you. independent caller. what are your thoughts? caller: i was sitting there listening to the division conversations you're having. i got a question for the president but i would like to ask what news people why they don't ask the president why he changed his name to barack. you do that, you do that when you convert to islam.
this president has repeatedly denied he's islamic. do you think it's a secret they're riding around with our tanks and our guns and bulletproof vests? host: johnny, texas, independent call her. caller: good morning. listen, i have two parts that i want to ask. why does all these rich people in middle east go ahead and get together like saudi arabia, dubai, where all these people coming from, protect themselves, if we're -- if there's -- here's the second part. if we're exporting oil here in the united states, gas and oil, why do we have to defend the oilfields over there for the rest of the world? we just don't need this police force no more. come home, i've been overseas twice. neither time did my stuff amount to a dam thing. thank you very much.
host: take a look at usaa today. they put together these graphics. americans see the world as a more dangerous place. and the us roll as diminished. even with the war weary public that helped convince a growing number that it's time for the united states to do more around the globe. you can see the graphic there. is obama tough enough? thinking about his approach to foreign policy and national security do you think that the president is not tough enough? 64% said that. 36% said about right. 7% don't know. and 38 -- sorry about that. the rest said about 3% said too tough. sorry about that. this is the usa dakota second pole on that. the biggest concern, the biggest threat concerns for the united states. 71% said the islamic extremist
groups like al-qaeda, 67% said the islamic militant group in iraq and syria known as isis, those are the top threats for americans polled in "usa today." republican caller, steve, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i would like to just comment basically on what you were saying. america has to stand in the forefront. they have to lead. the rest of our allies will follow. but it's been that way forever. this last administration, just weakness. i mean, that's all america sees, it's all the world sees, and that's why you see the uprising of isis, i know the guy a couple calls ago said he didn't believe isis exists. the two guys that just got their heads cut off i promise you they know it exists. but america has to stand up. and our allies will follow, just like we always stand up, and eight other countries they're in
so that option for nato on this issue of isis, as well. independent caller, good morning to you. caller: good morning. i was just going to make a quick comment. i think we should really improve relationships with israel and leave russia alone. and the military, we're not a major super military like people. i think we should really get out of people's business and really improve relationships with israel. host: okay. stan from illinois. hi. caller: good morning, c-span. i wish that our country would be
more behind our president and stop fighting each other so much. my comment is, if people think that our president is a coward or somehow he don't know how to fight, then obviously they don't know anything about illinois politics. the president is capable of doing the job. everybody knows that, especially his opponent, the republicans. listen, he's doing the right thing. the reason why law enforcement used the good cop bad cop approach, is because it works. he's doing the right thing, sending joe biden behind isis because i think that russia at this time is wanting to keep its eye on that and keep focus. we don't need another one. he needs to protect our economy. the president needs to keep doing exactly what he's doing. host: okay. "washington times" reports that in june, president obama proposed a $1 billion plan to position more american equipment in the baltic states in
preparation for an attack and more u.s. troops to have rotating developments, deployments through estonia. oliver in baghdad, iraq, independent caller, oliver, what are you doing in baghdad? caller: yes. how you doing the? host: good morning. oliver, what are you doing in baghdad? caller: yes. i'm an american of iraqi origin,
i went back to iraq, i completed my college at the university. now i graduated this year, so my comment basically is, there are 530 -- huge amounts of oil, and the 116 formations that were dug in. so basically iraq has a huge amount of oil and gas in the oil and gas industry. so that's why i'm calling, that upon the government, to be in iraq because basically it has a lot of resources, and it's strategic location, that it separates the gulf states, from europe, basically the nato ally,
which is turkey. therefore iraq and syria is only two countries that separate nato alliance from the gulf state and asia and southeast asia. so i'm calling that the united states should act swiftly to iraq to protect its interests, especially sacrifices in blood and money, and southern iraq, you see russian companies, and other companies that have a huge investment in the iraqi oil world, and you couple -- you accompany, and that really makes me wonder what are the u.s. companies, u.s. companies should have the priority investment in the oil and gas sector in iraq. host: okay. thank you very much. a couple of other opinions for you this morning. here is the "washington times."
times." "the washington post" this morning says that foreign policy beyond the south byte, president obama needs to clarify his vision. yesterday here in washington, secretary of state john kerry spoke at a ceremony honoring a special representative to the muslim community, spoke about isil. here is what he had to say. >> bar barrity sadly is not new to our world. neither is evil. and i can't think of a more graphic description of evil than what we witnessed yesterday and before that with james foley and what we see in the unbelievably brutal, mass executions of people because of their sectarian or religious affiliation. we have taken the fight to this kind of savagery and evil before
and believe me we will take it again. we're doing it today, and when terrorists anywhere around the world have murdered our citizens the united states held them accountable no matter how long it took. those who have murdered james foley and steven sotloff in syria need to know that the united states will hold them accountable, too, no matter how long it takes. host: secretary of state john kerry saying the u.s. will hold isis accountable no matter how long it takes. we turn to all of you this morning, what should the president be doing about the threat of isis and the aggression of russia? ed in greenbelt, maryland, independent caller. hi, ed, go ahead. caller: good morning. i want to talk about something that we haven't been talking about in a long time. i think the president is doing exactly what he should be doing right now. and the president and the vice president is doing a great job. and secretary kerry is doing a good job, also.
our country is polarized. and what's really hurting our country, even though the president is doing a great job, i believe that the other side, namely the republican side, are listening to the wrong media. you have this right-wing media, and people need to turn that thing off. it's hurting our country. our president is a great president and he's going to go down in history what these things are happening right now. the world is in trouble and they need to wake up and realize and turn off the media and listen to it. read the papers carefully. look at the back checking. you're doing a good job with c-span. if it weren't for c-span, we are -- have a tendency to be -- there's too much hatred in this country. you have warfares going against our children, children of color, and that's not right.
we're all in this thing together. host: okay, ed. kristen in shannon dale, pennsylvania, democratic caller. caller: i think that president obama is doing the appropriate job. he is getting a true coalition together unlike what the bush administration, the ragtag group that they pulled together, and basically when you hear all the screams for war and that the president is doing a good job, it's propaganda. there is money to be made in war by these corporate, you know, corporate, you know -- they want to do what the terrorists want us to do. the terrorists want us to spend money, to drain our coffers, to make this country poor, to react exactly the way these crazy propagandas are doing, and i called the gop the gritty old
propaganda. in this case the propaganda is let's go to war, let's spend money, let's put more money into the hands of the war prove iters, these -- it's crazy. it's just crazy. and it's reacting exactly the way the terrorists want us to do. the terrorists want us to denigrate our president, spend our money, drain our coffers, weaken this country. it's exactly why they did what they did. they want us to react this way, and it's just criminal. host: okay. the "washington times" this morning. has this on their front page story.
independent caller. hi, ken. ken, good morning to you. you are on the air. what should the president do about -- caller: good morning. to tell you the truth, you can't blame everything on the president. it's ludicrous what they're doing in other countries. for the woman that called just before me, i'm quite shocked that she would say we shouldn't do anything about it because of somebody on tv getting his head chopped off. i'm sure she would want to go in there and destroy people who did that. we have to do something. you can't blame it all on the president. he's doing the best he can. he has a lot of issues on his hand right now. my opinion i wish we could all live in peace, but that doesn't seem the case these days, so -- host: all right. we'll go to tom, next, ft. lauderdale, florida. hi, tom. good morning. i called in this program before, and if people recognize my
voice, they're going to be very shocked. i in general agree with what president obama is doing. let's take ukraine, number one. if we had taken historical perspective in vietnam, we would have avoided a very, very disastrous involvement in vietnam. but we got into the political military thing where we had to be powerful. if we had taken the historic perspective in vietnam, we would -- the war would not have evolved the way it did. the same thing i think is happening in ukraine. i don't think enough historical perspective is being brought to fore, and i think obama is using -- i hope he's using, maybe he's doing it and i don't know, but if you have a
historical perspective, people need to listen to experts on the relationship of ukraine and russia. and i think if they did, they would probably be more -- with president obama on that subject. now, as far as syria, i mean, as far as isis, you know, i also in a way agree with president obama. i blame them for allowing this to happen so quickly, i think if he had approached the problem earlier we wouldn't have this problem. now that we have the problem i agree with the coalition, the political changes in iraq. if this works, it will be a good thing. i just hope it does work.
on russia, president obama in estonia, outlined his message on ukraine and what nato needs to do. here is what he had to say. >> because of the work of generations, because we stood together in a great alliance, because people across this continent have forged a european union dedicated to cooperation and peace, we've made historic progress towards the vision we share, a europe that is whole and free, and at peace. and yet, as we gather here today, we know that this vision is threatened by russia's
aggression against ukraine. it is a brazen assault on the territory of ukraine, a sovereign and independent european nation. it challenges that most basic of principles of our international system that borders cannot be redrawn at the barrel of a gun. that nations have the right to determine their own future. it undermines an international order where the rights of peoples and nations are upheld and can't simply be taken away by brute force. this is what's at stake in ukraine. this is why we stand with the people of ukraine today. host: president obama talking about the situation with russia, reassuring the baltic states that the u.s. and nato allies stand with them. this is a headline from the wall
street journal this morning. that's why he made that stop in estonia yesterday, before traveling onto wales today, and tomorrow, for the nato summit. we're going to get your thoughts on what president obama should do to respond to russia and to isis. steve in st. clair shores, michigan, independent caller. steve, good morning to you. caller: good morning. i just listened to the sound byte and i liked how he called it an assault on ukraine. it's not an assault, it's an invasion. russia is invading a sovereign country. it goes to show how his foreign policy is -- he has no clue. he has been getting briefed on isis for four years. this has been developing for four years. and all of a sudden now he still has no strategy. he admitted that the other day.
but people let him off the hook, and this is what happens when you get a community organizer from chicago running the most powerful country in the world. he has no clue. he has -- go ahead. host: you're an independent. did you vote for him? caller: i did not vote for him, no, i did not. host: have you voted for a democrat before? caller: no, i haven't. host: you're calling on the independent line. are you a republican? caller: i don't -- i actually prefer not to use a title to describe how i vote or what i think. host: okay. caller: but i'm saying the guy has no clue, he has -- and it's apparent that he is an amateur running the most powerful country. you know what they hear him say is he will defeat islamic extremism in the world. they are barbaric people and he will not say he will defeat islamic extreme is im all over the world.
host: let me ask you if i can about 2016 and the potential gop field. is anyone in that field that you know of right now that will say the things that you want this president to say? caller: is there anybody in the field? yeah, i think there is. i think ted cruz, i think what you just said, rand paul and other people that say that they would take care of the problem, you know, his number one job is to protect us, the people. and he's failed to do that by letting isis grow into what they are today he has actually -- he's actually failed his job. and his oath. to protect the people and the 61 substitution. he's not done it. host: anthony, an independent in california, anthony, good morning. caller: hi. i just wanted to say first of all i know this will reach people that we're allowing our president to use all this money towards war, that is coming from
us. it's taxpayer money, and this could potentially start world war three. i mean, that's a dangerous term. i think it's great that people support the president. that's the way it should be. our president really support us or is this what he's trying to accomplish? i'm not sure, you know. there's -- there's a lot of controversy behind our president that he himself could be muslim, you know. so that to me is a conflict of interest. kind of nervous about the whole situation. i don't -- i think that, you know, a lot of the media that has shown aggression from russia. i haven't seen anything that russia supported with any trucks, with food and stuff like that, the people there. part of ukraine wants to become a part of russia, and that isn't russia's fault at all. you know, there is a rebellion
within ukraine, people -- and i think we should try to stop it, we should try to stop it. if we really care about our future, our country, our kids, our children we should really try to stop it. host: all right, anthony. patricia, houston, texas, independent caller. caller: yes. my name is patricia volter and i'm calling because thank you for putting me on. my comment is, isis is a radical group, but they're not going to destroy this country. the people that are going to destroy this country is the right-wing media, the fox news, everybody on fox news should be tried for treason. ever since president obama, and i have been keeping up with it, since he got elected the first time and re-elected they could not stand it, for a black man to be president, anything this man do they tear apart. he can't do -- he can say it's
greene they're going to say it's red. what is he going to do? i mean -- i mean everything that he does is wrong. and what they are doing is creating hate. they are going to start a race war in this country. they're going to start a civil war. and it's going to come within our country, not from isis, because our army can fight isis but they can't fight off this right-wing media that's putting -- every day, 24/7, on this cable news against president obama. host: we'll take a break from this. i want to show you from last night's senate debate in north carolina, part of c-span's 2014 coverage. north carolina senate candidates, kay hague en, the democrat, deseparated a variety of issues. here is a little bit of their debate. >> folks, speaker tillis is
misleading you about my record and about his record, too. i'm going to jump back to the other question, his 7% raise, if he were a senior teacher, meaning over 20, 25 years, you would get a .3%. he's done away with longevity scales. even the individual in the department of education in the state of north carolina said the way you have calculated these issues has changed the first time since 1933, and it's the worst thing that they've ever seen in north carolina. now let me talk to you about what you're saying about the president. i want people to know i am the most moderate senator in the nation, the nonpartisan "national journal" ranked me that because of my ability to work across the aisle and get things done. you know, i have -- i stand with the president when it's right for north carolina but let me tell you i stand with the people of north carolina when it's right for the people of north carolina and i voted against the president and my party, trade deals sent too many
manufacturing jobs overseas. i told the president we need to build the keystone pipeline. >> kay hague and voted with president obama. and she didn't answer the question. i think the real answer is, she probably regrets the fact that she has been a rubber stamp for harry reid and barack obama. you can't vote 95% of the time with president obama and not -- host: last night's north carolina senate debate. if you missed it, go to our web site. we're going to have over 100 debates leading up to the midterm elections. in other news this morning, a national section of "the new york times" has this headline. that in the national section of "the new york times." and also this morning, from "the new york times," has a lengthy
piece about the world's health organization and how its budget has been cut over the years, and how that has hurt its response to the ebola crisis, this coming from the top official of the who. and also the money section of "usa today," $26 billion gone. i clowrd rains on apple stock. after the news broke of hacking into the cloud, apple lost $26 billion on paper yesterday. to put that in perspective, the market value lost it in apple in one day exceeds the entire value of more than half the companies in the standard & poors 500. for instance, the entire company, marriott international valued at $20.2 billion. apple losing $26 billion on paper in stock.
and then also yesterday -- this is the front page of "the new york times" this morning, below the fold, has this piece about michael bloomberg. he is taking back the ranges of his company and reversal bloomberg is going to retake the ranges of the company he founded from andrew ross. that's on the front page of "the new york times" this morning. by the way, need to tell you about another debate that we're covering on c-span. that's tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern time, here on c-span. the california governor's debate will be having that on c-span at 10:00 p.m. eastern time, so tune in this. you can go to the web site, as well, for more details. joan in buffalo, new york, democratic caller, we got a couple minutes left here. what are your thoughts on what the president should do here to respond to isis and russia? caller: well -- host: good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning. i think that unfortunately the united states needs to -- is so
accustomed to playing big brother to the world, and making the majority of the investment financially and manpower, to fight conflict all over the world, we are being weaned off that philosophy and it's about time. let some of these other nations that have more of a vested interest in what's going on in the middle east, and the ukraine, let them step up and pay their fair share. not just financially, but in manpower. i agree with president obama. this is culture shock for our country. there is no reason to be posturing, because it's costly. not just in dollars, but in manpower. and i think it's about time that these other countries step up and pay their fair share. they're waiting for the united states always. to be the vanguard. if it's image, it's too expensive. thank you. host: nathan, new baltimore, michigan, independent caller,
you're the last. go ahead. caller: with the response in listening to a lot of the calls it blows me away that you can try to hold the president accountable to a whole bipartisian system was created for everybody to make a decision, not just one man. and howe how he's handling it is absolutely how he should. it's taking a step back. he doesn't want the left hand to know what the right hand is doing. the way the media is, if he starts tells his plan and telling everything you might as well give our plan over to the extremists and isis to know exactly what we're doing. so taking a step back, monitoring the situation, they are a threat but not as big a threat as al-qaeda, as far as coming over the shores. there's obviously more chatter about them coming over to the states and doing it, they're threatening, but our military, our intelligence hasn't had any threats to that yet, so he's taking an approach that i think is going to keep us pretty neutral, and if anything is
what does it do? it was hard to answer the questions before -- >> terrorists to spies, to people that they have probable ause to believe that they are committing some type of crime. it's a bulk collection of data e-mails. ns' >> the nsa is very controversial and the only way to resolve that congress puts this as their number one issue in 2014. wednesday during washington journal for the theme of the 2015 c-span student cam documentary competition. >> washington journal continues. > we're back with robert levinson, senior defense analyst to talk about the nato gathering taking place today in wales and continue through tomorrow, friday. what are the goals? what were the original goals, what are the goals of the nato gathering. think the original goals
are hard to tell prior to the events in the ukraine. what's on s saying the agenda. what are we going to talk about? we talk about afghanistan and the future there. new goal, there's a new threat in the events in the ukraine. so i think the first big goal is to get a coherent response of what's going on in the ukraine, talk about more sanctions, military actions, shoring up the alliance. he rapid reaction force that we're talking about. they want to send as clear a message as they can and present front.ed >> who is calling for what? i mean, what country, what kind is calling for what of action? guest: it's not quite clear. i mean they've all talked about rapid reaction force. and you know the big thing that the united states is calling for s a really greater contributions from nato. there's the whole issue of who's sort of ponying up for the alliance. there's a goal of 2% of gdp. here's only four countries including the united states that re actually contributing that amount of money.
still not total agreement. rance announced that they're not going to sell the two missile ships to russia. that's a positive thing the united states and other mens are for that. so it seems like the europeans and the u.s. are pushing closer unified front on this. host: what about germany and germany's chancellor. what role will she play. guest: germany? a tough spot. ties to a lot of russia dependent on energy. she's a strong voice. the biggest, wealthiest country europe. she's going to want, you know, to sort of balance things. about to be careful hurting the economy too much back home. but again trying to maintain the at the on of unity alliance host: what is a rapid response team. in theey been successful past? guest: they haven't been successful in the past. have a unit to take 30 days to mobilize. it doesn't seem very rapid. the men and women force that they can deploy to eastern countries but to
ukraine, countries like poland or latvia on short notice. to say a orces in russian incursion to one of the countries. -- howwould russia think would russia view that? guest: russia has responded to have ea saying they will to revisit their own strategy. they recognize that the ukraines in a different spot. estonia where the president was yesterday as a nato member. nato member, article 5 of he treaty saying it's everyone's place to defend everybody else. careful has to be about an incursion to a nato member. a horse of a different color, really. host: what about military exercises. uest: the u.s. is going to send forces in for a peacekeeping exercise in ukraine in september, i think i just read about that. military moves, we're deploying additional aircraft. he president announced some
additional aircraft deployments to estonia. so in the countries other than he ukraine, the eastern european countries trying to shore up. we had an agreement at the end cold war that we wouldn't permanently base forces in the pact n european warsaw countries. that's an agreement with russia. we're pushing up against that. not permanent, but being used.he word a rotating presence. we're stepping up and trying to nato is behind them host: this is part of the billion dollars that president in june that congress needs to approve? uest: some of the funds are for that. some of the billions of dollars are for these efforts. host: what does this current and isis, ith russia because nato is going to be talking about that as well.
guest: fighting the soviet union went away. went away with bang, not a wimper. it was in the midst of an identity crisis. what does it do now? russia, itry reaffirmed the relevancy of the alliance. it's the issue of contributing to make sure that outside of the military e's real teeth behind the alliance. host: tell us what's going on with contributions and the funding? guest: well, the way it works right now, the goal of nato is 2.2% of y contributes gdp. the u.s. is about 4.4% of gdp. uk, estonia, and greece are the only countries at or above 2%. is below that number. i did some math. if you looked at what it would to get up to that 2% level, the other countries of nato, talking about $108 billion above where they were spending on defense in 2013. money. a lot of
that's about a 34% increase over current spending. terms of overall gdp, there are over $19 trillion in gdp. you ear pauking a point or 6% or of the as a percentage collective gdp. so it's not that much. it's difficult. the european countries are aging ing from the societies. they have huge populations, social safety nets they have to pay for like we do. a tough sell right now to say to spend more money on defense. tell at the same time, them you need to sanction russia. guest: which causes economic pain. trade don't have the relationships with russia in the united states. but for countries like germany that have substantial trade with russians, the going to hurt the russians but them as well. host: more sanctions? countries agree
to that? more sanctions? guest: yes, i think so. they'll be careful. the top of the nato agenda because that's not an economic thing. but there will be some discussion. i think you're seeing it ratchet up. to ng the french agree not sell the ships, that's a tough call to the french. that's a lot of jobs. the french economy in tough timeltim times. will be ure if france compensated, if some other country is going to buy them or something. -- seen the the details. serious.w it's they need to send a message to putin. > france halts handover of warships to russia. cancelling.r it hasn't said they haven't it.elled -- i think that's the rub
are they going to get some kind of agreement or in and then look at what the commitments are. based on that, then the nato countries will say we are willing to commit acts number of troops. does that calculation of how many troops remain and from what countries, take into consideration the lessons learned from what is going on. >> i think it has to. a lot of people look at iraq, and it was very difficult to maintain an ongoing presence. those negotiations fell apart. we don't have an ongoing presence in iraq and it has descended into chaos. i think our president, and other countries, are saying we don't
want another afghanistan. -- a largether enough presence to keep a lid on things. >> we thought iraq would be able to do that, it clearly wasn't. there is a lot of second-guessing as to pulling out of iraq as quickly as we did. x independent color. independent color -- caller. >> eastern europe. first the u.s. promised gorbachev that the soviet union would become part of nato and become one superpower. second, that didn't happen. third, george bush promised putin that the u.s. would not interfere in eastern europe. second, james aker promised putin at the u.s. would not go
in one inch into eastern europe thomas and that happened in malta. in the here we are revolution in the ukraine. the majority of the people do not want to join nato and the havery is split, and we $17.5 trillion deficit. he wore.e iraq how will we resolve our own problems instead of having to support revolutions and induce wars in other countries simply because of our interests and oil interests. world, and i don't mean no one, 5% of the world and then europe which is another 10% of the world may agree with us, that the rest of the world, especially with our support to israel, do not agree with us.
power, theys into are not going to agree with us. >> robert levinson. >> the caller talks about certain promises made at the end of the cold war. one that was made about the ukraine. ukraine had nuclear weapons at the end of the cold war. they were russian nuclear weapons. and the ukraine agreed to give them up. i think it was the budapest agreement in 1994, oh thresher and united states agreed to respect the territorial integrity in exchange for giving up the weapons. it is safe to argue that russia is not respecting the territorial integrity of the ukraine. on the this lame ball united states for making promises and not living up to them, that is a stretch. in the ukraine, it has been fomented by the russians.
the majoritywhat of the ukrainian people feel, but the majority of people want to be an independent ukraine and make their own decisions rather than be told the russians that part of their country is no longer there. ohio.s, columbus, dovetail on ae to couple callers that called in especially the last one. american expect the people to respect congress, not only president obama but former keep telling us that we have a large deficit and will not leave money for our kids, and every time a conflict breaks out we spend billions of dollars in weapons and missionary but we can't take care of education and simple basic needs for our country. how can we trust all occasions
when they make comments like that? we can go to every problem in the world. we will have to realize that sooner or later. >> the caller raises an excellent point. this costs a lot of money. by theow it is cap budget control act of 2012. many people are saying if we are going to get involved in the ukraine or iraq, we need to revisit that. spendingntitlement that is getting out of control with social security and medicaid. these are tough questions, afghanistan and iraq, it's time to pull back. the voices are out there. and finances are a big part of that. >> david sanger has a piece this morning saying as the president costs a o asia, which lot of money and resources, takes on isis in iraq, possibly syria. or then talks about arming doing something more against russia. there's a cost to all of this.
raising the point you're making that the pentagon has budget constraints and says that the price tag for the air strikes in iraq, $225 million a month. >> yeah, i mean this is an issue. all of the things cost money. and there's lots and lots of people talk about we should do this or that. but then you say, okay, well what programs are you willing to cut to pay for this? your u willing to cut mom's social security check or medicare or are you willing to pay higher taxes. the last ones we fought, we didn't raise taxes, we lored taxes. we've never done that in american history. one thing to say we have all of he ambitions and playing a large role in the world. that costs a lot of money. programs o cut other or deficit spend, which is what we've been doing, or agree to raise taxes. i don't hear anybody saying that. i don't hear that voice at all. but the money has to come from somewhere. >> let's hear from dan. he's the last in youngston, ohio.
the republican caller. hi, dan. >> yesterday, i heard john kerry on tv talking about this new envoy and his words were, "religion means something." this is what he says. this few months ago, administration when they didn't ant to hear the concerns of christians and jews concerning us that ct, told religion didn't mean anything. this does seem that president oftentimes sides with the muslims. islamic id to call extremist terrorism. you know? this was out there before -- i didn't pay much attention b to it. does you look at what he right down the line. > and, dan, so -- so what do you want him do? >> well, what i want is for him thisspect the religions of country, his own constituency,
ust as much as he respects the religions around the world. >> okay, all right. issue of inson, the religion, is -- how is that egotiated, talked about at a summit that -- like the one they're having today in wales omorrow as well with the nato allies? i mean, is religion a factor there? >> i don't know how much of a factor -- it's a very difficult problem. think, you know, secretary of defense rumsfeld said something once, you know, are we killing enemies, the the islamic extremists faster than medrasas are producing them? i think the answer is, no, we are not. in order to drain the swamp, we have to fight the extremists, kill them, take military action. drain the swamp to stop young men, young muslim these things is you have to have a voice in islam. there are a billion muslims in the world. most of them don't support the activity.
you have to reach out to them. bad guys o label the for what they are. a alienate the o muslim populations. we're worried about people going over and being fighters. there's reports now that hundreds of americans and other europeans are going over to fight with isis. we have to be careful. it's a tough thing, i think, for western leaders to talk about because we have freedom of religion, you want to respect everybody's religion. but these are -- there's a stream of islam that condones extremist activity. there has to be against that but ot alienate the majority of muslims going to be our allies in winging this fight. >> thank you for your time this morning. appreciate it. >> my pleasure, greta. thank you very much. >> coming up next, we're going and talk with conservative commentators ann and gina moreland politichicks. and the new book "what women
really want" that after an update from c-span radio. >> the associated press reports that police departments across are using technology to officersentify problem before their misbehavior harms innocent people, embarrasses employer, or invites a costly lawsuit from citizens from a federal government. systemsch early warning are treated as a cure-all, experts say little research effectiveness, or more importantly, if they're being properly used. justice nwhile, the department plans to open a civil rights investigation into the practices of the ferguson, missouri police department. this following the shooting last month of an unarmed black 18-year-old by a white police officer. a person familiar with the investigation says the effort announced as early as today. the missouri officials were probe.d yesterday of the and fast food restaurants in 150 cities, including detroit, chicago, and new york, could be focal points of a worker's
walkout to protest low wages and push employers to pay them at least $15 an hour. cdonald's, taco bell, wendy's, and other fast food chains are expected to participate. and organizers say there will be to eful, civil disobedience draw more attention to the issue. he the democrat challenging three-term senator pat roberts has ended the campaign without an explanation. chad tyler sent a letter to the kansas secretary of state was rday saying he withdrawing. the race has a viable independent candidate as well as a libertarian candidate. the kansas democratic party's chairwoman says she needs a few days to sort out the situation, roberts' campaign said the move was, quote, a corrupt bargain between orman.ats and greg he ran for senator roberts' seat n 2007 as a democrat before dropping out. he said he grew unhappy with both parties and has positioned
>> the nsa is controversial. the only way to resolve the conflict is if congress puts this as the number one issue in 2014. >> we are back with the co-authors of a new book, "what women really want". co-author of the the book, along with ann marie murrow, also the co-author of the book, and editor in chief of "politichicks.tv." >> thank you for being here. >> sure. >> what do women really want? >> well, obvious lip -- whole book took a to talk about it. we thought about writing "what men really want." it was going to be a short pamphlet, we decided to go with
the women. we talked to women all the time because there's a national organization that gives women a voice. we ask women to engage in the political process. we think that the things that really do matter to women are can personally affect by being active in what happens in the political realm. don't want women to. so we wanted to look at the you know, i'm sorry, the objections. involved?women get we wanted to be a conduit. hey, go ahead, it's okay. you can do this. women can make a huge difference in politics. >> why do you want women to get involved? what's going on here? see that's going wrong? >> well, democrat women have been always involved in politics. a strange dichotomy that democrats when they vote, they don't just vote, they stay
involved. stay committed to their women, republican men and they vote, they go home, and they don't come back to the next election. we encourage everyone to be involved and know what's happening in your world. >> is it a book about feminism? >> it's how you define feminism. wants d out women really to talk about what it means to be feminine. there are differences between me and women. certain people want to say there's not a difference between men and women, there is. women do see differently than think differently than women. we wanted to have that conversation and we wanted to talk about how men and women can speak to one another. and how -- also how women from one side of the aisle can come across the aisle and have a civil discourse without being demeanoring toor one another. that's another big part that we
try to include in the book. >> do you think that democrats talk about it in a wrong way, in a different way? guest: i think democrats talk about it, period. that's important. republicans, the words silent majority, i think, were really damaging to the republican party. because they didn't use their voices. i think they've allowed politicians to speak for them. don't want any politician speaking for me and about what my needs are in my in my d in my family, life. and i'm -- the only way to get through to the politicians is to be involved. and to be vocal. and if you don't like something, do something about it. don't wait for someone to do it for you. >> are there specific public policy measures that you're ndorsing here, you're encouraging women to get involved in? guest: i think women love freedom. a basic level.
freedom to worship who they want to worship, protect their families, protect themselves in a culture that doesn't allow women to be safe all the time. so we spoke to the freedom issues in this book and found issues of freedom for family, thoesz are really paramount for women. so this is just where it's a great opportunity for women to conversation his and assert their voice in to the political system. you bering always that, know, i'm the life of a former state senator. he knew that he worked for the people. that was never lost on him for a moment. because i reminded him. we want do e things for women is make sure they understand that the people in that building every day, they work for you. and that women need to be engage in actively the campaign processes, to get the people elected that they want. absolutely them accountable. and what women really want. womene a road map to what can do that. even with the busy lives, while
they're running the kids to boardroomtting in the in the meeting. the things they can do to fit it have ir life so they do that voice. host: what is the road map? guest: a lot of things. party platforms are really important. a lot of people overlook it as something they don't care about in politics. a lot of people don't like labels. a whole chapter of how we don't like labels. my dad comes from exact opposite political perspectives for me. we love each other through that. f we let society apply those labels to me, we'd hate each other. that's another part of the conversation we wanted to have. one of the things that's important is if women would take in the grassroots politics, they would have a lot more control. and then if the politicians they helped were elected, if they hold their feet to that party the party ake platform what you want it to be.
no one wants to dictate that. host: you write in here when you ask conservative women today they will tell you they want real men. break it down by paragraph in here. men who will advance their economic prosperity. what are you talking about? what policies? guest: we don't want to rely on en, we don't want them to be above us or below us. we want to be as equal as we can e as men and women who are unequal. we will always be unequal. we don't want to be on the same level with men and women. we just aren't. if we both work in the office. i'm doing the same job as you if i do expect to get the same pay as you. construction, in if he can haul 400 pounds of
bricks and i can't, i'm okay being paid more. there can be equality in the work place, but in some work place, it depends on where the work place is and what career path you choose. >> are you saying democrats have a different message on that? guest: i don't think so, not at all. i think we should all want the same thing. there's so many things that we all really actually want. if we broke it down to the basics, democrats and republicans are similar in a lot of ways, probably more than most -- both sides would even want to admit. host: you go on to say in the ook, men who aren't afraid to let them think for themselves, men who will do their own job. when you say on -- what women really want and say real men. why the focus on men? guest: we talked to a lot of men for this book as well. i have found that men are women -- bout what they're confused. we find a lot of people who buy
our book are men who -- they want to know what women really want. they think it should be a lot bigger. like -- like -- but then they said once they finished reading it, we probably changed the book "what women as really want." there's a serious matter here, he rule of men and women is evolving in our culture. i think we need to be really take and really to kind of off the facade and the things that society has imposed on us. things from of the the -- you know, the era of you will haven't given women the freedom that they originally and perhaps intended. they said, you know, you must look and put family on the back burner. we're here to say, no, no. you can have it all. but there is a policy difference. asked that question. to me, there's a policy difference. we don't agree with everything.
clarify. wanted to often the approach from democrats is to have government you, have government impose the policy on you, where the republican perspective is often to -- it's a free market, let the free market reign, let miraculous.ket be because we believe it is. and so -- i work in a male-dominated industry like you do. i'm a broadcaster as well. i work with all me. my office is all men. there's one other woman in the office. we just kind of duck and cover. say that there's some disparity in our industry for men. you and i know this. compete anyway. i could go to an industry where women are dominant, teaching is one of them. nursing is another. i could go to one of those industries and there would be no pay disparity. i don't want a government to tell me that it's going to make things equal for me. things ing to make equal. i think i can compete in the arena. that's the thing we try to encourage women to do.
host: let's get phone calls. talking with two of the three authors of the book, "what women really want." dr. gina murrell and loudon here. erie, pennsylvania. good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning, i'm a conservative woman. i'm glad -- i hope your book is successful in getting women involved. i do want to bring up the point, though, i do think that the parties have completely agendas. and on many issues, you can't talk civilly. one of those. sacrament to the left. being pro-life is one of the highest priorities of most of the conservative women i know. when it comes to conservative social values, especially if you like balanced budgets, conservative women want
he federal government to balance their budget b like they have to in their house holds. you guys ndering, did cover the benefits of marriage in your book? because it's so protective for individuals and for society. it's the number one anti-poverty tradition that is in this country. t drops the probability of child poverty back 82%. people coming from fatherless house holds have much more criminal behavior, school dropout rates. raditional families do make societies healthy. i hope you covered that in your book. good luck. host: you're a doctor of psychology. go ahead. guest: thank you for your question. we do -- i don't mean speak for ann marie. of the words, me again, they've been used as labels to divide. we talk about in the book that
it's a culture of we the people versus baby elite. the thing about the social issues we speak to extensively in "what women really want" is that there aren't a lot of social issues that are social issues. misnomer ort of a label. say for example abortion. you brought that up. i'll address it. .5 million every day spent on abortion. that's money. i call that a fiscal issue. don't know, if we're spending $1.5 million every day on something, that's a fiscal issue. i don't want to take that label that it's a social issue that should be ignored to me. this is a fiscal issue. of life that we can talk about here as well, constitutional rights? most certainly. in fact, in tely, the back of our book, you said this specifically, we have the declaration of independence, the incident ghts, very we have as you know,
other things. e try to be comprehensive and give women truly a resource so they can literally make a life activism.heir host: this is a kaiser health poll taken before the supreme court made their decision about a's requirement for contraceptiv contraceptives. nd the majority support contraceptive coverage requirement, they broke it down by men and women. law upported the ac a's that require companies to provide contraceptive coverage. guest: i don't think we have a contraception, with birth control, as much as we don't want to pay for someone's abortion. that's my personal opinion about that. for 't want to pay something i don't believe in. i don't believe that i -- i on't want anyone else to pay for something that they don't believe in. if someone doesn't believe in --
if the government were to give someone is d anti-gun, i wouldn't want them to have to pay for my gun. i -- when i say that there's not a lot of difference, please there's not amean lot of difference morally, socially, environmentally between democrats and republicans. there are major differences. but when you break it down to saying choice, they want choice. so do we. we want -- we may want different choices, but we want choice. we believe in our first amendment rights. we believe in freedom of speech. we do too. we don't want to be fired from our jobs for being republicans. and people -- and we live in california and it happens. host: you're saying you respect the decision by some women to abortion, but that's their choice. guest: i'm not saying that either. i don't want to pay for it. i'm not going to eliminate abortion from the world. but i don't want to pay for it. that's my choice.
think that there's demeaning to me that women can be bought so placated -- i be don't know what it cost? $15 a month in free birth control. realistically afford that or make decisions to protect themselves in other ways. so i don't want to be -- i don't want to reduce women to a $15 a month payoff so they'll vote a certain party. for me, that's humiliating. i think that women are better that.that, stronger than if we want to lobby for something, let's lobby for more for more lobby equality. but to lobby for birth control money and ll of this time and dialogue on something that really isn't that expensive, how about open the keystone pipeline and get our gas prices down, that, i'll talk about. the those things make more sense to me than getting all upset over birth control. it's pretty affordable to begin with.
host: the phone lines are lighting up. them.o amy in pennsylvania, democratic caller, hi, amy? caller: hi, how are you? i agree with the women. i must be a very conservative democrat. i believe if you're going to lay down and do something and try to have an abortion, i don't think i have to pay for it. personally, morally, that's wrong. in my eyes. things ou want to do like that, be in a marriage, go before you do something. i shouldn't have to pay for someone's contraceptive. that's my opinion. and i'm democrat. host: okay, amy. caller: democrats, republicans, we're not so different. i'm a gun-carrying, free-talking woman. i agree with everything these women are saying. you live?e do caller: in gun-carrying pennsylvania. guest: if i can ask you, do you mind?
host: sorry, i cut her off. guest: this is where they're so important. i like to ask this question, but i love that she -- she's talking labels.sues instead of identify with the party you want. i don't care what party you dentify with, as long as you engage and talk about the issues instead of about the people, you know, insulting the other people party.other and instead of this kind of passively being like, i don't i t to listen to you because label myself this. to me, that's ignorant. and i think what she said is so vital to women that we have to be above just asking for handouts. if you really believe in the integrity of women and the and if you women, really want equality, then asking for free stuff just doesn't make sense. and one other thing if i can when you subsidize something, you get more of it. it's just the rule, it's learn that.1, you if we're going to subsidize more -- more, you know, sex
utside of marriage, if that's really our goal, more fatherless families, so on, so forth, we're it.g get more of so that's the only question we have to ask ourselves too, no is it how good the offer, something we want more of before we spend the money on it? host: david, indianapolis, republican caller, hi, david. doing?: how are you guys host: good morning. caller: my comment is i really women.about i think that the average woman is better off with a husband and children. and i try -- i don't see women having -- i think most work sucks. and i worry about women. i think about something like michelle dugger is probably the safest woman in america more men will be a lot willing to die like the early feminist, who died by herself with no food in the house.
and lionized after her death after women who were not there to help her passed to the other side. that's my comment. david.kay, guest: i was a single mom for many years. most difficult times of my entire life. and i had -- i felt so guilty all the time having to leave my boy, sometimes with day care -- i hate to even say this. i'm sorry, jason, wherever you are. having to leave him in kind of questionable day care. i didn't have family that was helping me. i didn't have the time i didn't have child support. i had to fight for that. it was so, so difficult. really cook so i don't even know how my son survi survived those years. now he's a great cook, i think necessity. it's so difficult to be a mother raising a child by yourself. the best single mom is still the worst mom because you have to be a mom and a dad. and we're not men.
we can't do both. and children need both. i will always believe that. and i've seen i want. i've seen the proof in my son things that are always going to be lacking in him because i just couldn't give him. >> you write in one of the chapters that you wrote yourself, women i talked to today often say their first love like mine is being a wife and mother. that is by god's own design. but today so many women must forego that dream to entered enter the work place. what are you saying using the words by god's on design? guest: if women could paint the picture of what they wanted. that they consider it a luxury, and that they aspire -- 80% of women aspire to have the ability to stay home. omen who are mothers and who are in the work place. they desire to have that. so if women can have that for at least a period of time while then ant that, then --
women should speak up about that. and our culture should be right too.r that because a woman's sovereign home is every bit as important and difficult as her job in the work place. so it should be about what she wants, not about what society tells her what she should want. that's the voice you try to want. in what women really and i don't care how you look at men and women, we have differences. women can have g -- babies, so far, men can't. some look at it as a burden. a nice long ake maternity leave and inmake less that year, that's worth it to me. those hours, my children, i have five of them, are worth every penny i've lost in the work place. to me, it's a cost benefit analysis. women should make that choice. host: independent caller? caller: i think it's a good idea
liberal woman would rather abort their families. t's less we want to worry about. that's my comment. ost: to ron, florida, independent caller. aller: i'm a progressive male, independent. am i being heard? guest: yes, you are. caller: thank you. i have six children. i was a single parent also. your -- i'm curious as to book -- does it touch on the fact that women don't really want?what they because i found that through life, the majority -- i've been arried twice, the majority of women keep changing their mind. they don't seem to know what want?eally host: dead silence. guest: we're complicated creatures. i'll admit that. i think that the rest of the ladies here will admit that too.
complicated.e i don't know what i want to eat time.of the i don't know -- there's a lot of things we don't know. things.ggle through some but what we do know that we want, we're unwavering. my principles, my family, i will and die for all of them if i ever needed to. want, we're ow we unwavering. you can't budge us on things that are really important. things like food, i think i want mexican today. but i'm not positive. host: we'll go to bert, columbus, georgia, hi, bert. caller: y'all are the kind of love to love. i will tell you, real men, you know? is this -- y point when i was hurt in '91, had a back operation and had to have nother one in '95, so i couldn't work since then. and my wife worked.
worked for 20 years a trucking company. she ran the office. and then she was very good at it. and what she wanted out of me was the house cleaned, the -- the dinner cooked. our son, you know, clean and everything. and i was just wondering, do you have something in the book to talk about when the woman has to a stay at e man has home? guest: that's a freedom question. it's a very basic freedom question. and kudos for you for graciously kudos to that role and your wife for stepping up and accepting her role. that's what life is all about. that's what freedom is all about. that's why in the book "what we try to y want" eally address that flee freedom issue. before you have government involve itself in your life. ecause thank goodness, there's not a law, for example, that, you know, that that situation
that you encountered has to go a certain way. it should have been able to go your wife is you and determined it to go. and that's why that freedom -- that freedom quotient has to be the number one question. my husband was in the city, he would call it the litmus test. he said if there's a bill before me, i think about is it going to less ore freedom or freedom. i go with that. i love that. i have never forgotten that he said that. host: dave is watching in utah. independent caller. dave, you're on the air? caller: you know, i think verybody -- would have been really nice to know what your guest thinks, you know, what is love? there's a lot of distractions out there, politics, democrats, republicans, independents. but in the end of the day, i think we're all just looking for love. can you expand on what that means? host: who wants to tack that will? guest: are you a father? host: i'm so sorry.
didn't realize -- guest: for me, soon as i gave birth, for me, i understood what love was. and my husband -- i was remarried -- my husband is a rock. he is -- he's the rock when i'm he balloon that floats away a little bit. we complement each other. to me, it's love. it's never perfect. sometimes it's difficult. but it's what keeps me going. guest: i love that question. up. so glad we brought that we do address that directly in what women really want. we talk about love of god, country, love of family, love of freedom. we talk about how sometimes love is tough. just because you agree with someone doesn't mean that you a government policy to gift that person something, right? because sometimes the best thing you can do is say no. is say that's a really bad idea.
want that e you government intrusion in your life. i'm a home school mother school of five amazing adorable children that taught me everything i know about love for sure. but i can tell you there's a bill in the senate that gave money to home schoolers. and i thought, how great. paying all of these taxes for the public school. what i would like to have is a little bit of help buying all of these expensive schoolbooks, right? another mother came to me and she said, you don't want that. that's not the rule of government. if you choose to take your children home, it's a sacrifice, it might be a good thing. it doesn't mean that taxpayers for your ot the bill choices. so sometimes love is tough. and we take a look at culture, within our own country, we look how we subsidized single family homes, for example, and what that has done, economically, and even socially to those cultures that we have ubsidized, it hasn't been a gift. it truly has not been a gift.
sometimes love has to be very tough. host: speaking of policy and parties make, th debbie wassermann schultz as you know heads up the democratic national committee wrote a piece in politico magazine about the utopsy that republicans did after the 2012 election. and she knows that polls show the licans have not moved needle since then with women. she writes this -- the gop's trainings, and memos made one thing very clear, the party doesn't understand that female voters th has nothing to do with presentation, rhett rirks outreach, it's always the republican policies. olicies that would move them closer to equal pay for women, policies that would allow them vote,ercise their right to policies to discriminate against would nd policies that allow policies to get involved in medical decisions that belong between a woman and her doctor.
guest: republican women haven't get involved.to allow the men in their lives to take that role for them. but i do think that women are finally waking up on the republican side. and they're realizing that if take control, they can't wait for someone to do it for them. voices are starting to rise up. politichicks, we have -- our website, women across the united states write for us, they're activists. they're getting involved locally. they're learning. it's daunting at first when women find out what they need and how to get that. but because they think it's so huge. politics is enormous. t's difficult to know everything. you don't have to know everything. oom in on what you need and work on that. but -- but it is a matter of we're doing some catchup. women are trying to let the politicians know, though, that
heard.ed to be and it's -- they've been quiet for too long. guest: she's dead wrong about what she says about being policy. platform, s, read the the republican platform. it's called platforms in still let toes in the book. we think if women really take a look at the grassroots level, at the actual platforms of the party, it's not a policy problem. it's absolutely a publicity problem. the gop leadership and ann marie and i, our co-author, we on this on oncur what women really want. we're really tired of the gop elite thinking that they can cowher in the corner every time they're confronted. leaders.strong i don't care if they're men or women, that makes no difference. we want them strong, outspoken, not afraid to stand. and we don't want to worry about licking their finger and
ticking in the air and saying oh, someone is going get mad. the debt ceiling, the republicans cowher on it every time. going to shut it down, we got bad publicity. stand by the decision you made place. first all you have to say, american families, do you not have to pay our bills? guess what, so does the government. we're sorry it might be painful. don't you cut costs, we have to too? host: david in grand rapids, michigan. democratic caller. david, you're on the air, go ahead. caller: i just don't like the idea of other people saying what my daughter or my ex-wife or whatever can do with their uterus. that.ick and tired of it's our family dynamic. we get to decide. if my daughter decides that she doesn't want to have a baby, that's her decision. she gets to decide that. ent hasa that the governm uteruses isle about totally against freedom.
host: okay. ann marie murrell. guest: i don't want to pay for it. i don't want to pay for it with one penny of my tax dollar. you can believe in it. i don't, i don't want to pay for your daughter's mistake. i hope that never happens, i really do. columbus, ohio, sharon, democrat. caller: i'm listening to these women, they are talking for all women. they cannot speak for me. they're saying that oh we should abortion.or the we're not asking the government to pay for your abortion. that they saying is pay for men when the government should not help. they when we had the suffrage. they're talking for a lot of they're not talking for me. i work in a child care center. i see what happens. child man makes over --
care is taken from them. look at what's going on in this economy. i'm tired of people coming on and speaking for women, all women. i'm a black woman. guys going you through the same thing that i'm going through. do think you guys have to more research before you talk about women. you're talking about abortion. i'm from a different country. back there, you don't have the right. let me say this, women find a way to have an abortion. you guys have money. you don't believe in abortion. eople who have money will find a way to have it. women -- there's one chance right now. children.lady has two one of them has a challenge. she doesn't want to have another baby. guess what happens? the doctor says, we cannot do the abortion for you. children ffered three -- she is on
host: i'll have you jump in. guest: i appreciate the call. this is something we talk about a lot. olerance of other people's opinions. we don't mean to speak for every woman in america, nor would we. this lady didn't sound very tolerant of what we believe. we believe that's one of the fundamental problem about women's engagement in the processes is that we get angry. we can't have a civil discussion. that's what you do on your show every day. there needs be more of that, even-tempered, can we keep the for a moment.f it or we become the el motional women, the male-dominated feminists t the always talk about that wanted to label us. an ink we can have intelligent conversation without insulting each other and being intolerant of one another even if they're very different from us. ally, i happen ic to think there are children in society who end up unwanted, especially if abortion is not -- is not subsidized with our $1.5
day.on every but i also hope to speak a -- with t about my my -- in line with my talk. down's ed a child with syndrome at one point is slated with abortion. it's not a brag. he's the biggest blessing ever. it's him blessing our family and everyone he meets. but i'm glad that his mother made the choice to give him the opportunity at life. fundamental s a thing. it's a difference in perspective on constitutional rights. but i believe my son had just as much a right to be born as anyone even though he has down's syndrome. blessing. a huge you know what? i learn a lot from him. so just to disregard, you know, children with down's syndrome now more than 90% of them are aborted, i have a great big problem with that. and i have a be walking example in my life of why that might not be the best choice for all women. i you can't raise that baby, waited on a waiting list of 300
families to adopt my child with syndrome. there are families waiting for these children. give them up for adoption. host: rita, tampa, florida. republican caller. caller: good morning, i want to say thank you so much. i appreciate it. been a single mom for 19 years, you're right, it has not been easy at all. support, you t of know, from family. there were times when i just put my hands up and said, god, if you don't help me, i can't make it. but you know, almost 19 years i am. here ucf three weeks ago. it's just been by the grace of god. thank you for telling your story. because it is very difficult. want to say as an
african-american woman, i chose and have that child. i knew that i was not married. believe in the principles of god, but at that time, i didn't follow them. o when you don't follow the principles of god which is a man, a woman, married first, then come to children, we have to all suffer the consequences. you can just, at you know, go to the doctor and get a quick fix, that's not the issue.ke care of because meant mentally, emotionally, those things you've done to your body and you've taken an innocent life, it will stay withes you. the caller before us, i understand the plight. but here's the problem -- when you look back to see these women children, three, four first of all, they're not married. hat drives -- that's where the issue lies. when god said family, he meant usband, wife, and then the children. but we've thrown god out.
and now we think that we can do this all on our own. it's time for us to get back to the original plan of god and the original plan of marriage one life.one woman, for i will say thank you ladies for bringing out this book. thank you so much, god bless you. >> god bless you. >> ann marie? guest: you just spoke to my heart. we're going to talk about the caller before too. host: sure. guest: because i worked -- i worked sometimes three jobs. i'm not wealthy to this day. i hope to be some day. problems making money. it was never easy. tried to -- i wrote about it in our book, what women really want. it.i lived it was so hard and there was so much guilt involved. occurred to me personally to even get on food stamps. and i know i qualified. i know this for a fact. now i know.
enter my mind to ask anyone else for help because i had two arms, two legs. i could work, and i did. i did everything i could to keep us as strong and independent and healthy as i humanly possibly could. not ever easy. life was never supposed to be just easy. guest: it isn't. my background in psychology, as you know. in my first master's degree, i worked the entire time as a postabortion counselor. i can tell you what abortion does to women is the best-kept secret in this count are i. -- country. women are very traumatized by abortion. doesn't mean every woman. but you can't know. it's rolling the dice when you go in for that abortion, whether ended fe is going to be because of that abortion. for sure, one person is dying that day. very often the case that women -- and not only does it end up with suicide and drug abuse and other things, relationships end over it. even when abortion was performed
sake of the relationship, but it also ends up with repeat abortions. that's very unhealthy. we're learning now about the health consequences of abortion. it's not a good thing. body is not made to have that pregnancy interrupted. o i have great compassion for those women that i worked with during that time in my life undecided on ll these kinds of issues. i see the faces of those women and i believe the women have of lives and i believe it goes back to what about the talking whole time, greta, women have not been empowered verbally to do it.u can ann marie saying about the food stamp thing. someone told her she was going time.t through that but the message from media, culture, and our message from washington, d.c. often is, you can't do it. let us take care of it for you. we want that message to end. we believe king -- in strong, independent women who can make it. can't, we believe that's what charity is for.
host: as we wrap up here, who do the ee at the future of republican party. men or women, that fit within what you've written about here in this book. guest: good question. marie?nn guest: boy, that's tough. vice presidehaven't been a lot strong leaders in the republican party. i love ted cruz. a seventh generation texan. y ancestors came back three years after the alamo. i lived in california most of my life, though. i love ted cruz, i love his strength, his independence. luis gomer is from my district in texas. he's one of the feisty guys who to back down on any issue. he's fearless. mike lee. ones.are some really good ut right now --
host: any women? guest: oh, my gosh. host: gina? guest: yeah, there are. you'll see. there are some good women. and for president -- for especially, i personally choose not to inject that. but i will say this -- there is no way i'll sit idly by this time and let the another ns nominate crayon down your throat establishment dynasty-type candidate that we've had. they've had their time. i think they've had their run. it's time for a true maverick, someone who will stand up to the establishment. and i'm hoping and praying that this time around we can find that person who's going to be about we the people instead of about they the elite, they the lobbyists, they the political building.e capitol that's what i'm looking for in the candidate. the first time i find, i will hard core.d, they have to declare before i an decide who i want for president. host: for more from these
politichicks.tv. and their book, what women really want. thank you so much. >> thank you. host: up next, the phone lines where your thoughts on we began earlier today. what should president obama do about this threat coming from islamic state? and russia's aggression against ukraine. we'll be right back. >> it's 9:32 a.m. eastern time. you.pdate on the news for payroll processor adp said added 204,000 rs jobs last month. it's the fifth straight month of solid gains. job gains above 200,000 a month are usually enough to lower the unemployment rate. the figures suggest that the government's jobs report to be released tomorrow will also show solid increase but the adp numbers cover only private businesses. and sometimes diverge from the government's more comprehensive report. he u.s. trade deficit fell in 1y
lowest level since january as machines and semiconductors rose. said therce department trade deficit fell 0.6% in july d $40.5 sonably adjuste billion from $40.8 billion in june. exports rose in july pointing to the possibility secondnger growth in the half of 2014. overseas, the european central ank says it will start a new stimulus program that involves buying financial assets to salvage a weak economic recovery. the announcement came after the ecb said it had cut two key rates today. es the bank'sderlin determination to keep europe's weak recovery from going into reverse. the latestre some of headlines on c-span radio. >> here are highlights for this coming weekend --
>> we are back. we're going to return to our question that we began with this washington on the journal. what should president obama do about the threat of isis and ussia's aggression against the ukraine. we'll get your thoughts here in a minute. 202-585-3880. republican, 202-585-3881. independents, all others, 202-585-3882. you can join the conversation on twitte twitter@c-span wj is our handle
r join us at journalistc-span.org. president obama and david cameron penned an op-ed together times of london." in that, they write this. they accused the mill at that isis oflar time group of brutal and poisonous extremism. in the ts will weaken face of their threats. wrong.ill not be more countries will not be cowed by killers. he be be forthright in the defense of our values not least greater f world of freedom is a fundamental part of how we keep our people safe. the united e east, arab emirates called for a coordinated international effort to tackle the scourge of terrorism raising particular concern about the threat posed fighters. state president obama and the prime minister, david cameron, making an effort to build an
international coalition to go isis. ll military action is on the table. expanding, the crisis we see in iraq to go in to syria and target isis there. we want to know what you all think. how should president obama respond to this? is he doing the right thing? is more action needed on both isis and russia? front page of "the wall street journal" this morning has the putin sets out peace terms. this below the fold in the paper. russian plan would freeze kraine separatist gains, kiev ready to negotiate. that's what it says in "the wall street journal" this morning. the moscow russian president vladimir putin pushes a cease-fire ukraine that freeze gains set in the stage for the kind of partitioning moscow has used to tame other neighbors. r. putin said he and the ukrainian president said they
were very close on agreeing to a ng the nearly i five-month conflict. the leader proposed an end to the rebel offensive but a pullback of the ukrainian troops which would be a major concession for kiev. t of russia yesterday as news was made that there was cease-fire ermanent negotiated between the two sides. that fell apart. and talks are to be supposedly friday. on that is the same day that nato could take some action on russia's aggression. the president in wales right now for a two-day conference with allies talking about russia, isis, as well as afghanistan. john, in maine, an independent caller. what are your thoughts on president obama and what he should do here? isis r: my thoughts about is that we should do absolutely nothing. reason -- the the area is a muslim area.
we're not a muslim country. they don't like us. regardless of what they say, foreign aid, they hate americans. host: you think all muslims? caller: they believe in the koran and the koran, if you read it, it's pretty much a book about taking over the world and making everybody muslims. and 15% of them are fundamental, which means they believe the billion rally out of 1 $ 160 million s muslims in the world that believe in that format. we'll never be able to appease them people, ever. host: dan in los angeles, go ahead. caller: i kind of agree with the last caller. we actually -- i think by us iraq in the first place, we create more terrorists than we'll ever kill. so we can't actually kill all of these people off. we have to actually militarily do all of tually
this. we can change the mindset that we -- which we would need states ike uae and all of the other muslims countries to actually et involved and change the mindset of the radicalized muslims. so we can't -- we can talk about military action all day long. but we will never bomb our way out of this problem. we have to actually get other ike-minded countries involved to change the mindset. because over time, that's going to take a long time for us to do it anyway. host: bill, chicago, democratic caller. me?ler: it's i'm bill. host: oh, it's you, bill. call caller: oh, yeah. with ly thing we can do isis is slap them back so that the people who live there can take over and can maintain them. we do not live there. and as long as people are living in those countries allow
that to ions like flourish, there's nothing we can do. host: okay. guest: there's no such thing as us eliminating them. make sense. host: are you talk about a political solution? guest: it has to be the will of the people in those countries. host: bill in chicago, democratic caller. rom russia, from the financial belligerence s sets test. opening in the welch town newport is being recognized as the most significant in 20 years, if not since the fall of union.viet the crisis in ukraine and the broader threat of the belligerence will command leaders' attention. for weeks, nato administrators nd ambassadors have been hammering out a set of policies to unveil as the demonstration alliances resolve.
they have barely more than six p on agenda focusing on dreary issues. the question is do we need nato a number ofbate for years. ays alan riff kin, the prime minister of defense. vladimir putin has extended that debate. we have experienced for the first time in 1945, the a exation of one part of european country by another by military means. durham, north carolina. an independent caller. go ahead. a ler: i wanted to make statement in reference to, you know, what we should do with isil right now. so i'm a veteran. overseas in afghanistan. i'll tell you right now, you know, a lot of that situation it's set up is t hard from being
refrained from being much involved in that situation of the hornets nest stirred up by us. if you look back at ronald reagan, what he had to do with with the bombing of beirut, when out of there, that made hezbollah which is the same thing that's going on right now. a strategic strike out of boots on the ground, but using every trike capacity past this point to weaken it. i think that's probably the most effective -- they do pose a threat. certain nk it's to a level that can be it's more of a propaganda thing more than anything else. steer fear in the heart of americans. iraq the air strikes in are costing $225 million a month. you expand that to syria, you're talking about a lot more money. warrantsink the threat
the cost? caller: absolutely. people don't see the intelligence behind it. so that is far more costly than d right now and supplying the missiles that we kept stock pile of in the first place. host: your thoughts? i want to talk about is with the person if power, the nato, the mistake, any leader could ave ever done when he started -- he pointed his finger and say we might -- that was the first mistake. it should never ever been said. and this is horrible.
hould haveside later s an emergency meeting allowing ukraine to become a member immediately. meeting today in wales. the president is there. and tomorrow as well. "usa today" has the options that the leaders are weighing. president obama and talking aboutting ukraine. one thing is the quick action to countries of aggression. go er, hi, there, jeff, ahead. good morning, you're on the air. caller: hello. host: yes, go ahead, jeff. aller: oh, okay, one last call for jeff. caller: these two-countries and regions are different. russia has always had internal problems throughout the
years. and it's like vladimir putin, he don't play games like obama's been playing. there whether in with nato or on our own. he's going to strike back hard and we cannot win it given the state of the current economic station and how things are going in this country, we can't even keep our own borders closed and safe from people just coming in here. and he expects to go over there and clean house. to clean our own house first. independent john, caller. what do you think? bomb the should laboratory at mosul, iraq, ecause that's where they make chemical weapons for hussein. a very important thing because isis will use chemical anybody.against
that's where they would be made. the laboratory at mosul university. we should destroy it. host: keep taking your thoughts on how the president should isis and the threat of russia. 15 minutes left here. phone isning us on the jason plus, the energy and environmental correspondent with national journal and co-author -- six things to heads to hillary veg vegas. why is she heading to vegas? uest: she's going to be the keynote speaker at the clean energy summit in las vegas. crowd of peak to a clean energy stake holders, politicians, green groups, plenty of democratic supporters. host: why this energy conference. what is it about harry reid's energy conference that would attract hillary clinton? guest: in the past this has been a big haven for democrats.
her husband, the former president, has spoken there a umber of times, john podesta spoke there in the past. he'll be there today. al gore has spoken there. so this does affect a number of democrats and it's really just a spot to talk aboutish energy. host: so what are political and environmental analysts saying clinton's trip? guest: i think people are just looking to hear what she has to say. his is the first big speech she she's given on energy. past.poke about it in the but people want to see possibly specifics from her, which disappointed.ay be there's not a lot that she has to say here. think a loft people are going to be listening to hear some of what she said in the past on this tour, which has been a lot of -- the support for president
obama's clean energy plan, hopes agreement, rnational more firm international agreement at the u.n. summit in paris next year. and really just general support and-- for more clean energy action on climate change. host: we've seen her recently draw the line of distinction between her and the president on foreign policy issues. s it possible that she will draw some distinction between her and the president for the democratic base on climate change? certainly possible. i don't expect something like that to happen. she's been very supportive of energy t obama's clean plan, so far, especially the standards on existing power plants. in this tour, she's said a lot. she's praised action on climate change. i don't think there's any reason that she would stop the climb there. ost: what is energy diplomacy, what did she say about russia's
se of energy as a weapon against ukraine? guest: not familiar with what she said on russia. with regards to ukraine. spoken a that she has lot about, 14e wrote a chapter in her book about this. on the work being done international stage to reach an agreement on how to combat climate change. chapter on the work that was done in copenhagen. she's spoken a lot on wanting to see a stronger, more firm, more binding agreement that comes out of paris and any future international talks. host: what has she said about keystone e over pipeline and do you expect that to come up today? something you would bring up and harry reid -- reid's y leader harry energy summit? something a lot of people want to hear but won't hear most likely unless she surprises
everybody. she's dodged the issue so far on this tour. she was in canada as part of this tour. and really refused to answer the questions. she said it's something that still needs to be considered. and has really left that decision -- she doesn't have to comment on it. to see her xpect comment on it as much as some ould like her to come out and say she's against approving a pipeline. host: the energy and environment correspondent with "national journal" wrote "six things to watch for hillary in vegas today." thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: the 2016 contenders, "the new york times" this morning chris ew jersey governor christie and the speech on mexico trip, he lays out vision renaissance. governor chris christie of new jersey offered a prescription called a north american energy renaissance in an expansive speech calling for an end of the 40-year ban on
l of ts, natural approva pipelines between the united states and mexico and a construction of a keystone canada to the gulf coast. the governor travelling to mexico city with many is part of that this his effort to beef up foreign credentials if he decides to run in 2016. we are getting your thoughts his morning about what president obama should do specifically on this threat of aggression.sia's tom in caldwell, idaho. independent caller. tom, back to you. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. in wondering if we live america anymore. we have many military men on the call today. they talk about bombing. we have an arbitrary sort of undefined enemy here. and i'm looking at the common defense powers in the constitution, never been a declaration of war. we don't even have a -- don't aggressor, we've never even been attacked.
we're operating on -- we're operating on fear. it's not something that america should do. and i think what it's all about be able to ty to prove this idea of perpetual war and it's ual peace divided more than ever this nation on democrat versus republican and the rest of this when we need to be looking much further. this is an american issue. independent texas, caller. what do you think? caller: i'm disappointed about things are e way being portrayed. we're giving too much focus on shouldn't.e we're putting fear on the people here in the u.s. when we should that. doing but government should be focusing and trying to get all trying arties together, to figure out what kind of isis -- what is the background, from? do they come who are they? and instead of prepares
start es here to go and another war and what have you. we just had two weeks ago people dying, dying by the thousands. and we didn't do anything about that. so now we are focusing on isis with one person, one american that died, yes. yes, i feel very, very sad about this. the u.s. should concentrate more about what's going on and i feel this is part of israel. israel is doing all of this. host: to get people to -- why would you think israel is involved with isis? call e caller: i think they're involved because they want to have syria. of the goland heights. control that area there. they always want people to -- host: what's your evidence of that?
caller: my evidence -- just it -- it just happened for a month and now it's gone. it anymore.r about host: go on to kelly in roan, georgia. a republican caller. hi, kelly. caller: thank you for taking my calls. of been listening to a lot the things today. many of which concern me and 'm -- one thing that i'd like to mention is many people keep bringing up about americans getting involved in war and stuff. i just like to take us way, way, actually o anyone imagine that the civil war had place.ken can you imagine the north and the south fighting it out.
evil.y was absolutely and the right side won. host: hyattsville, maryland. republican, hi, jack. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: my comment on this dealing with cultures that are just so old, thousands of years old. and we should take a long view also. our -- the big reason we're over that is because of the oil we're dependent upon. we need to take a 15-year, 20-year plan and get off of that dependency. we have coal, gas, engineers here, nuclear power. has great potential for this country. o -- host: what about the threat that many intelligence experts and embers of capitol hill have seen the intelligence say isis is a real threat to america. uest: i believe they're a real
threat. they're very far away. they have such big problems right here to deal with in this country. it's a shame that we have americans over there. americans is of fire here for the america's involvement. we're the world we sending more americans over there, we should do anything that we can, even work with isis momentarily, just to get all of our people out of there so that we are cleanly out of there. we don't have this big el motional push on us. -- emotional push on us. it could be that isis does something terrible in this country. when they attack this country, that's when we get involved. the where withall to that part regions of of the world off of the map entirely. host: you're saying wait until 9/11, thousands of people die. guest: you think that will happen again with the wakeup we had with 9/11?
i think our intelligence. if we spent $225 million a month for air strikes, let's be it that here on our border and increase our security. not saying become an the tionist to the rest of world, let's fortify ourselves to look after ourselves and get off of the energy again si as it's involved in the middle east. there are terrible atrocities africa all the time with the tribes and machete work that's over there. we seem very indifferent because we're not dependent on our resources from africa. host: moving on to ed, then, in bu waterbury, independent caller. ahead. caller: i'm so confused. learned through different sources that isis is used by the united states to take out assad in syria. this is something that the united states the united states overnment paid for and got out again.
the u.s. is threatened by the pipeline that russia is going to run through syria. all about energy. there in theg over ukraine, because russian energy is cheap going over to the western part of europe. they're afraid of russia's influence. so now, we have to take out russia because the rule gains strength and it's all about the dollar. the thing for america -- are you willing to let your children let these crazy bankers have their way, destroy western civilization for the dollar? we have to accept the fact that can'tgger world, the u.s. contain it all. and we can't keep fighting for the bankers. so what do you think? host: all right, we will have to leave it there. more discussion to come on this theother topics tomorrow on washington journal. we'll be back tomorrow morning, 7:00 a.m. eastern time. thanks for watching.
>> president obama continues his overseas trip today, attending the nato summit in wales where he is participating in meetings with other world leaders and focusing on the alliance role in afghanistan and the conflict in ukraine and the growing global threat from isis. he returns to washington tomorrow. we will bring you live coverage of ralph nader and grover norquist. they are both speaking on the topic of