Skip to main content

tv   Q A  CSPAN  November 24, 2014 6:00am-7:01am EST

6:00 am
i found myself after that very exciting campaign in which a sitting president was defeated, starting to watch congressional proceedings on television. i watched the house and senate. i would hear members of congress use phrases like "my good friend." being young and naive, i figured they actually were friends with each other. years later, i realized that wasn't quite the case. >> why did you come to d.c.? >> i wanted to get involved in politics. i was a political science major in college. i realized i wanted to do something with it. i liked doing politics, following it from a nonpartisan point of view. i thought about academia, getting a phd. i realized i was kind of a news junkie. i followed it all the time. that is when the internet was burgeoning. print newspaper still had a lot of clout along with television networks. i said to myself, i do this in my free time anyway.
6:01 am
i might as well try to make a living at it. >> how many different terms are in here? >> about 200 or so. >> some video i want to show you and have you explain. [video clip] >> i say to my good friend from north dakota, no. >> i thank my good friend. >> i would say to my good friend from wisconsin -- >> i thank my good friend from california. >> the act sponsored by my good friend from colorado. >> where did this start? >> this has british lineage. it comes from parliament hundreds of years ago. if you have seen the proceedings of the house of commons, they say "the right honorable gentleman." which has a similar meaning. it is kind of a thinly veiled approach to trying to be polite to somebody that you don't really care for. in the house of representatives, there are 435 members. a lot of these are men and women who don't even know who each
6:02 am
other are. it is kind of disingenuous. in the case of the senate, there is only 100. they probably know each other. they might not like each other but at least there is a better chance of them being acquaintances. >> you call these clichés. >> some of them are clichés. they are clichés among the political pack. when you hear members of both parties, democratic lawmakers, republicans, using the same phrases -- some of this is dictated by the rules of the house. where you are only allowed to say certain things. i think in washington they have become clichés. >> is there somebody in politics that is known for doing this all the time? >> so many of them. if you listen to a news conference by house speaker john boehner, nancy pelosi, the former house speaker, any of the other congressional leaders, you
6:03 am
will hear versions of this. whether it is american exceptionalism or my good friend or trying to lift the economy, or any such phrase. that is what really got me interested in writing this book. many of these folks have really successful careers before congress. they were a business executives, lawyers, doctors, military officers. in those positions, they had to exercise independent judgment, critical thinking, and i'm certain they didn't speak this way. >> i'm going to post some different phrases. acela corridor. >> that refers to the amtrak trains that run between washington dc and new york city. it is shorthand for the chattering class. those who are in the know politically, often political
6:04 am
operatives, members of congress, politicians, influencers. they tend to ride these pricier trains between new york and washington dc. sometimes it is just do do "a hit" on television, as it is called. you might go up for the day and come back to d.c. >> you know the trip from here to new york is about 2:45 -- the regular train is a half hour longer. but half as expensive. >> i think it is a status thing. to be able to say, i got there quicker. also, it is left unsaid by many of the people who take it but it is a more elite way of
6:05 am
traveling. this is portrayed particularly by critics, republicans certainly, who say, the media, the politicians, they are all working together for the good of the democratic party. this is the criticism you get from the conservative side. >> right under that is "the american people." >> this might come in second to "my good friend" on the house floor. if you did a word search, it might even come in first. you hear this from members of both sides of the aisle. the american people, one side wants tax cuts. the other side wants more spending. the american people want this, they want that. when it comes to house members, they represent about 700,000 people. they do not represent the american people. >> what is a real american? >> this is a variation of
6:06 am
american people. it is when officials refer to their constituents to say, they are not of washington. they don't spend time watching the halls of congress. they have "real jobs." sometimes this could be a pejorative. you are suggesting somebody's ethnicity is not a real american. usually, it is used as a positive. >> what is in the national interest? >> it is a similar type notion, to say my ideas are in the national interest. suggesting that the opponents are not in the national interest. i don't find that to be true. you get people of different persuasions who get elected to congress with all different ideas. i don't know too many who have actually not acted in the national interest. just a small handful who were convicted for corruption.
6:07 am
>> what do you think of politicians? >> for the most part, they mean well. they are trying to do the best as they see fit. i think the longer they get into office, the higher they rise in the leadership, the more protected they get. i remember when i was covering congress on the house side in the last decade, folks who were freshmen there who now are governors -- i used to be able to interview them all the time. they would speak pretty candidly. they come out of a party caucus meeting and they tell you what went on. now you have to go through layers of press secretaries just to get the same clichés and overused statements. >> what jobs have you had? >> i have been a political journalist in one form or another for most of my career. i started as a local reporter in southern california. i worked on the pasadena star news. i worked on the ap for a short time. i came to washington dc and
6:08 am
cover the house for a congressional quarterly in the early part of the last decade. i was in the house hall on september 11. i saw all of that up close. a day i will never forget. i moved on after that the magazine campaigns and elections, which covers politics, how campaigns are run, the consulting class, the business angle of politics. then i moved on to a start up which turned into politico. a dominant washington dc news organization. i was there for just about six years or so. a couple years ago, i got approached about a position in silicon valley and decided to try my luck at that. now i'm editor of an online site called politix, which is a news and discussion site.
6:09 am
>> at politico, what was your job? >> i had a couple different roles. i handled the opinion section. i oversaw a opinion pieces from members of congress, from think tanks, consultants, occasionally entertainers. we had a piece by barbra streisand at one point and steven van zandt from bruce springsteen's band. it was fun to be able to do a variety of pieces and get different thought leaders in there. the second half of my tenure, i ran something called "arena," kind of a cousin of the op-ed space. it was real-time opinions from political consultants, sometimes sitting members of congress. we would send out a question and get their response, just a couple paragraphs, post it, and there was a long string of opinion there. >> what do you remember being the strangest request you had? >> there are so many of them. >> when they call up and want to get their words in a publication
6:10 am
like politico? >> this is a variation of one of the terms in our title, washington handshake. the technical meaning of that is where you are shaking somebody's hand and looking over their shoulder to see if there is somebody more important in the room. we meant it as something larger. operators, people who want to be friends with you, our seemingly buddy-body when it seems like you can do something for them. once you are not in that position, you don't hear from them as much. fortunately i have not experienced that all that much. it is part of what you get in a position like that. you get all kinds of requests. you get requests for press
6:11 am
releases. members of congress -- i got this from higher-ups on capitol hill and we weren't going to do this. i think the most common form is from lobbyists who are trying to use opinion pieces to push their special interest. you didn't have to read very far into it to realize this was not in the "national interest." >> let's watch another video clip for some of the words. [video clip] >> what i hope to do is have a conversation with all of you. i want to have a conversation with you. i am happy to have a conversation about how we reduce our deficits. a conversation with the american people. >> this is one of the favorite terms of elected officials. president obama is particularly fond of it. i don't know that he uses it more than others, but he has the loudest megaphone so we hear it most from him. those are great examples of the
6:12 am
president talking about issues that maybe he didn't want to be on the front table. in the book, we talk about a few ones that are unpalatable. among them, when edward snowden leaked information about the nsa, etc. president obama said, we need to have a conversation about the trade-off between civil liberties and protecting the homeland. or, when the states of colorado and washington legalized marijuana, he said, we need to have a conversation about it. tragically, after the newtown, connecticut massacre in december of 2012, the issue of gun control came up.
6:13 am
knowing it was unlikely to pass, which it did not, the president said, we need to have a conversation about it. i'm paraphrasing. it is a way of deflecting something you don't really want to be discussing. >> the one thing that i hear all the time, people say, we must have a conversation on race. my reaction is, we talk about race all the time. what would the conversation be like? >> that is the reaction that you often get. when eric holder, the attorney general first took office, he made that statement about the u.s. being a "nation of cowards." people were afraid to talk about race. i think that brings up some very important points. what would there be to discuss about it? also, a conversation doesn't mean action. it doesn't mean passing a bill. a conversation can mean any number of things.
6:14 am
>> "throw under the bus." >> this is a term in washington, finance, hollywood, when somebody is no longer of use to you. they are an easy scapegoat, to throw under the bus, when they can no longer help you. people get fired, this is what they sometimes say. you hear this on capitol hill when somebody loses a leadership election and they were told the votes will be there. that was one of the more challenging terms because it is fairly common. we have to find a new way to get at it. it took some thought and effort. >> how about "strawman?" >> this is when you create a false image of something. when you say, my opponents say x, y, z, but they are not actually saying this. you get elected officials from both sides of the aisle who do this all the time. president obama has done it, george bush triggered an entire associated press story about all the strawmen he was setting up.
6:15 am
what i think was a sign of progress in politics, when you have more women involved, you have straw women as well. there were some accusations about hillary clinton telling stories about sarah palin that didn't exactly check out. it seemed like she was sort of setting up a straw woman. it is now expanding across genders as well. >> do you have advice for people when they watch politics? should they have this book sitting by their side? >> that would be one option. i would say, put together a mental word cloud or start writing down the terms and see how often they say the same things over and over. then you can discount a lot of that. watch what they do, not what they say. you have all kinds of highfalutin political rhetoric. not often what they do is what they say. >> chuck mccutcheon does what? >> he is a longtime washington
6:16 am
dc journalist who has been the co-editor of the almanac of american politics, the co-editor of congressional quarterly politics in america. he has written several other books on his own. he wrote a book called "nuclear waste disposal in new mexico." he wrote a middle school book on climate change and how to teach it. he has some other works as well. we are longtime friends. we worked on the hill together. staking out meetings, covering news conferences, trying to piece together what happened. that is how we have known each other. >> where did you learn how to write? >> i was always interested in reading, not just at the content of how stories or articles were written, but the form they took. i was one of those kids who actually read the encyclopedia. i would look up old politicians
6:17 am
or cities, or whatever it might be. when the internet really blossomed, this is a cliché in and of itself, but it was like a light went off in my head. i didn't have to lug around books or go to libraries. i could find much of the same information. that really informed how i wrote. it led me to watch certain styles of writing. i never wanted to imitate anybody but i would take a piece of this, a piece of that. i was a politics major in college, where you had to put together different articles, papers, etc. >> what is "the ask"? >> when you are a lobbyist, somebody in a suffocated -- supplicated position, you have to ask for something. politicians who ask for money, some are better than others at this. if you are a sitting member of congress, you have to raise thousands of dollars a day just to stay competitive.
6:18 am
even if you have a seemingly safe district, a challenger can, along and tell their potential supporters, this man or woman is vulnerable. it is part of the job. many of them don't like to do it, but if you don't you are probably in the long line of work. >> what is the alternative pronunciation of the word " washington?" >> what is "warshington." this is something you hear from people who grew up in mid-atlantic states in the 1930's, 1940's, 1950's. it may have to do with a speech affectation. former house speaker newt gingrich sort of pronounced it that way. even though he represented georgia in congress, he grew up
6:19 am
in pennsylvania. not quite mid-atlantic, but same region generally. some people have ascribed other motives, to put the war in washington, some alternate meeting. like a lot of terms in the book, you can't nail down precisely where it came from. >> do you ever catch a politician using it on purpose? >> i'm sure it has happened before. i see it mostly as a speech affectation. others, you get saying it on purpose. >> or democrat? >> this is what republicans do to pretty much insult the other side. this goes back to the mccarthy era or so. he would say, the democrat senator alleges this or that. some people think it means the democratic party doesn't
6:20 am
actually represent democratic principles. other people think it is because it has the word "rat." all that matters is it offends sitting democratic members of congress. >> what is the best book you've ever read about politics? >> there are so many. that is another cliché. one that i would prefer to, that i would love to do something like this but probably never will would be, "what it takes" by richard kramer. he spent years on the campaign trail leading up to the 1988 presidential election. you had a wide open field on both sides. on the republicans, you had george h.w. bush, bob dole and several others. on the democratic side you had jesse jackson, joe biden, others. he followed them around for years. he realized he didn't work for
6:21 am
the new york times or the wall street journal. he took a back door to get to know who these people were. he started talking to their friends from elementary school, middle school, folks they had worked with in their careers, to find out who these people actually were. a wonderful piece of reportage that i can't imagine having the time to do or the resources. maybe someday. >> about 1000 pages? >> it takes a lot of reading, it is like a doorstop. >> what are some of the other books you have read that you really like? >> again, so many of them. one i would say was -- the biography of president obama by david remnick, the new yorker editor which came out around the
6:22 am
time of his election. i think it was the fall of 2008. it was i think called "the bridge." it wasn't about the presidency, which hadn't even started yet. it was a similar approach where he went back and interviewed all these different people that had been part of obama's life and came up with some really striking revelations. another one that i would add, a memoir which i don't usually put in categories of books that i find useful, at least by politicians. this was by robert novak, the conservative columnist. i don't necessarily agree with all his ideas, but he wrote about how he got access to politicians. he wrote about how much money he made in various television gigs. it was fascinating to hear that candor. it is not something you usually get. >> i might have some more questions about your favorite books but right now, let's have some more archive video.
6:23 am
[video clip] >> we try to remain as happy of warriors for each other as we can. >> happy warrior, that is one that you get from both sides of the aisle. house speaker john boehner is particularly fond of that. we quote him using that same term in another context, during the partial government shutdown in fall of 2013 when he was asked about the solution. he didn't want to talk to the press, just said, i'm a happy warrior. it is often ascribed to hubert humphrey, the former senator from minnesota who was known to be jovial, amicable, wasn't a mean guy. he seemed to actually enjoy the art of politics, meeting voters and giving the same speech repeatedly. i think he's a good model for that.
6:24 am
>> what is a washington handshake? >> again, when you are acting insincerely. you are shaking somebody's hand, looking over their shoulder to see somebody more important in the room, somebody who can help my career, somebody who can give me money. it is a form of insincerity. the opposite is when somebody like former president bill clinton looks you in the eye, clutches your shoulder or elbow, makes you feel like the most important person in the room, and then goes down the line and does the same thing to the next person. a washington handshake is somebody who is not very good at feigning sincerity. >> have you ever done that yourself? >> i'm certain that i have. since writing this book, i try to be much more careful about that. not just shaking somebody's hand, even in conversation, not looking at my cell phone, etc. not saying i'm perfect but i have become more conscious. >> where did the term "waste,
6:25 am
fraud and abuse" come from? >> it is one of those terms that picked up in the early 1990's. when you start getting stories about taxpayer-funded agencies going on lavish vacations, when you have members of congress going on junkets, it is shorthand for bureaucracies in washington that don't act in the taxpayer interest efficiently. they are paying loaded salaries, wasting money. oftentimes, this is overblown. usually, when you say this, they are not pointing directly, just sort of generalizing. it is one that i tune out. it has gotten so overused at this point that i think it is devoid of meaning. >> borking? >> this goes back 27 years to the failed supreme court nomination of robert bork,
6:26 am
federal judge, by then president ronald reagan. it is the notion of going up against a judicial nominee or anybody else who has to go through the nomination process simply for their ideological beliefs. not because they are unqualified. judge bork had been a yell law professor. -- yale law professor. he was a sitting federal judge. he had sterling academic credentials. a few republicans who opposed him just didn't agree with his ideology. a lot of people say that really set the tone for what has come after. >> this video archive is not in your book, but i want to ask you about this. [video clip] >> thank you for your service.
6:27 am
>> thank you for your service. >> we thank you for your service to our country. >> thank you for your service. >> thank you for your service. semper fi. >> where did this start? this didn't used to be a term that was used. >> i think this is largely a post-9/11 concoction. maybe that is a bad word because you are talking about the military, who do deserve our gratitude. i found it funny that one politician is thanking another for their service. it is like telling a colleague, thanks for coming in today. it is a way of making you sound sincere and flattering and humble. but then going off in some cases and sticking a knife in the back of the person you are doing this too. >> it is an all volunteer military now. what do you think it sounds like to the military, when everybody says, thank you for your service? >> you really wonder about that. i think they find it very frustrating having to deal with elected officials.
6:28 am
in the military, you do what you are told. there is a mission, you carry it out, no questions asked. in congress, it is much messier. at best, you can try to cajole your colleagues. you can't compel anybody to do anything. i talk to military folks about how frustrating they find it. it is a different way of going about it but of course they are not going to say that out loud. >> you are the editor-in-chief of something called "politix." >> it is -- the parent company is a company called topix, where people go and talk about city council or local police forces. the idea was they wanted to start a discussion forum about national politics.
6:29 am
they wanted somebody from the d.c. beltway and that is how they found me. >> where is it headquartered. >> in palo alto, california. >> and that is where you live? >> i live a little bit north of there on san francisco peninsula. it is a very nice, temperate part of the world. i am fortunate to be able to go back and forth to washington and elsewhere. >> what do you say to the conservatives watching that say, he couldn't be in a worse place, out there on the left? >> i find it not as monolithic as people think. in silicon valley generally, there is a lot of libertarians. a lot of people there just want to do their business. they want to get funding, they want to grow their idea. they are not the least bit interested in government
6:30 am
bureaucracies. military folks, the culture there often clashes with the legislative process. it is very much the same in silicon valley, in the tech world, also in san francisco. it is strongly democratic but it is also one of the capital centers of the country to get major financial institutions. >> you get the prices are sky in a way is capitalism. for what is there is fear somebody who loves politics between washington and the san francisco bay area? california and are discussing politics day in and day out, on the weekends all e not speaking about fundraisers could do what of congress who thought, this pic about skiing or a
6:31 am
lake tahoe. the don't work hard they are just not as enthralled about seeing elected officials. senator who's on television quite a bit and i was given one on the plane who noticed it. >> topics is owned by who? by old news ned companies. >> how does that work and when did they come together? >> they come together a few times a year. >> when did they start the company? >> started around 10 years are so, it is all automated. stating just coming in
6:32 am
what they think, going on for days and months. the idea with politix is to have humans that editing the stories. i have certainly learned a lot, not just about writing but to put together headlines that will go viral and sell. i have learned how journalism you really need to push out your own content. is not only to write a good story. i am seeing this even in the new york like times. >> the school to another video with another memorable term. their honeymoon is over. honeymoon period is over, he could not longer doing what it could.
6:33 am
>> honeymoon is over. >> this is one of those cliches that goes back at least decades, the whole notion of a new ymoon for a presidential administration goes about 80 years back. got his 1983 he hundred days, he was working with overwhelming democratic congress and is easier. that has been this notion that when a new president takes he gets a honeymoon. has really re it been true, and it hasn't been true with the presidents i have watched. bill clinton took office he did not get much of a honeymoon from the republicans. president george w bush did
6:34 am
not get one from the democrats. and obama did not get one in 2009. of a fancy is more notion. even president gerald ford he an overwhelming democratic congress and immediately the set of fighting. he knew most of those guys. >> what is your favourite on a daily basis aside politics? >> sometimes sports. baseball play-offs that is fun to read. >> and inwardly read to keep up on politics. >> there is not one source. cannot really believe anybody, is not that the facts are not right is a chronology. is the angle.
6:35 am
the m still a subscriber of new york times, like to read it work of my coffee in the morning. read the late washington post, are going to politico. i like to go to other sites like politico wire. also read liberal sites. some do a really good job in analysing the races. in some kind of blind ideological away. then i will read over something like jennifer rubin's blog. read about california
6:36 am
politics, properly nine or 10 different sites throughout the day. >> you were advising a get a cian today to message out, what would be the number one place where people get a message out and get the rest of the media? >> i will say twitter has one of the most viral effects. course you only half 140 characters so you have to be very concise. say something candidly, i think is a pretty good tool to get messages out. really strange he t from south carolina,
6:37 am
had a quote from argentina and he announced on facebook he was going through with engagement and was not going to get married. that was interesting. there was a post from in other congress from south carolina, who after the disturbances on ferguson wrote about how it is wrong to fund programs for the military with equipment to the local police departments. he said i might reconsider this. book, another ur time is "gang". >> represents members of congress from both parties which team up together. once they got together for
6:38 am
entitlement or health care. a gang of 14 to ease the blockage of traditional companies. we spoke about opposing the somebody romeo and juliet situation in capitol hill. know who started first. together g of 14 came of the that members minority party or traditional nominees. >> more archive video. >> let me be clear. let me be clear.
6:39 am
>> in the present of the states use that phrase in some ways it sounds like a parent talking to the child. like lenny be clear, you're grounded you're not going out. in many ways it is an insincere way of talking. makes you wonder, what are they doing the rest of the time? what is the rule? having the rs to depth ceiling, ticking relation of all the deficits now to $17 ears trillion at this point. each year ess has to through and politically
6:40 am
efforts to raise the ceiling. onto 1995 there was a rule in certain at whenever a piece of legislation this ceiling will get raised automatically. it is like racing the limit on your credit card. >> what is the other rule? few years into the that ership is seemed formally or informally he and his team are willing to push for pieces of legislation which had the support of the majority of the majority. if only every majority the bill ns passed
6:41 am
democrats cried over this. 7 think there were getting cut of the legislative process. there were cases of variations of that were used. vote r times democratic were came along. john boehner he violated the hassard rule. when it came to government or the fiscal bill he told his republican troops, this is said and we're going to pass it. >> bradley fact? >> refers to the 1982
6:42 am
race ornia gubernatorial between tom bradley, who is and the american, republican candidate. bradley was shown to be on the going to be elected governor of california, on it didn't come out that way. many e is some debate like of these terms, they say he going to lose anyway, but of these een many a really fortunate term in modern politics is the inverse.
6:43 am
>> where are some other books? >> again, so many of them. to read ral i like political biographies of members of congress -- one recently was hrc. there was interesting to see her time at the state department had very good y access have the time here "game changer". >> i read from the first game
6:44 am
the next double down, when they were inside the campaigns. some of the drama behind the elections were sarah pailin and john mccain. hard mitt romney's people thought he was going to be elected president that he wasn't. more my several books, about the ronald reagan years in the 1970's. >> he had one about richard nixon. he's an interesting author, because he's a man of the left he writes a least in the first book, he's fairly evenhanded. bits of still very good
6:45 am
reportage. i also like a book about ronald reagan and the 1976 campaign. gerald ford almost won. he got some very deep information. >> was that a presidential memoir that you think got beyond the obvious? the robert ly, currie ones. at us in they came 2012, read that on a trip to time e where had a lot of on the trains. reading about american
6:46 am
politics, that redefines what political biographies should be. he could spend years, he would leicester texas and to discover where lbj lived. >> there is one more to go. >> yes. is amazing he spent over 40 years researching these books, and he barely got to the presidency. tragic death assassination. not recount the
6:47 am
events which have been told he spoke times, about the jeff k legacy and how it affected governments. >> we have 11 seconds. >> i don't offend everybody. want to personally offend. >> it as a way to prevent yourself from looking mean. go out and really stick the knife in the back. >> what is astroturfing?
6:48 am
>> when somebody speaks about the same specific issue and are supposed to be spontaneous, you know it is artificial. like the old astroturf, saw this old baseball stadiums. in means somebody artificially created. >> dark money? around means going campaigning finance rules trying to give the candidates trying nder the table or to hide it. trying to shield his actual donors are. much y and sweden have so direct campaign contribution. much you think -- who starts these staff, the media or the politicians? >> and the media start saying
6:49 am
the same thing over and over again. >> like honeymoon. obama ke in stages of the presidency, reagan fatigue i ever ow if voters have used that phrase. now that we are indebted to age with hashtags that false off. >> don't let the fed be the enemy. >> really discussing the art in the romise legislative arena. to present ronald reagan who said i would rather of what i want then go for hundreds and get nothing.
6:50 am
when you are in a legislative get ess you're not going to what you want, you have to pick your fights and have to know when to push and went to accept compromise. speaking about washington before, what is the san francisco values? >> often came for republican candidates as they spoke about extreme liberals. used in their view those who use illicit drugs or who are hippies and bands around parks. i don't think it is that representative of san you get nancy pelosi has often seen as the symbol of this. traditional and
6:51 am
conservative catholic, who has been married to the same man for decades. it is always k further but politics is not far. >> overwritten window. >> this is one of the concepts that came out and this book. once i started digging into research reflects to acceptable range of political ideas. became as a conservative is ught in michigan, it meant to denote those ideas which are kind of within the mainstream. you get those individuals who seemed to be outside the mainstream and are not part of acceptable political discussion like ron paul. when he was advocating for the federal reserve. somebody e left
6:52 am
barbara reid. she was the only person in congress to vote against the resolution of 911. more on ndividuals are the fringes, if you want to rise to the leadership you're better to stay in the courtyard. is comedian will farrell sinks on the what you write about. >> i would ask each candidate in a single word for his candidacy. strategically. >> that if something were popular culture really has introduced new terms into the political discussion. there must have been october
6:53 am
2000. -- al gore and george w bush. meant to represent what some say as inferior intellect. that is the case. that gets repeated endlessly. >> here is our last clip. vice ude commentary on the president dick cheney, what is the relationship between the two since you left? >> he lives in washington and we live in dallas, you miss your pals when you leave washington. a lot of people were there
6:54 am
for the eight years and i good friends with them, one of them is president cheney. i don't see him much. clip really sums up when you read them get along with somebody that much. it is a funny construction there by president bush. goes down to eney texas, it is not hard to see somebody in this day and age. and political context it is a can stand each e other but we have a casual conversation. really comes to mean a
6:55 am
peaceful person, in this day and age of terrorism, may be had for i saw counter-attacked the terrorism. lot in ot brought up a the post 911 years. when those who proposed iraq were seen as being violent and it is a complicated discussion. like the british prime the world war re i, 11 them to get more territorial. >> washington handshakes and a dog whistle? whistle refers to of people were waiting.
6:56 am
specific group when george w have is in office, we references to evangelical. cites strange austrian phrases, when they speak about protecting seniors which nobody is against. specific meaning about not cutting social security or any other entitlement project. >> if they want to read the they can buy vious it, if they want to get with your website politix. how do they find it? just on the internet, just google it.
6:57 am
and have your ws say. guest is david mark. very much for coming. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] coming up on c-span, your calls and comments on washington journal. at 8 pm c-span begins with a retired members of congress.
6:58 am
tonight on the communicators, funder of ceo fiscal note and technology which great outcome for legislators. down e can actually break a legislator bases and how they going to work for a certain bill. there is a lower opportunities for chinese lobbiers. her other people that they are most likely to vote for or the least. develop and a strategy to get the information that you need.
6:59 am
we look to provide all the not a crystal ball. being said, there is a analytics er from that would provide. you should deal to get to the answers you look for. tonight, on c-span two. >> this morning american university prof spoke about obama's immigration policy. and previous presidential orders. is an executive director for the homeless. and later, we discuss the do with tribal issues
7:00 am
like sporty mascots or the keystone xl pipeline. we take your calls but in the conversation on twitter or facebook. ♪ monday before thanksgiving. good morning. welcome to "washington journal." we will see a deadline in the enough for the iranian nuclear talks. in grand jury meeting ferguson, missouri on possible charges. some of thes on continuing fallout from the announcement by president obama on immigration last week, focusing on the border patrol. a boston editorial calling on the border patrol to c

32 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on