tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News December 20, 2015 12:30pm-1:01pm PST
questions or property stories at firstname.lastname@example.org. i'm bob massi. i'll see you next week. [ woman vocalizing ] . . . >> this week on "the journal," the republican presidential candidates audition to become commander in chief and it's not the party of george w. bush anymore. from isis to immigration to anti-terror surveillance, a look at the fault lines that emerged during tuesday night's debate. plus, congress avoids a government shutdown with a year-end budget deal. we'll look at the good, bad and ugly in this week's agreement. first, these headlines. live from america's news headquarters, rocket and artillery fire now being exchanged across the israel/lebanon border following the killing of a notorious
terrorists. hezbollah says an air strike killed the man. he took part in killing of four israelis in 1979 including a father and his two children. and was freed in a prisoner swap in 2008. the u.s. navy welcoming a new ship to its fleet. it's the "uss omaha" christened in mobile, alabama, where it was built. it's about 420 feet long and is capable of handling a variety of missions. it's the fourth navy ship to be named after the city in nebraska. i'll see you at the top of the hour for more news. welcome to "the journal." the republican presidential candidates audition to become commander in chief this week in their first debate since the
terror attacks in paris and san bernardino. and as the top nine contenders took the stage in las vegas on tuesday, some clear fault lines emerged in the fight against isis and u.s. intervention in the middle east. >> the people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away and for what? it's not like we had victory. it's a mess. the middle east is totally destabilized a total and complete mess. this is the biggest debate we should be having tonight is regime change a good idea? has it been a good idea? there are still people, the majority on the stage, they want to topple assad and there will be chaos. >> if you think a no-fly zone is a reckless policy, you're welcome to your opinion. how's it working so far? we have 250,000 syrians murdered, slaughtered, millions running around the world running for their lives, it's not working.
so as i looked at this debate, i saw a fault line emerging like this. trump, cruz, rand paul on one side saying we really want to stay out of most of these fights in the middle east. go after isis with bombing. you have kasich, christie, bush and rubio on the other side. what does this tell you about republican foreign policy? >> this is a divide, a split that's long been in the making. you can see there's always been a weighi iwing of the republica that believes the best policy is staying away from these where there is no good outcome. the bebadebate happened in vega. you heard that if you just leave the middle east alone, it will let you alone. the vegas rule applies. what happens there stays there. what you hear from people like governor christie and senator
rubio is an understanding that simply staying away isn't going to help us because these problems end up haunting us as they are haunting the europeans with a refugee crisis and rise and spread of isis. it's not really an option for american foreign policy to say let the middle east burn each other out and it would leave us untouched. >> you heard it from senator cruz in particular and donald trump is sort of there. you can bomb isis and that will take care of it and that will be enough. can you -- others say, sorry. you have to occupy the territory. not with american troops necessarily but with at least sunni arab allies. >> you put your finger on something, paul. there's been a false dichotomy set up between boots on the ground translating to two or three american divisions spreading across iraq versus
staying home, the question is there a middle way at this point? someone said it's time to focus on nation building at home. you know who said that? barack obama. and let's be honest. that's the position that those three candidates are espousing. obama is over there more or less carpet bombing or at least bombing the heck out of islamic state. he won't put troops in. some of the others are trying to find the way toward an intervention that suppresses islamic state. >> let's talk about the politics of this. could the trump, is the trump and cruz and rand paul position easier to sell? it says basically we can defeat isis without having to have any real major intervention. we can do it from the air. there is a sense that you can win without a big investment of men or material. could they be in the right track
politically in the republican primary? >> it is easier to sell. they are clearly hoping there are a lot of americans who still do remain so war weary given the post-bush years that that will be a popular view. and that's who they're catering to. the problem is that the electorate has changed. we've seen evidence of this. and the fact that you saw ted cruz go out and give a speech on his foreign policy ambitions is because he feels on the defensive on this issue. you have seen by the way ben carson who we haven't mentioned yet who just sort of not really had much intervention plan either saved from the polls and people not confident in his leadership abilities. i think that there is actually a lot of eagerness among conservatives to hear a smart plan out there for intervention that doesn't necessarily involve full-scale nation building but involves some sort of greater involvement. >> i want to get on this issue of dictators and toppling
dictators. that's another fault line that emerged. we don't want to do that. it leads to chaos. >> i thought rubio sort of stuck cruz on that point. cruz mentioned it. rubio pointed out that gadhafi was responsible and admitted he took down that plane over scotland and the bombing that killed u.s. marines. he made a distinction there. assad was supporting hezbollah and allowed improvised electronic devices to be shipped into iraq which killed american soldiers. >> what's astounding by what cruz said is that mubarak running a roughly okay regime and it wasn't a murder factory is in the same league as someone like saddam hussein or assad responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. i think senator paul put his
finger on something that's useful. a debate that is good that republicans are having now. whoever becomes the candidate next year when the debate takes place with hillary, the republicans are going to offer foreign policy and say what about iraq and what about iraq? republicans have to come up with an idea how to intervene in the middle east without bogging us now. >> when we come back, a split over surveillance spills onto the debate stage setting up a showdown between two republican front runners. who had the better argument when it comes to nsa data collection?
wanna take holiday decorations to the next level? use this. if you want to take holiday enjoyment to the next level, use this. aarp member advantages, the aarp credit card from chase and avis want to help you and your family enjoy more this holiday season with winning offers and exclusive opportunities for our members. that's what i'm talking about. visit wintheholidays.com and have a winning holiday season. tuesday night's debate tuesday night's debate revealed another rift in the republican party. this time over nsa surveillance. marco rubio took on ted cruz over his bill that barred the nsa's bulk collection of telephone records. >> it did two things.
number one, it iended the bulk collection of data of millions of law abide be citizens. the second half that's critical, it strengthened tools of national security and law enforcement to go after terrorists. >> this is not just the most capable, it's the most sophisticated terror threat we ever faced. we need more tools and not less tools. that tool we lost, metadata program was a valuable tool we no longer have at our disposal. >> two formidable debaters there. metadata didn't go over the bad guys but law abiding and if we don't collect those things, we have a better chance of going after bad guys. what do you make of the exchange? >> rubio had the better of that exchange. he pointed out, for instance, that the man that did attacking in san bernardino was for all we knew a law abiding american citizen and this is exactly why
we need those metadata tools. we would have loved to know who he was talking to in five years prior and made those connections and it may have given us a hint he was up to something no good. so what you see here is senator ted cruz got himself out on this limb months ago with this vote. he's now trying to make himself look like he's more of a hawk than really can be held by that vote that he put forward and i think you saw rubio exposing some of that. >> he was going with that vote last june to appeal to rand paul supporters when he expected rand paul to finally go out. rand paul also had the same position and rand paul -- i respect his opposition to it because it's consistent with his libertarian principles. this is what we knew he would vote for. he's consistent. what about cruz? >> what cruz is telling us is that usa freedom act which replaced parts of patriot act which is a stronger assurances
that we're not going after him as he put it the good guys and that we're focusing on the bad guys. it's not the case. one of the things it does is restrict the national security agency's ability to collect and store on its own premises instead of the phone company's large amounts of data. why is that important? before 9/11, after 9/11, we realized one of the reasons that attack happened is that the fbi could not speak to the cia and the nsa was constrained in records it was able to collect. we created a new apparatus, new legal authority so that you wouldn't have those walls between different agencies that would prevent us from being able to stop these plots in advance. senator rubio is right. should there be another 9/11-style attack, there will be hell to pay for anyone who put up wall between these agencies or made intelligence collection more difficult. >> go ahead. >> just to play devil's advocate on ted cruz's behalf.
we're involved in a political process. he's trying to win a set of primaries and the fact is there are republicans out there who are concerned about privacy. >> we hear them every day. >> we hear from them every day and ted cruz is trying to establish a strategy that appeals to those people. the rand paul voters. the problem is he has got to pay the piper if he gets caught off base and running a strategy that conflicts with positions he took in the past. i think that's the problem he's running into trying to bend reality at the moment into his political strategy. >> if cruz won the nomination, he and hillary would have similar positions on this. if rubio won, you would have a real -- or christie or bush, they would have a real contrast on this. there was also an exchange, kim, on immigration where the two, rubio and christie, went after it and -- rubio and cruz thinking he has advantage on rubio because of his gang of eight bill. rubio turning tables saying you offered on amendment to that bill which would have barred
citizenship for illegals here but would have allowed legalization. what do you make of that debate? >> this is what cruz wants to talk about. he rather talk about immigration. it resonates more with the base. his position about closing down the borders. he did get called out this week. there is all this video out there of him offering amendment back in 2013 to that immigration bill that would have provided legal status to undocumented aliens who had come in illegally. >> wait a minute. he said -- cruz said i meant that as a poison pill. i knew that could never be accepted. i offered that to kill the immigration bill. >> okay. well he will make that case. he's got tape out there, however, saying we need to make this path and make this work. i guess the question is he's putting his faith in whether or not voters will understand the legislative maneuvering that goes on in washington. >> okay. still ahead, congress avoids a
well, the last budget debate of the obama era officially came to an end when congress passed a spending bill and $650 billion package of tax cuts. that's avoiding a year-end government shutdown. joe looks at what is just in the deal. joe, i've covered a lot of these. they are always ugly. there's a lot of junk in there. but on the ugliness scale, where does this fall? >> probably somewhere in the middle. there's been much, much worse. there's a lot of good stuff in
here. you've got some important delays to taxes in obamacare and the oil export and a boom for american energy and permanent tax policy that will really help economic growth. >> the oil export ban is a big deal. it's 40 years to put in this policy and it's going to create new markets for u.s. producers. but down the road, this could really help the american energy production. >> yeah. especially since we have the base going now with fracking to produce a lot more energy in the united states. you have to do something with that. if we can make oil a primary export for the united states, they can only long-term produce more jobs for the u.s. >> joe, green energy subsidies for several more years. wind and solar, they are still
getting subsidies. >> they are in late middle age. part of the problem is, republicans were disunified about their priorities. that throws the power to democrats. >> they couldn't get 218 republican votes to pass the budget. >> or 60 votes in the senate. it will probably avoid some sort of crisis. >> what about the obamacare? some people say it's a tax on insurers and medical devices and on high-value health care plans, so-called cadillac tax. these are delayed now. some republicans are saying, look, this is a problem because it make it is harder to repeal obamacare down the road. do you buy that? >> i'm not sure i buy that analysis. these are really causing a lot of problems. the device tax, job innovation, for example, the health insurance tax increase premiums
this year by about 2% and the cadillac tax, the tax on high-value tax plans was causing vast disruptions in coverage that employer-sponsored coverage where most americans get their insurance. >> i can tell you, within our company, they are going to have to redo the health plan here and all companies across the country are having to think about that. this is actually, in that sense, helpful to workers. >> sure. i mean, some people call this corporate welfare. i mean, who works for these companies? it's most americans. >> so kim, what is the takeaway here for paul ryan, the new speaker of the house? how has he managed this process? i mean, the overall numbers and much of this was already baked in from the deal that john boehner had struck with president obama. how does paul ryan come out of this here at the end? >> it's not necessarily a knock on paul ryan, he couldn't get 218. the reality is, as joe alluded to, you always have a contingency of republicans who
refuse to vote for any of these spending bills. you almost always have to go to democrats. and in that regard, look, he managed to craft a bill that had significant victories, the oil export ban, the end of these taxes. he's also getting very rave reviews about the process and the degree to which they are being allowed to offer their views and amendments and input. so far, people have been very pleased with what he's managed to end this year so far. >> the paradox is, joe, because conservatives won't vote for any budget bill, you actually lose some conservative reform you might have gotten otherwise. >> right. it's sort of, what else could they have gotten if they were able to command the majority here? and there are a lot of policy writers they want to get in here. >> thank you, all. we'll have to take a break. when which come back, hits and misses of the week.
if yand you're talking toevere rheumyour rheumatologiste me, about a biologic... this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further damage. this is humira giving me new perspective. doctors have been prescribing humira for ten years. humira works for many adults. it targets and helps to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections,
including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com this is humira at work whei just put in the namey, of my parents and my grandparents. and as soon as i did that, literally it was like you're getting 7, 9, 10, 15 leaves that are just popping up all over the place. yeah, it was amazing. just with a little bit of information, you can take leaps and bounds. it's an awesome experience.
time now for hits and time now for "hits & misses" of the week. >> the bromance of 2015 definitely belongs to donald trump and vladimir putin. the donald has expressed his admiration for vladimir putin's intervention in syria and this week, the president of russia gave a press conference in which he described the donald as a bright and talented person and an absolute leader. and i think this is a couple that really deserves one another. i mean, donald trump knows a strong man when he sees one and vladimir putin knows a sucker when he sees one. >> wow. okay. joe? >> the federal aviation administration for requiring all americans to register their drones. these aren't predators, okay?
it's a new technology. a couple pounds used by hob hobbyists. the fine for not complying is $300,000. the faa, meanwhile, is notorious for having so many jobs they can't do any of them well. fine the faa for undermining innovation and refusing to set priority sg priority. >> dan? >> ben carson is falling in the polls, as we know. this week a washington columnist reporter wrote he's falling because of his race. now that he's declining, they are abandoning him. well, megyn kelly asked ben carson about that and he replied with two words. "that's nonsense." >> good point, dan. thank you. remember, if you have your own hit or ss, tweet it to us @j
us @jeron fnc. hope to see you here next week. hello. i'm arthel neville. >> and i'm eric shawn. investigators are trying to search for clues who put that big bomb that forced the boeing 777 to make an emergency landing. hillary clinton going on the offense in last night's third democratic debate looking past her two on-stage rivals and training her fire on gop front-runner donald trump. what it means for a possible general election match-up. plus, this -- >> the force is up