he would tell me that under monday were murdered in cold blood. nine men, three women. each one had a family. a survivor of the massacre, john weaver, knows it's simple luck he is alive and they are not. here's what he told me. >> every one of those people who were killed were the nicest

people that you could know. they were great co-workers and would never harm a fly. and they were responsible, great people. government workers and contractors. and i just cannot believe that they were subjected to that violent, horrible death that they had. and that's the most devastating part. for me, you know, i got away. that's no problem. i got lucky. it was my birthday, and i consider myself the second luckiest person on that day because my friend was the first luckiest person. but all those other people, they did not deserve that death to die like that. and it was horrible. that's all i have to say about that. >> john weaver also told me he wants know how the navy yard killer got his security clearance to begin with and then held onto it despite repeated run-ins with the police and alarming signs his mind was to say the least extremely troubled. many people wondering the same thing tonight. at the table tonight andrew sullivan founder of "the dish" cornell belcher democratic strategist and pollster for the

obama 2012 campaign and an anne-marie slaughter. let's talk about the navy yard shooting. the whole issue of mental health in this country is something that we don't really deal with very well. continually it gets cut back on. obviously played a role somewhat in this. do you think anything will actually change? >> i think when you keep hearing in the budget debates cutting back on discretionary spending, discretionary spending. when you hear discretionary spending you should be thinking the safety net that takes care of people who say they're hearing voices, who are not getting care. it's real people who are not getting taken care of. >> it does seem, andrew, like there were a number of red flags. hindsight is very easy to look back and say. but it does seem like time after time you have this private security company which did this background check on this guy. they didn't even know -- they

weren't able to find out the stuff that we were able to find out in a matter of an hour or two about this guy. >> yeah. i think there are two things to say. one is that not all people with mental illness kill people. >> right. >> rarely. >> a huge majority do not. part of our problem with dealing with mental illness is the stigma that's still attached to it. there is nothing particular about the brain as opposed to other organs of the body that should make it less susceptible to being treated and looked at and monitored. i've been in therapy for a very long time. i think it's made my life immensely better. my mom has suffered from bi-polar disease her whole life. i've seen this very much up close. and i believe it's an urgent issue for us to actually as a society talk about it. and talk about it not in the context of a moment where someone is just killed all those people, because that again if we're not careful restigmatizes it. i think mental health has to be placed absolutely equivalent with physical health.

>> which it totally is not in this country. >> and it's an absolute tragedy that we're not doing it. >> one of the things that i think might be interesting is this time around with it raising to such a high level is perhaps it becomes part of the campaigns. we do have mid terms coming up here. and as you know -- >> it has not been an issue. >> it has not been a part of campaigns at all. mental health issues have not been atop the list of candidates talking. i think what you'll see now is that sort of being moved into that space and where democrats and republicans running for congress in this mid-term election in this off-year election i think the public's going to force them to start talking about mental health issues. >> if it didn't happen in the wake of the virginia tech shootings, in the wake of so many of these other mass shootings, and the kind of killings we see every day, i'm not sure that this incident is really going to spark change. >> here's the difference. democrats, if democrats have -- i think they can link and historically democrats have backed off the gun issue. but if democrats have the balls to link this issue and actually take on the gun issue, link this mental health issue with the

restriction issues i think they have a winning campaign strategy for some of these red districts. [ overlapping speakers ] >> but it's got to be. >> it should be a bipartisan issue. >> but it's not. >> it can be and should be. we shouldn't -- there is no reason why republicans and democrats should not be treating mental illness and mental health as a key part of our agenda. >> especially with so many of our troops returning from these long wars in iraq and afghanistan with some form of ptsd, needing mental counseling. i want to bring dr. drew pinsky from "dr. doctor drew on call" he joins us from los angeles. dr. drew, you say this guy was hearing voices, had runs in with the law time after time, was reporting mental health issues. you don't want to stigmatize it and say somebody like that shouldn't be able to be employed. because you want our troops returning from iraq and

afghanistan you don't want them stigmatized for having ptsd. at the same time, you don't want somebody who has severe mental issues, access to a security clearance, access to sensitive weaponry. >> this is -- listen. every point everyone's raising at the table is categorically valid and important to talk about. however there's sort of another layer to this, anderson. you're kind of tilting towards that. if you look at every one of the mass shootings that we've been reporting on the last couple years, connecticut or aurora, colorado or this shooting, every single one has been someone with access to mental health services. a lot of access. so the idea of this being an access problem is completely false. i'm telling you, as someone who's worked in a psychiatric hospital for 25 years, we as physicians cannot use our judgment to put down force and law to help people stay away from weaponry. if we had some sort of system, a simple law in place that would allow say two physicians or three physicians to evaluate somebody and fill out some paperwork and say you know what, this guy does not meet criteria

to have a weapon and that's that. we know. i guarantee you, anderson, when you hear the aurora, colorado story played out i guarantee you'll hear about a physician, a psychiatrist who desperately tried to keep this man from hurting himself or other people but she couldn't do it because we don't have the power to do so. >> you say this isn't a question of access to mental health counselling, but i think back to the virginia tech incident. and if my memory serves me correct, that person's parents that, shooter's parents, desperately attempted to get help for that kid. >> that's the point. >> but because of the law, unless that person wants to get help, the parents have no power. we hear this from parents all the time. >> well, no, they do have power if they follow physician's directive which is get a conservatorship over this kid. he's acutely ill psychiatrically. i've recommended that hundreds of times to patients families. >> don't you have to prove somebody is a danger to themselves or to others? >> listen. look at amanda bynes is now in a

hospital for an extended period of time because her parents had as you guys said at the table, the balls to go up and get a conservatorship over her. she is in care. britney spears is alive today because her parents got one. it takes a lot of courage to do so because you do threaten the relationship with that adult child. but when they do so, we know what they need to do. we need to be able to force people to follow direction to save lives. the problem here is that individual liberties are taking precedent over the protection of the community. and it's got to change. it's got to change. >> this is where it actually becomes into the gun debate, right? because the issue about the freedom to have guns is the drive for that is the same issue that says, you do not want a system that lets people declare other people incompetent and take over. so that's why i say i don't think it's a bipartisan issue you're going to get this pushback that says, you don't want a system in which it's really easy for people to say -- to declare others mentally ill?

>> dr. drew, do you buy that ptsd was involved in that? i talked to commander liphold yesterday who said he's sick of hearing people using that and that so many people have ptsd, the vast majority they're not becoming violent. they don't end up like this. >> anderson, you know i love you but i'll call you out on this one. i was yelling at my television yesterday because you kept bringing that up. i thought boy, the 9/11 issue did not make him better that's for sure but that doesn't cause this. this is psychotic illness. all the way back to 2004 when he became paranoid about the construction workers across the street and shot out their tires. that should have been identified then. this poor man died of his mental illness, too, let's not forget. >> yeah. >> i just worry. and there's always a danger of abuse. when people who are mentally troubled, who may not be capable of we may not be able to predict easily that they'll be of ham to others or themselves, are suddenly coerced into mandatory care. i mean, that is a problem.

i'll never forget watching my mother being taken away forcibly from us and put in a hospital and waving goodbye to her in a mental ward. those things are traumatizing things to happen to people. >> so you worry about the family or the state having too much power? >> actually right. my mother acquiesced and so on. in some cases it may be a muddled area and people can abuse those powers, too. and that's my concern. and if they have access to things, what i find also some friend of mine with ptsd and other people i've met with ptsd,they know they have it but they really don't want to seek treatment. they think they can hack it out. >> but also there have been penalties for their careers in the past if they do seek treatment. in the military as much as the military says they want to address this, we have seen in past years folks who do come forward with it, their careers suffer. and talk about that stigma earlier. there is still within the military think that's still that stigma. >> that's why some of the most effective policies and programs

out there are other vets who dealt with ptsd talking to other vets. >> this guy was hearing voices. dr. drew's the doctor, i'm not. but it certainly sounds like classic paranoid schizophrenia. he's worried about people following him, worried about people using a microwave to track him. this is deep mental illness. and part of what i was saying is what he called for the police and he says, people in the hotel next to me, the hotel room next to me are coming after me. >> right. in microwaves. >> exactly. what happens after that, right? >> they alerted the navy. we don't know where it went from there. that's one of the things obviously we need to learn. we've got to take a quick break. dr. drew, thanks for being with us. let us know what you think. tweet us on @andersoncooper. coming up, bill crystal joins us in our fifth chair in a moment.

♪ [ male announcer ] now, taking care of things at home is just a tap away. ♪ introducing at&t digital life... ♪ ...personalized home security and automation... [ lock clicks ] ...that lets you be closer to home. that's so cool. [ male announcer ] get $100 in instant savings when you order digital life smart security. limited availability in select markets. ♪ limited availability in select markets. make my mark i wawith pride.ork. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars.

just by talking to a helmet. it grabbed the patient's record before we even picked him up. it found out the doctor we needed was at st. anne's. wiggle your toes. [ driver ] and it got his okay on treatment from miles away. it even pulled strings with the stoplights. my ambulance talks with smoke alarms and pilots and stadiums. but, of course, it's a good listener too. [ female announcer ] today cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everything works like never before. [ coughs ]

i've got a big date, but my sinuses are acting up. it's time for advil cold and sinus. [ male announcer ] truth is that won't relieve all your symptoms. hmm? [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer plus-d relieves more sinus symptoms than any other behind the counter liquid gel. thanks for the tip. [ male announcer ] no problem. oh...and hair products. aisle 9. [ inhales deeply ] oh, what a relief it is. ♪ see who does good work and compare costs. it doesn't usually work that way with health care. but with unitedhealthcare, i get information on quality rated doctors, treatment options and estimates for how much i'll pay. that helps me, and my guys, make better decisions. i don't like guesses with my business, and definitely not with our health. innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

welcome back. news tonight about the gun that was use in the washington navy yard shooting. a federal law enforcement official says the gunman etched sayings into the shotgun like quote better off this way and quote my elf gun whatever that means. two days before the shooting the gunman spent a few hours at a

shooting range, paid $419 for a remington 870 shotgun. he passed a federal background check according to the store's attorney. this raises the usual questions about efficiency of background checks and gun control in general. invariably after these mass shootings comes the gun control debate and op eds on both sides of the issues. david fromm wrote "better mental health provision would help reduce gun massacres." in her op ed for the washington times emily miller argues there isn't a single gun control law that could have prevented the navy yard shooting. do do you think this will change anything in the gun control debate or the usual players come forward and say the usual thing? >> i don't think that's quite a fair way to characterize it. i think people have strong views on this, developed them over the years, evaluated the evidence. this won't change anything. the gun that was used is not a gun anyone proposed controlling

or the shotgun. >> cornell, do you think this will change anything? >> no, well, from a standpoint of congress, no. because there's not a body count number that you can get to where people who are dug in in an ideological positions are going to move on gun control. what's going to have to take is those voters in middle america and those voters in those rent districts, quite frankly, to get upset enough and say, you know what, 80% of us believe in stricter sort of restrictions on handguns. let's vote out the people who are in fact standing in the way. until that happens, no, nothing's going to change. >> you've done polling on this. my understanding of the support and for those who are opposed to it, those who are opposed to more limits on guns feel more strongly about it and are much more passionate about it than those who -- it's not a voting issue for is that true? >> in the past it has not been a top sort of list voting issues as in parts of the south. but i got to think when you see

the body count continue and continue and middle america, this does become an issue. and we have 80% of the american people sort of saying okay this is common sense. we need more restrictions. it will become a voting issue. >> we have a second amendment. this country is different than other countries. the passion that bill talked about is deep and real and about american liberty and freedom. i honestly think once you have this number of guns in a society the ability to bring them down is almost zero. and certainly in the process of trying to control them you're going town leash criminals with much worse a much greater ability to avoid the law in getting them. so i'm reconciled to it. i just want those who support gun rights to recognize that the cost of those gun rights are many, many innocent deaths. and just own it. don't pretend that this is some weird side product. it is the absolute -- no other country has this level of fatalities, and it's because

guns which are by the way the most cowardly of weapons, it was an act of cowardice. you don't have any strength to kill a woman or a child with a gun from a distance this. man was a coward as well as anything else. i think they have to only fact that yes, we believe it this freedom. and yes, the damage is dozens and dozens of children and innocent people every year and en >> it let me bring in emily miller, senior opinion leader of washington times emily gets her gun but obama wants to take yours author. do you own that? do you accept that? >> well, all i know is what happened on monday in the navy yard was absolutely horrendous, obviously. the things that i say, though, can be things that can be done. that's why i wrote my column today. for example, this shooter was in rhode island recently, called the police and said, i'm hearing aliens talk to me and i've had to switch hotels. the police should have put him in a mental hospital. if he had been put in patient mental hospital as dr. drew in the previous segment he would have been put in the prohibited

category. here's the kick. he was in rhode island. rhode island has one of this country's worst records for putting member health records into the fbi's nix check. had he been put into a mental hospital in rhode island wouldn't know about it. he still would have passed his background check. until this background check system is fixed which means mental health records put into the says system. look at fix nix.org. massachusetts is another horrible one that won't put these records in how are we supposed to catch these psychotic, schizophrenic people if records aren't being put into the system. >> am i hearing you correctly you are now for a universal background check? many of the republicans in the house are not. >> no, cornell, that's not the issue i'm saying at all. talking about the current issue we have in this country. it is illegal to have a gun if you've been adjudicated for mental illness or in patient in a mental hospital.

that's a good thing. none of us want crazy things having guns. look at what's happened. >> people who have mental illness are not crazy. there's a huge spectrum. >> this man is schizophrenic. [ overlapping speakers ] >> guys, stop. put a brake on this for a second. let's just not talk over each other. it just drives everybody nuts. >> i'm sorry. >> as i was saying -- >> andrew's point is anybody who is in a mental hospital doesn't mean you're crazy. go ahead. >> somebody who's paranoid -- i'm refer together shooter on monday. if andrew wants to protect him that's his own problem. someone who slaughters 12 people and is hearing voices is a paranoid schizophrenic is the definition of crazy or insane. and you don't need p.c. police to be stopping that. that's real and should be in a mental hospital. >> andrew, to emily's point and that's the point the nra makes, a lot of these states are not reporting all the information they could be reporting and should be reporting in order to make this background check that does currently exist more

effective. >> and of course i agree with that absolutely. my only issue there is i think we should be careful if we're trying to destigmatize mental illness to suddenly broadly call anybody with mental illness crazy, crazy people. that actually makes it less likely for people to seek help. it actually restigmatizes this. >> andrew you're talking about two different things. we're talking about what can we do to stop mass shootings which are very rare, account for according to congressional research about 18 people a year. very rare. but the one that is we have we talk about aurora, newtown, the nayy. all of them. >> they're increasing. >> they are not increasing. >> yes, they are. >> based on what facts? >> based on the fact that every year there's more and more of them. >> cornell, let's talk about real facts which is congressional research service a congressional arm of congress did a report in april, looked at ten years. there's no increase, there is no decrease. they are unpredictable. there's been about 500 people killed by mass shootings. throwing out these things does not make them to be true. >> the crs does say in that same

report that there's a lot of information we do not know about how people use guns and that they recommend -- and i don't want to misquote it -- but they recommend sort of not a database but gathering more information, actually studying how people use guns in this country which is something a lot of groups resist. >> andrew, that's true. i mean, anderson, that's true that they did say that. but back to the facts if we're going to just talk about facts on this show, it is estimated it's been an average of 18 people killed by mass shootings. when the president says this is increasing that is not true. what we do have is gun control. and all gun crime has decreased since 1991 by 40%. as gun ownership in this country has increased about 300 million guns in this country now, gun crime all crime has gone down. about 8,000 people killed every year by gun crime, a quarter of those are criminals, about 22 people, 18 people a year in these mass shootings. talk about gun violence --

>> can we talk about another fact? the other fact is what andrew said, which is regardless whether they're going up or down in this country, they happen every couple of months to the point -- >> no, they have not happened since -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> let her finish her sentence and then we can have an actual conversation. go ahead. >> it happened in norway and the whole country came to a halt. it happened in supreme courtland at dunblain. the whole country came to a halt. my kid said in high school today, oh, yeah, there was another shooting. what do we do about the fact that we now just accept as part of our lives -- >> emily is saying there is something we can do and that's report. again emily stop me if i'm wrong. but follow the current laws, report more accurately to make the checks that exist to make them more efficient make them work. >> this shooter wouldn't have gotten picked up because the police didn't actually do anything. >> he did try to buy a handgun which he was prevented. >> anderson that's not accurate.

this is a gun range i go to, sharp shooters. he did not try to buy anything than the shotgun he bought. something that vice president biden has encouraged quite a lot. >> the report i just saw said he attempted to buy a handgun but because he was from out-of-state -- >> that's not true, anderson. the "new york times" actually said he tried to buy a rifle. >> i'm not talking about that report. i'm talking about a handgun. we'll double check. >> not true. >> we'll double check. but clearly the background check that exists, it wasn't an issue because he bought a shotgun. he bought a shotgun and nothing came up. >> look, on studying this, there's been a ton of social science work on crime and on gun violence and what the efficacy or lack thereof of various types of gun control laws. james q. wilson great social scientist of mine maybe of andrew's, too, was not particularly a gun rights guy to start off. an open-minded social scientist. he studied this over the years and came to the conclusion most of these gun control efforts, in a country that starts off with

300 million guns, that's just a fact that we have to deal with, don't do much good. some of them have contrary -- have sort of perverse consequences. i agree with you on the mental health issue. everyone is now saying because this guy was clearly disturbed we have to report everyone who ever goes into a mental health hospital or seeks mental health treatment. i'm not sure that's a great idea. you would discourage people. people have episodes, get depressed, have treatment. 20 years from now do you want that to be in a database? i'm just saying these things as a matter of actual public policy as opposed to reacting to a terrible tragedy are much more complicated. >> i agree. i'm english. so i came at this about 30 years ago looking at this country. it's a different country. and it does place a premium on freedom in a way other countries do not. the result of that when you look at other countries, the rate of murder, fatal murder, not violence but fatalities, because god knows the english are violent as hell but they don't have enough guns to kill each

other. >> they don't have access. >> we nonetheless will have because it's a free country with a second amendment, we will have much higher levels of carnage through gun violence than any other country and we do. >> we got to take a break. and emily raised a good point about the misreporting that a lot of media outlets did, including well pretty much everybody yesterday. i just want to clear up, this is from the lawyer for sharp shooter small arms range where emily i think you go there. from the lawyer j. michael slocum. this shooter did not attempt to buy an ar 15 as we said from the range. he did ask about purchasing a handgun. no brand was specified but he was told he could not purchase a handgun until september for delivery to his home state through another federally licensed arms dealer. that's when he decided to purchase the shotgun. >> federal law you can't purchase out-of-state handgun. >> right. emily miller great to have you on the program again. up next a shutdown of the federal government looming tonight. house republicans say they're going to agree to fund the government going forward but not fund obamacare. president and democrats immediately denounced that strategy. so what's really going on?

we'll talk to our panel ahead. "ac 360 later" "anderson cooper

google, glossophobia,ophobia? or speech anxiety, is the fear of public speaking. ♪ this is preeminently the time to speak the truth frankly and boldly. this is no unsolvable problem if we face it wisely and courageously. let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is... fear itself.

(clapping) ♪

shots of the white house there. a battle is brewing in washington that could lead to a shutdown of the federal government. house republicans say they'll approve a bill that keeps the government running but cuts funding for obamacare. they'll seek new spending cuts

in exchange for agreeing to raise the debt ceiling. president obama and senate democrats of course say they will never go along with this. dana bash is our chief congressional correspondent. she joins us now. what is the latest on this back and forth? >> reporter: the latest is exactly as you've laid out. we are going to see a vote in the house tomorrow likely. more likely friday. and then the question mark is how the senate deals with this. because we know the votes aren't there. what has been fascinating to see evolve over the past several hours, anderson, has been this real split and a divisive, even bitter one among republicans, though. and what's going on is that a lot of this has been really fueled by senator ted cruz and people of his ilk in the senate saying they believe that the last chance to stop obamacare is through this vehicle, this spending bill. and he spent all of the summer recess in august going around the country getting a petition going on a bus tour to try to convince republicans that this is the way to go, even though

house republican leaders did not want to do this at all. and p.s., here we are and house republican leaders basically had to give because they couldn't find the votes to get this spending bill done without defunding obamacare. and now there's a back and forth because they think in the house that ted cruz is abandoning them. put out a press release today they thought it was sort of waving the white flag saying i can't get the votes here it's up to you. there are some really vicious back and forth going on. it's not a pretty sight. >> cornell, do you think the government will actually shut down? >> look, once upon a time you would think there was a reason center in the republican party could bring along the herd. it's clear right now that speaker boehner has lost control of his caucus. i don't me that in a nasty partisan way. if you look at what his caucus is doing how they're bucking him he's lost control of his caucus. so i have no idea. once upon a time you would say no because it's political suicide. even newt gingrich would say don't shut down the government.

but you have a core of tea party republicans, 40 plus of them, who have basically sort of taken control of the caucus and the establishment. so the reason people are kind of on the sidelines. so once upon a time i said no they wouldn't shut down the government because of political suicide. now i'm saying they may take the country over the cliff for ire ideological purposes. there's no telling. >> bill? what do you think? >> they're not going to take the country over the cliff i don't think. house republicans think obamacare should be delayed for at least a year and ultimately repealed. i happen to agree with them. they're entitled to send to the senate a continuing resolution that discontinues obamacare. they're entitled to send a resolution back that simply funds the government with obamacare. i think on this case september 30th there will be votes in the house. the house will yield because they can't practice -- there wasn't the popular uprising that ted cruz and others hoped for over august. they're entitled to send over a bill that embodies their views. stupid of the leadership to fight that so long. pre-emptively trying to gauge out how senate would respond.

>> why send over a bill that has no chance of making it? >> because they believe it that. they'd like to make a statement they control the house and this is how they would like the law to be. the house passes the bill it likes, the senate passes the bill it likes. they come to conference, the house will yield to the senate. i personally thought if you target particular parts of obamacare i think should be delayed you could make a good public policy case for delaying like the individual mandate. president delayed the employer mandate, why not delay the individual mandate. you would have a chance better politically. there's a tactical judgment. people add policies they wand to defund or not defund. there's fights over the levels. as a practical matter just personally -- it could end up in a shutdown obviously. but i think in this case they've worked it out pretty well. chaos among the house republicans, huge suspicion of the leadership among the activists, huge disdain for the activists. >> have you ever seen anything like this? >> sure. >> when? >> what do you mean?

this has been happening for a long time. the government actually shut down in 1995 in the good old days of bipartisan consensus. you know what happens if you elect a president of one party who happens to be believe strongly in what he believes in especially the signature legislation of obamacare then you elect in the next election the american elects to 2010 a huge number of republicans who campaigned against obamacare and then in 2012 they re-elect the president but leave republicans in control of the house you're going to get a lot of politicians who feel like i ran on a certain pledge, and i have the duty to try to make it happen. doesn't mean you go over the cliff but it means they have a rice to try to express their policy views in legislation. >> they do. that's called an election campaign. and they fought very hard for their position and they lost soundly. they lost the majority popular vote in the house as well. >> right. >> now and also, they've already agreed on a budget. they've already passed one. the debt ceiling they're not prepared to pay for something they've already passed. this is not normal politics. this is one rogue faction of a party vandalizing the

constitution of the united states and jeopardizing the good faith and credit of the united states which could be catastrophic for ordinary people already under enormous strain. these people care more about their ideological purity than the well-being of the economy or the well-being of americans. >> the other odd thing is they care more about their ideological purity than actually the health of their party. because yes, it shut down in the 1990s and it was suicide for the republicans at that point. >> you think the republicans will get the blame this time around as well? >> absolutely. >> dana i know you want to say something. >> i was going to say to andrew's point about the debt ceiling, that's a fight that's not too far away, maybe in the next month. it seems to me reading the tea leaves and watching the way the house republican leadership and those who are -- they feel like they're walking the plank on this issue are dealing with this, they're setting up a stage for the next fight. and republican leaders in the house in particular, they agree. they don't want to go ahead and

hold the debt ceiling hostage because they know what the effect would be on the economy. they saw what happened in 2011 with standard & poors what they did to the credit of the united states. they get that. so it really seems to me that they're trying to make a big deal out of the fact that those who were out there really fighting for principle are not standing on their principle in order to try to calm that 40 or so -- those 40 or so people in their caucus to say you know what on the debt ceiling the next fight which is just around the corner, stick with us. we want to do this time right way. >> dana, appreciate you being with us tonight. president obama writing a letter to iran's new president, a lot of people in washington cannot be happy about that. i want to get everyone's take at the table on that next right after this. a live shot of istanbul. years. we raise black and red angus cattle. we also produce natural gas. that's how we make our living

and that's how we can pass the land and water back to future generations. people should make up their own mind what's best for them. all i can say is it has worked well for us.

appreciate you tweeting with us. all that's been happening about syria it's easy to forget there's a new president in iran. appears to be very different than his hard line predecessor. he's exchanged communication with president obama. >> translator: president obama wrote a letter to me. in that letter he congratulated my election. and some issues of his interest

were raised in that letter. i responded to that letter. i thanked him and expressed the islamic republic of iran's viewpoint on the issues president obama raised in his letter. and some other issues. from my point of view, the tone of the letter was positive and constructive. >> well, the iranian president also said his country has never pursued nuclear weapons and has to plans to do so. he said he has complete authority to resolve questions about nuclear matters diplomatically with other nations. could it be that wind of change are actually blowing out of tehran? andrew, what do you think? >> i think that it's certainly a good sign. and i certainly don't think we should respond to it with knee jerk negativism. i think if we can get an agreement in which iran's legitimate pursuit of civil nuclear power is upheld, if their dignity and honor and pride are acknowledged, but if

we also get reliable international inspectors to go into these sites, then we should -- it's a great tragedy the enmity between the united states and iran. we should be natural allies. the people of iran love this country. as we saw in the green movement. and it is a great country and a great civilization. for it to be constantly put in this corner and demonized the way we have. now, this is not to say that obviously the revolutionary guards and khomeini have not revealed themselves and certainly did in 2009 as among the most brutal, vicious, nasty people. or that they are actually sending people to go and stoke the war in syria, which is happening right now. but it does seem to me that the election of rohani represented as the green movement represented a real mood among the iranian people they do not want this isolation any further. the economy is tanking, inflation is hitting higher and

higher levels. they have a real incentive to get a deal, and they are saying and telling us they do not believe in using nuclear weapons and they've certainly cooperated in controlling syria's chemical weapons. >> bill, do you buy that? do you believe there is something new happening there? >> no. i think there's a charm offensive, but i'll be the knee jerk negativist here [ laughter ] >> that's why we asked you here tonight. >> appreciate being here. no really if they say they haven't been pursuing nuclear weapons. everyone has been wrong. >> same old lies. >> that is a lie. i'm not saying that he couldn't put a negotiating position on the table that the americans will have to look at. but i think i'm extremely dubious that they will give up their nuclear weapons. >> isn't it a good thing, bill, at least saying now we don't want nuclear weapons and we're willing to talk? is that not at least a good breakthrough? >> not good if he says it to us and we believe it and incredulously. keeping calm and keeping everything. >> it's not actually new. because actually khomeini has

always said -- he actually issued an fatwah saying we will never have nuclear weapons. the issue here is weapons versus all the materials necessary to make weapons when they want them >> exactly. >> so in some sense, rohani is khomeini's man. >> he says, rohani says he has the power to actually negotiate. >> it he does and rohani is a pragmatist. and the change certainly in tone between mahmoud ahmadinejad is night and day. ahmadinejad would come to new york and talk about denying the holocaust and really embodied everything people are most worried about in dealing with iran. rohani is a much more pragmatic person. but the moderate, the real moderates were all disqualified from running in the election. so we shouldn't -- i think this is a great opportunity.

and i completely agree with cornell and andrew that we should engage and we should see i think the sanctions are biting. i think the younger iranians absolutely do want to be re-engaged with the world. there may be a deal here. but i don't think we should say this guy's completely different. because he's still representing the supreme leader. >> i think i have a sort of pushback on all these people criticizing the president now for even reaching out. >> pollster for obama saying that? i'm stunned. >> i'm actually sort of taking democrats to task. i called them balless earlier. but earlier in the '08 premium rest going back to the battles with hillary clinton, one of the predicates was we're going to do things differently part on foreign policy and all these decisions that conventionally say we just don't do this. we're going to stop doing this in order to sort of break some of these historical impasses. and him reaching out to the iranians first i think is something that is unique and i

think it helps move this along. >> and the effect of that talk in 2009 was that he tragically made himself i think -- i'm sure he regrets this now -- sit on the sidelines for ten days because he talked himself into being nice to the iranian ray gem when there was a genuine democratic uprising. one of the biggest mistakes. >> did not seek american support. actually urged us to keep our distance. >> it seeked american rhetorical support. >> no, it did not. [ overlapping speakers ] >> iranian dissidents i talked to would have liked the president of the united states -- >> we have a difference on that. >> the point is that america intervening hurts them. if they're seen as an instrument of america -- >> we didn't intervene in the greet muffment is doing just great in iran right now. >> it's not our fault that we didn't. but cornell is right. in the inaugural address in 2008 he said we will extend our hand if you will unclench your fist. his point was, and he is right, either with syria or with iran,

you can't do a deal if you're not going to talk to people. and in this case, we have to explore every conceivable diplomatic avenue. because if we ever have to use force -- >> have we not been trying to do this? has this administration been force? >> no, we have. but bill, hang on. >> i'm not going anywhere. >> this administration has put together an incredible set of sanctions. >> and did it work? >> yes. those sanctions are biting. >> the nuclear program has been delayed? the nuclear program has been delayed? >> they are back at the table. no. neither was it under george bush. >> i totally agree. >> what i do think, though, they haven't just been talking. they've put together these sanctions and they are biting and there's good reason to think iran does want to explore the possibility. >> removing the sanctions? >> i would certainly keep the sanctions for now. >> but we should lift them if we get an agreement with them on inspection of the sites and a clear commitment that they are in favor of nuclear power. and the nuclear program could be just nuclear power. we should verify it, be

skeptical about it. but i think obama needs to do more than just accept this. i think he needs to make a risk, take a risk, do a gamble, really reach out for the iranians. this is his reagan gorbachev moment. if he was able to resolve this conflict, he will have transformed global politics. in a way that reagan did it. because this is the cold war we're now, in iran and the u.s. >> we have to break here. we'll have more from the panel when we come back. [ male announcer ] these days, a small business can save by sharing. like carpools... polly wants to know if we can pick her up. yeah, we can make room. yeah. [ male announcer ] ...office space. yes, we're loving this communal seating. it's great. [ male announcer ] the best thing to share? a data plan. at&t mobile share for business. one bucket of data for everyone on the plan, unlimited talk and text on smart phones. now, everyone's in the spirit of sharing. hey, can i borrow your boat this weekend?

no. [ male announcer ] share more. save more. at&t mobile share for business. ♪ at&♪ hooking up the countryess. whelping business run ♪ ♪ trains! they haul everything, safely and on time. ♪ tracks! they connect the factories built along the lines. and that means jobs, lots of people, making lots and lots of things. let's get your business rolling now, everybody sing. ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪

it's been that way since the day you met. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away.

ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. getting the right nutrition isn't always easy. first, i want a way to help minimize my blood sugar spikes. then, a way to support heart health. ♪ and let's not forget immune support. ♪ but now i have new glucerna advance with three benefits in one. including carbsteady ultra to help minimize blood sugar spikes. it's the best from glucerna. [ male announcer ] new glucerna advance. from the brand doctors recommend most. advancing nutrition for diabetes. it's lots of things. all waking up. connecting to the global phenomenon we call the internet of everything. ♪ it's going to be amazing. and exciting. and maybe, most remarkably, not that far away. we're going to wake the world up. and watch, with eyes wide,

as it gets to work. cisco. tomorrow starts here. vo:remember to changew that oil is the it on schedule toy car. keep your car healthy. cisco. show your car a little love with an oil change starting at $19.95. that's a view of the philippines. we want to talk about stories that caught our eye. that music is by "pet shop boys." andrew is obsessed you. were at the concert last night. aren't you a little old for this? >> no. >> i went to madonna three times so just throwing that out. >> please. they're filling stadiums across the world.

except the united states. >> what is it about the pet shop boys that you're so -- >> they're intelligent. they're funny. and they're sincere. and they are musical geniuses. i think they're as great as lennon and mccartney and will one day be understood and around the world are accepted as such. it's only this country. but look, i love them. and i was in ecstasy all last night. >> i'm sure. at the end of the show we try to look at stories that are kind of uncovered. we only have about a minute left. one of the stories i mentioned on the show the other night which you wanted to mention which is the treatment of general petraeus at city college in new york being harassed and screamed at on the street as he teaches a class for a dollar a year at the invitation of the administration. >> he's followed from class to class with people yelling at him. >> not getting a very strong defense from the administration. might be a stronger rebuke for these students or nonstudents. >> i don't think the administration can beat up on students in the streets of new york. >> screaming and yelling at

someone walking across the street to teach a class? >> what were they screaming? >> war war war. >> he did preside over a war in which we tortured people against international law. so i can see some reasonable -- >> i don't believe he was accused of doing that. you think? >> no. i think he controlled the war in which that happened. >> he didn't control the war. he was put in charge of the war in 2007. >> you think the torture was over by then? >> i'm not sure there was torture and i think it wasn't over by then. i think he was a great general and an impressive public servant. >> guys, good conversation tonight. >> thanks for joining "ac 360 later." this is for you.

♪ [ male announcer ] bob's heart attack didn't come with a warning.

today his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack, be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. man: sometimes it's like we're still in college. but with a mortgage. and the furniture's a lot nicer. and suddenly, the most important person in my life is someone i haven't even met yet. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. as you plan your next step, we'll help you get there.

the united states and around the world. tonight, a mother's anguish. >> aaron is now in a place where he can no longer do harm to anyone. and for that, i am glad. to the families of the victims, i am so, so very sorry this has happened.ser who has been by the of the shooter's mother all day today. also, you heard rick warren tell me this last night. >> there's no way a gun should ever get in the hands of a mentally ill person. >> tonight i'll talk to a woman whose life changed forever because of a disturbed young man with a gun.