this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. today on the show, the battle over the border wall. tough talk on iran. less tough talk on russia. what does this all have to do with the mid-term elections? we will examine where american domestic politics meets american foreign policy. i'll talk to richard haass and gloria borger. also, ronald reagan famously called america --

>> a shining city on a hill. >> as america now lost its place as a beacon of freedom, even as a great nation. john meacham says you must look at the long arc of history to answer that question. he'll explain. and women in the workplace. the me too movement has uncovered a bluss abuses and women make 80 cents for every dollar a man makes. joanne litman joins me to discuss how to even up power and pay dynamic between the sexes. >> but first here's my take. the united states has reimposed sanctions on iran. but it is the only country in the world to do so. the other signatories of the iran deal, europe and russia and china believe iran is in full compliance of the accord and that pulling out would undermine the process that was working in keeping iran's nuclear program limited and peaceful. so will washington's movement

solo and isolated make a difference? in fact, yes. almost no company in europe will agree to do business with iran and risk its much larger business with the u.s. even more significant, very few companies anywhere in the world will do large transactions with iran because these are generally denominated in dollars which means they cannot take place with u.s. sanctions in effect and the u.s. government determine to oppose them. the dollar has been the global currency for a while but surprisingly its central role endured even increase in the last two decades. i say surprisingly because america's share of global gdp has declined in this period, despite that fact as was written in 2016, almost two thirds of the world's reserves are held in dollars. the reasons for this are varied. the dollar has a first mover advantage. it was the most important

currency when the great expansion of globalization took place after the collapse of communism and the entry of china and india into the world economy. like the english language which has become the global business, the dollar is the convenient common denominator for global currency transactions. the alternatives are weak and euro is dogged about concerns about the future and swiss frank represents too small to represent a reserve currently and china hasn't earned enough to freely float its currency. the unusual role for the dollar gives the u.s. enormous power. but with power comes responsibility. and it is troubling to see washington wield it in such an arbitrary and high ended manner. as was pointed out, nothing lasts forever, the pound sist sterli sterling, the reserve currency for much of the 19th century, started to be overtaken by the dollar in the 1920s, history

will not repeat itself precisely. you could end up with a few reserve currencies the euro and swiss frank all for example, european countries and companies are sieging at the trump administration's moves. they have begun to discuss ways to respond. china will eagerly step in to take on more and more of the trade and economic relations with iran since it can conduct its dealings without recourse to the dollar. iran will search for ways to free itself of its dependance on america's currency. the long-term cost of the trump administration's reneging on the iran deal, might prove far more consequential and negative than we now realize. let's get started. >> all american eyes were in ohio on tuesday as a state held the nation's final special election before the mid-term

vote in november. president trump's name was nowhere to be found on the ballot but the vote was seen as a referendum of sorts of on presidency as the november vote will also be. i wanted to take the opportunity to examine the importance of the president's foreign policy on the way he's being perceived by voters in this midterm election. immigration, russia, tariffs, they are all important issues that will help voters decide which way to vote. joining me now are richard has, the president of the council on foreign relations and the author of a world in disarray, american foreign policy and the crisis of the old order. an op-ed columnist for the "new york times" and author of to change the church. pope francis and future of ka tholism and gloria borger, cnn's chief political analyst. let's start with the russia piece. we have one more step in the strange part the trump

administration plays where the president cannot bring himself to say anything negative about putin but the administration quietly continues to sanction russia. >> yeah, i mean, you have this ongoing dynamic where if you just ignore donald trump, you would say that this was a fairly normal republican administration that is dealing with russia sort of in ways that fall well within the normal guidelines of bipartisan foreign policy. you have sanctions. you have criticisms and you don't have big sweeping deals with moscow or putin. and the latest example is of course the sanctions following the poisoning case in the uk. but meanwhile, trump himself obviously pines for a partnership, a grand bargain, daytant, with putin and famously can't bring himself to say anything negative about the russian president. this is continued for 18 months. >> you've been through four administrations. have you ever seen something

like this where the president seems at odds with his own administration foreign policy? >> you can ask that question about everything we've seen over last 18 months and the answer is no. this administration is shall we say a departure, both in policy and in process from all of the predecessors going back to truman. this is a radical administration, a fundamentally different kind of administration. the only thing i would say on russia and i know there's a view that a lot of the policy is quite traditional, it's just trump. i think that misses an important point. a lot of the specifics are tough. some of the sanctions, arming of ukraine and so forth. but but but. the big issues if you were putin, you would say you would be more than willing to pay the price they've been asked to pay given the hollowing out of the u.s. relationship with nato, given what the united states -- the trade war with the allies. the weakening of the fiber of the basics of post world war 2 american important policy administrations and the like,

this was a soviet goal, this distancing and driving a wedge between the united states and closest allies. that has happened to a significant degree. some of the specifics -- some of the lyrics are pretty tough. but the muse beiic, you've got like the music if you're sitting moscow. >> trum has been able to create this situation where the party is defined by hawkish foreign policy, by suspicion towards desperatisms and more people distrust nato than russia. some of the specifics -- but it's a sea change in republican opinion. >> totally. this is a party of trump now. it's not the republican party of old. trump has a 90% popularity rating with republicans. it is a personality that people

in the republican party who are true trumpers are attracted to. and they believe that whatever he says is correct. it is not richard has, but it is sort of this cult of trump. and they believe that he knows what is best. and so suddenly, there is nothing wrong with what happened in helsinki, even though we're not sure what happened in helsinki. but they believe that donald trump who wants to establish a good relationship with putin, will be able to best putin, because they believe that trump can be the great negotiator as he has been telling them and not only with putin, but with north korea, right? with kim jong-un. and by the way, trump feels the same way about the special counsel bob mueller. i'll sit down with him and i'll face him down and i'll win that one.

so there is this sense and not among all members of congress, i might say, there are a few, a few republicans who stand up to him and say it is not correct, but by and large, the party has shifted and it is the party of trump now. >> it isn't just -- i would say yes, it's trump himself, but there are underlying structural reasons for the shift too. the reason that republicans were united against the idea of the soviet threat for 50 years was that soviet communism was seen as a radical left wing ideology that was a global threat to american values and american religion and american capitalism and so on. and russia under putin shares as richard says some foreign policy goals with the soviet regime but it has a different idealogical position. it's battle lines are the border lands of eastern ukraine and crimea, not the center of germany. it's seen i think somewhat reasonably by a swath of voters less of a threat or a different

kind of threat than it was in the past and trump has accelerated that transformation away from mitt romney's world view. i don't think he's alone in causing it on foreign policy. i think trump's view of himself as this deal maker sits -- who's willing to make deals with hostile powers and stop allies taking advantage of us and so on. it fits well with preexisting currents in republican politics that iraq and bush and that failure brought to the surface. >> and also the fact -- >> we've got to take a break. i want to talk about two other fissures in the republican party. when we come back. how can we say when you book direct at choicehotels.com

you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com

♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to

[ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there.

we are back, talking trump immigration trade. richard has, this is another area where the republican party was always the party of free trade. the way you made trade deals when you were in government, you got democrat iblg technocratic elites to ally with republican house members because that was where the democrats because of the unions were always opposed to trade. now you have this extraordinary situation where you take polls of registered republicans and their 10 percentage points more suspicious and hostile towards free trade. is this a case where of what ross was talking about, where trump didn't reshape the republican party, he saw that it had already changed and jumped on that bandwagon. >> i think there's an interesting dynamic between trump and trumpism. if you look at previous trade votes, the degree of republican support had begun to erode. they were closing in on the lack of democratic support for free trade. and what i think it shows is

over the years that the pro free trade school didn't make the case for it, didn't show how it was good not just economically but strategically. and also probably didn't do enough for the loser and there have been losers from free trade because of gaining the wto and in part sometimes specific factories get pushed out. we haven't systemically done nearly enough in training in education and by the way we better get it right. because the problem as you know for all of this job loss is not trade for the most part. it's not immigration. both get scapegoated. it's increasingly technology, whether it's artificial intelligence or robotics or autonomous vehicles, that wave is coming. unless we get it right and put in place the training and education and social support and safety net, we haven't seen nothing yet when it comes to populism and nationalism. >> the thing that trump has decided to nationalize the midterms on is immigration. actually when i had steve bannon

do a long interview with me, he predicted it. he said trump will nationalize and should nationalize the election on immigration. is that a winning issue for him? it does seem to put the democrats on the consequendefen because they embrace policies like abolishing i.c.e. and sanctuary cities. >> the democrats played into his hands by saying they wanted to abolish i.c.e. they ought to stop it -- >> it was a powerful internet meme, i'm not kidding. >> it not work for them. immigration has worked for donald trump, from the first moment he came down the escalator and declared and said people are coming into this country and rapists and whatever, it works. he has promised to build a wall. he knows that he's not going to do that right away. mexico certainly isn't going to pay for it. but immigration has been one of his key issues and he is never going to get off of it because

it works for him. i do think tariffs is something that could boomerang for him. >> sure. >> because in the fly-over country in this country, people are going to suffer as a result of it and you see -- you see members from the midwest saying don't do this to us and now he's saying we're going to give you billions of dollars to get you through this, you know. >> he's doing what richard suggested. he's compensating -- >> he's created a wound and now he's self-inflicted wound that he's now sewing up. >> what do you think about immigration? >> i actually disagree mildly with gloria in that i think it's possible for trump to overreach on this. i think it was sort of a deeply underestimated part of the appeal at the beginning where people said oh, you know the country is pro-immigration and trump is speaking to a small minority and what trump realized both that there was a lot of general disquiet about

immigration rights that doesn't show up in polling and issue like guns where you had a coali motivated by it and the coalition on left was much more diffuse. but the stuff -- the stuff at the border, the child separation, the optics and so on, i don't think that part of it helps trump. abolish i.c.e. helps trump but being perceived as sort of cruel i don't think helps him. it's a sign in certain ways of his weakness that he has to focus on this to mobilize -- to mobilize to try to hold the house. but i think that there are -- there are actual disadvantages to him here even though it was certainly underestimated as a source of the support at the beginning. >> and the democrats still don't seem to have a grip on how to counter it. they do seem on the defensive. richard, i want to ask the cost of this in broader policy terms. one of the great achievements of american foreign policy over last 20 or 30 years, has been

this incredible harmonization, with two neighbors, with mexico long time contentious relations, you have the last five mexican presidents have been pro-american, pro-trade, pro integrationists and it seems we have very bad relations with our two closest neighbors, our two closest trading partners. can't be good. >> it isn't good. one of the great luxuries of the united states for decades now, we've been able to deal with the rest of the world and not have to worry essentially about our neighborhood. that is almost unprecedented in the history of great powers and one of the reasons we could be as great as we were at the relatively affordable level. we seem determined to do that. the spat with canada is preposterous and with mexico, trump is caught. he's so anty nafta, nafta turned out to be the best immigration policy we had by improving the economic conditions in mexico

far fewer mexicans were incentivized to flee and come to the united states. by the way, we want to prevent people now from coming from central america. if you don't want to deal with it at the border, we need to deal with it locally. that means helping governments deal with gangs. that's why people are fleeing. we should think twice and three times before undoing this -- i guess i call it free to strategic luxury of having good relations with both to our north and south. >> this is fascinating but we have to go. we'll have to pick this up another time. next on "gps", when most people think of the things that built the modern economy, they think of everything from steam engine to a -- my next guest looks at things slightly differently, we know to look at the gramophone, concrete and breaking mechanism on an elevator. why in the world? find out when we come back. ♪ it's so hard to believe

♪ but it's all coming back me. ♪ baby, baby, baby. all you can eat is back, baby. applebee's.

ancestrydna can open you to a world of new cultures

to explore. with two times more detail than any other dna test... you can get a new taste of your heritage. only $59- our site's lowest price ever.

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. steam engines, social media, what people point to when they

ask what made the modern economy, but the undercover economist looks at the subject differently and always puts a twist on any subject he covers and that's why i love reading his columns. his latest book called 50 inventions that shape the modern economy. tim harford, you have figured out what are 50 that shape the modern economy. actually, they are the fun ones, this is sort of -- not the steam engine or motor car, the ones that we don't appreciate, the ones we overlook the bar code or barbed wire or one of my favorites is paper. it's -- >> explain that. >> well, when i started working on this book, the 50 mentions, you must talk about the guttenberg press, the moveable type printing press, it was disruptive and the novel, the newspaper, all of this was made possible by the printing press. and of course that's true. but the whole point of the printing press is it's a way of mass producing writing and

there's no point in mass producing writing unless you can also mass produce a writing surface and that is paper. if you try to use a printing press on animal skin parchment or silk, technically it works but kplekly completely impossible. paper was a wonderful symbol for me of an invention that's very inexpensive and quite simple and it's disruptive and important because it's so inexpensive. >> the gram ophone, another strange invention. why do you think it defined the modern world? >> the thing is it's a lesson for us, there's a warning story here. obviously it's culturally important but the economic significance is that it changed who got what. >> for younger viewers we should complain -- >> it's a thing you put a needle on it -- and amplifies sound. >> that was the thing, it was the first way in which rather than sitting in a room listening

to a musician, listening to a band or or kes stra, you could get a recording of the muse you can amusic and play it in your own home. so suddenly you don't want to listen to the 12th best opera singer in the world. you could buy a gramophone with the recording of the very best. suddenly all rewards flow to them and people at the very top. despite the fact their skills hadn't changed and moral worth hadn't changed but their economic gains had changed and of course you can see obviously why that holds out lessons for us today, because silicon valley, for example, many silicon valley firms and uber and google, so many have managed to scoop up what was localized value and concentrate it in the hands of a few people. >> you also talk about the incredible importance of something people may not recognize which this one really strikes me crucial. the elevator. >> we take it for granted. we have absolutely take it for

granted. it's a hugely important mass transit system. all of these debates about mass transit, should we install light rail and buses and trains and do we invest enough in infrastructure? the elevator is a wonderful example of a mass transit system. people in cities all over the world use elevators every day. huge numbers of people, incredibly environmentally flish. imagine a 100 story skyscraper and chopping that into two story sections and then distributing them all over some office park surrounded by tarmac -- >> which is what the world looked like before, right? >> much of the world still does look like that -- >> right. >> a city can only go high, either residential or in office terms if you have elevators. >> absolutely. you need air conditioning and reinforced concrete and you need the elevator. >> and it ournz out it was a my indica complicated -- >> it's been around for a long time but the crucial

breakthrough was otis, of course the elevator guy, not the elevator guy, but the elevator brake guy and demonstrated in the mid 19th century at the one of the world's fairs and had a huge public demonstration. he was raised behind the crowd and behind them a guy dressed as an executioner with an axe who slices -- you can imagine the sense of doom and peril, slices the rope and the elevate falls half around inch. the crowd gasps and otis calls out all safe gentlemen, all safe. that's the public demonstration. now elevators are safe and the rest is history. >> tim harford, pleasure to have you on. >> next on "gps" there are many deeply worried about the future of the nature but should they be? jon meacham looked at the long arc of history. if you're one of those worries he has some good news for you.

♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ just say the words ♪ and we'll beat the birds down to acapulco bay ♪ ♪ it's perfect for a flying honeymoon they say ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪

but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? i knew at that exact moment ... i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors. it's not just picking a surgeon, it's picking the care team and feeling secure in where you are. visit cancercenter.com/breast

♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest.

whoooo. you rely on tripadvisor so you don't miss out on the perfect hotel...

but did you know you can also use tripadvisor so you don't miss out on the best price? tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the hotel you want for the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! so you can spend less time missing out... and more time paddling out! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com or download the app! now for good news of sorts, jon meacham is one of the finest historians i know, a pulitzer winner and and when he looks at america's current struggles and at the long arc of american history he says the good news is that we have come through such darkness before. that is straight from meacham's new best seller "the souls

america" the battle for our better angels. welcome back to the show. >> thank you, sir. >> the book was inspired by charlottesville and by the kind of ugliness we saw there. but you as a historian were able to remember while we did see white supremacists marching to charlottesville and more distressingly the president seeming to justify it. we've been there before and worse. >> we have. donald trump represents the most vivid manifestation of our worst instincts but they are instincts that are part of the national character. i think to act as though he is somehow a different thing all together let's the country and history off the hook. strom thurman segregationist platform he spoke in charlottes talking about how the integrated swimming pools would be the triumph of communism and that was 60, 70 years ago.

these moments come and tend to go and what we have to do is just really concentrate on how did moments of particular fear which can be so irrational make people lash out. what is it that we can address and hopefully move forward? >> the fear of the emancipation of blacks, for example, by the 1920s, had created a clue clux can that was so much more dominant that we realize. describe the klan. you talk about it in your book. >> and immigration. there was fear of immigrants and blacks and jews and vir you lent anti-catholic prejudice. three to five americans were members of the klan. 50,000 klansman marched down pennsylvania avenue without their masks and governors of oregon and colorado and texas and georgia were members of the klan. it was all about economic

transition, uncertainty and fear of the other that somehow or another, people that did not look like us or sound like us, meaning white anglo saxon protestants were going to take jobs and take over the country. we have been in these moments of transition before and ultimately usually with presidential leadership on the good side as opposed to the xaser batding side we've come through. >> you talked about how fear is often the facilitating factor, when you get scared and nervous, it's easy to lash out. you talk in your book about a case in some ways the most heartbreaking case because it's about a good man who did a bad thing. franklin roosevelt and internment of the japanese american. >> early 1942, pearl harbor has happened and attorney general of california, man named earl warren, some people speculate the brown decision was in some ways an act of atonement, not a foreign nationals american citizens. >> japanese americans. >> roosevelt caved to that.

i think we have to judge people on toe fatalty of their lives, many ways represents these competing impulses of kindness and cruelty and grace and rage. as most of our great leaders have. and my argument is not we've been here before so it's going to be fine. it's that we've been here before, how do we get through it? one central element, one common denominator is that the people themselves were relentless in saying this is not who we want to be. we may be who we are sometimes, but we don't want to be that. and if we can get to 51% for our better angels, that's a pretty good day. >> talk about though what is the process as you see it of sort of evoking those better angels. how does that one do in an atmosphere of fear? one of the things i wonder about, most of the time it's fair to say that the more

optimistic candidate has won the presidency of the united states. 2016 was a break. it was the more pessimistic candidate who won. >> this would be a very different conversation -- i'm not sure i would have written the book, if he had won the popular vote. that's a significant thing. i'm not saying he's not legitimate to put away your twitters, before you say that, but it is the case that this was a quirk. and she was a particularly weak nominee for a number of reasons. i think most people and i think you see this in the polling, most people don't want to be part of a donald trump america. a key percentage are willing to go along with this as long as there's prosperity and he's doing things amid the chaos that any republican president would do. the supreme court justices would have come from any republican president. the tax cuts would have come from any republican president. deregulation would have come from any republican president.

my sense is fdr once said there's something in the human psyche that cannot stand the constant repetition of a note in the highest scale. and i do think that and ultimately there will be a kind of breaking of the fever because his -- the president's cultural dominance is something that we genuinely haven't seen before. i know he loves that. but i do think that as jon adams once said, his son would do math so his son could do poetry. there's something in american life that does not want politics to be the defining characteristic of one's cultural life. and i think there's going to be a backlash to that. i also think the country in 20 years because of demography will look like barack obama's america than donald trump's. >> we're all grateful you studly history. jon meacham, pleasure to have

you on. >> next on "gps", the me too era has brought many issues that have long been swept under the rug. but problems between men and women in the workplace remain unsolved. my next guest former usa today editor in chief joanne litman has great ideas when we come back. this is not a screensaver. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪ who would have guessed? an energy company helping cars emit less. making cars lighter, it's a good place to start, advanced oils for those hard-working parts.

fuels that go further so drivers pump less. improving efficiency is what we do best. energy lives here.

omar, check this out. uh, yeah, i was calling to see if you do laser hair removal. for men. notice that my hips are off the ground. [ engine revving ] and then, i'm gonna pike my hips back into downward dog. [ rhythmic tapping ] hey, the rain stopped. -a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. -tell me about that dental procedure again! -i can still taste it in my mouth! -progressive helps keep you out there.

men and women and work. the relationship has been frout forever and the troubles can come to the floor it the me too movement. my next guest worked her way to the top in the male dominated media field. her last job was as editor in chief of "usa today qutd and long before the me too movement started she saw a major reason no progress was being made. she's written all about it in a new book called, that's what she said. what men need to know and women need to tell them about working

together. i invited her to come tell me what she learned in writing and reporting the book. >> joe ann, pleasure to have you on. >> great to be here, thank you. >> you must have been thinking about this book and writing it before the me too movement. did you anticipate some of these things? did you already sense them because you've been in the working world for decades? >> yes, i will tell you -- i started working on the book more than three years ago. the reason is because women have been talking about the issues that we face at work and i'm talking about things beyond not just the really extremes of sexual abuse, but the issues we face every single day. things like being marginalized, overlooked and underpaid and not given the same level as respect as the guy sitting next to us. the issue for me was that women talking amongst ourselves, it's half a conversation, at best gets us to half a solution. what we really need to do is

bring men into that conversation. that's the only way we're going to solve this. >> just so people can understand, what you're talking about as you say is not necessarily physical abuse and such bit a whole series of other kinds of things that are routine and that men don't even often notice but that women are deeply aware of. was it your experience when talking to women and you've gotten to a point where you've run huge organizations with hundreds of thousands of people, even people like you feel that sense of marginalization. >> every woman has felt it. and it's -- the research backs this up. for example, women are interrupted three times more frequently than men. the northwestern university actually did a study of the supreme court of the united states and found that the female supreme court justices are interrupted three times more frequently than male supreme court justices. this is women at every level and there's been research done that looked at the respect gap between men and women.

it found if you put a man and woman in exactly the same position, same title and same duties, that the man has more of a more influence over his organization and he has more power than a woman in exactly the same >> what works to fix this? >> so the good news is there are a variety of things that can be done that actually do move the needle. in terms of wage, for example, there are -- in the uk, legislation was recently put into effect in which companies have to report the gender wage gap. i think there is some movement here in some areas in the united states to do that. and some companies are doing it voluntarily. another -- you know, there are some very, very simple things that the men who i spoke to gave me some great tips. one of the television executives, for example,

instituted a no-interruptions rule in meetings for men as well as for women. when someone is pitching an idea, they get to finish. then, as he said, you can tear them apart afterward, but let them finish. what that does is it allows women who very often do not get their ideas across in a meeting to actually be heard. there's another thing that happens that very, very common. i always ask when i speak to live groups, i will ask for a show of hands among the women, how many people have ever had that experience where you say something in meeting, nobody hears. it's like crickets. then a man repeats it two minutes later and everybody turns to him like, dave, great idea. i always ask for a show of hands. literally, it's about 100% of women who have experienced this. it's so common. but that's another thing that in meetings, there's -- the women of the obama administration

actually came up with a concept that they dubbed amplification, which was very effective. amplification is a woman would say something in meeting, another woman repeats exactly what she said and gives her credit for it by name, which means that her idea first of all doesn't die on the vine and secondly that she gets credit for her idea. >> you've traveled around the world for the book. it seems to me like iceland was your favorite country. explain why. >> so iceland is the number one country in the world for gender equality, according to the world economic forum. i travelled to iceland because i wanted to know, first of all, what does that feel like? but what i found in iceland, what was fascinating to me was the difference between iceland and other countries and really what the most meaningful issue there is, that the men are as likely to see the gender gap as a problem as the women are. it is not seen as a female

issue. it is seen as a humanitarian issue. and the men -- >> you point out that men will very often describe themselves as feminists. >> absolutely. i would sit down with the burliest fishing boat captain, and he would bang the table and say, of course i am a feminist, as if to say, of course i'm a human being. there is no political connotation whatsoever to the word feminist. men as well as women also believe, by the way, that the world economic forum is wrong, that they are not equal. and their point is if we're number one, it just shows you how far we have to go in the rest of the world. >> pleasure to have you on. >> a pleasure to be here. thank you. >> and we'll be back. ♪

♪ keep it comin' love. if you keep on eating, we'll keep it comin'. all you can eat riblets and tenders at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. ancestrydna can open you to a world of new cultures to explore. with two times more detail than any other dna test... you can get a new taste of your heritage. only $59- our site's lowest price ever. i'm ray and i quit smoking with chantix.

i tried to quit smoking for years on my own. i couldn't do it. i needed help. for me, chantix worked. it did. chantix, along with support, helps you quit smoking. chantix, without a doubt, reduced my urge to smoke. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i don't think about cigarettes anymore. talk to your doctor about chantix. i don't think about cigarettes anymore. now t-mobile has unlimited for the rest of us.

unlimited for you. for them. for all. get unlimited for as low at 30 bucks per line for four lines at t-mobile.

does your business internet provider promise a lot? let's see who delivers more. comcast business gives you gig-speed in more places. the others don't. we offer up to 6 hours of 4g wireless network backup. everyone else, no way. we let calls from any of your devices come from your business number. them, not so much. we let you keep an eye on your business from anywhere. the others? nope! for a limited time, when you get fast, reliable internet, you can add voice for just $24.95 more per month. call or go online today. call or go on line today.

as some of you enjoy some well-earned vacation time, perhaps by the ocean this summer, consider this question of the week. what is the oldest color ever discovered on earth? according to researchers from the australian university. is it pastel orange, flaming red, pale blue, or bright pink? stay tuned and we'll tell you the correct answer. my book of the week is "the summer before the war." this is a gentle, sweet novel that describes how a small town in england reacts to its first female teacher on the eve of the first world war. if you like "downton abbey," you'll love this jewel of a book. the correct answer to the gps challenge question is, d, bright pink. take a look at this picture of a

color produced by the oldest living organism on earth. what you're looking at is 1.2 billion years old. it was pulled from beneath the sahara desert in west africa. an oil company was drilling for petroleum and sent rocks removed from the earth to scientists at the australian national university to study the molecular composition of the oil. the scientists extracted the pigments from the rock samples and were surprised to find bright pink colors. now, these aren't the remnants of prehistoric bright pink creatures. indeed, 1.1 billion years ago, there was no life on land. all life was microscopic and largely bacterial, but scientists say these bright pink pigments are the molecular fossils of chlorophyll that shifted from a blue-green color to a reddish hue after the organisms died and sank to the ocean floor. they were then preserved at the bottom of oceans that have long since vanished.

unearthed more than a billion years later and extracted in a lab halfway around the world. before you wonder what could be discovered from our oceans a bill years from now, some scientists suggest the sun will have evaporated all the oceans by then. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. hello and thank you for joining me. i'm ryan nobles if for fredricka wl whitfield. one year after charlottesville, they are bracing for protesters. they want to send a clear message, hate is not welcome. the wounds from last year's clash in charlottesville still remain raw. that's when white nationalists, neo-nazis, and ku klux klan groups