to say to fox and to msnbc, out, off, end, good-bye. >> now, he's entitled not to like the channels, but the chairman of the commerce committee should know that the fcc has no jurisdiction over cable networks. shouldn't he? well, that's it for this edition of "reliable sources." i'm howard kurtz. join us again next sunday morning 11:00 a.m. eastern for another critical look at the media. "state of the union with candy crowley" begins right now. two weeks after a political rout and week after an economic trip overseas, the president moved on a third front, convincing nato allies to stand by him in afghanistan. >> we adopted the goal of afghan forces taking the lead for security across the country by the end of 2014. >> and trying to get republicans to stand with him on a nuclear treaty. >> there is no higher national security priority for the lame-duck session of congress.

>> preparing to enter the second half of his term, president obama faces a new political dynamic and many of the same old problems. today, the nation's top military man, admiral mike mullen on matters of warrer and peace. >> i think it's critical that we move forward as rapidly as we can. >> then a million and a half thanksgiving flyers and the backlash over body scans and pat downs. we'll talk with the head of the transportation security administration, john pistole. >> the bottom line is we need to provide for the best possible security. and tsa critic congressman john micah. >> i'm going after reforming tsa. i can tell you that. >>'m candy crowley and this is "state of the union." nato set 2014 as the year they want to turn over all security in afghanistan to the afghan government. not soon enough for critics of the war, but too soon for others that worry that complex and risky tableau of politics and

violence in afghanistan may defy a solution for years to come. 655 coalition troops including 451 americans have been killed in afghanistan so far this year. now the deadliest year since the war began in 2001. joining me to discuss the way forward in afghanistan and more admiral mike mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. thank you, admiral mullen for being here. >> good morning. >> appreciate it. let's start with the 2014. vice president biden was on "larry king" earlier and he called it a drop-dead date. what does 2014 mean to you? what does that mean? >> well, i'm very encouraged by what happened in lisbon over the weekend. nato, 28 nations, member nations in addition to another 20 nations who contribute troops all affirmed 2014 for the time that we turn over security responsibilities to the afghan security forces. so president karzai and his leadership will have responsibility for his own country in terms of security. we think that's a reasonable goal.

obviously there's a lot between now and then. nato also affirmed that that transition would start in the spring. we don't know exactly where it will start, but i'm confident of that date -- >> surely province by province, is what you're looking at. >> we are. we're looking at district by district, which we expect will start in the spring. so we've laid out a plan. we think that's a good target, with an expectation that it can be achieved. >> well, when the vice president says drop dead, does that mean no matter what, u.s. combat forces will no longer be in afghanistan in 2014? >> just like iraq, clearly, there will be a transition point, and that's it, and we will still have forces there, and i think the president said it yesterday as well, to train and assist. but in terms of combat forces, that's certainly the plan at this point. >> and that's true for nato forces and for u.s. forces. >> that's correct. one of the agreements that was

signed this weekend was a long-term agreement between nato countries in afghanistan as well, all of this speaks to the long-term commitment to afghanistan, though afghanistan clearly must take the lead. >> and what is the footprint that you envision will be left in afghanistan after 2014? we know there are still 50,000 u.s. troops in iraq, although combat forces have been brought out. what's it going to look like in afghanistan? >> very difficult to know, candy, at this point what it would look like. it's too far off. clearly we have an expectation that it will be dramatically reduced from where it is now. we have almost 100,000 troops there today. but in terms of specifics, it's just too soon to tell. >> do you have a ballpark? could it be -- do you foresee that you might need more troops to help with the training and that sort of thing after 2014 than you'd need in iraq given the complexity of afghanistan? >> no, we really haven't sat down and done that detailed work right now.

there's just too much uncertainty between now and then to say, this is what the footprint size would be at 2014. >> let me try to get you to subtract how many forces are currently, u.s. forces are currently in afghanistan that you would categorize as combat forces. >> well, right now, there's a substantial number, specifically, i mean we've added upwards of 60,000 since president obama came in. the vast majority of those are combat forces. but we've also focused on establishing a large footprint in terms of training afghan security forces. but the vast majority of them right now are combat forces. >> i spoke with former president bush last weekend. we were talking about whether or not enough forces were sent to afghanistan to begin with. and he said something interesting. i want you to take a listen to it. >> what happened in afghanistan was that our nato allies turned out, some of them, turned out not to be willing to fight.

and therefore, our assumption that we had ample troops, u.s. and nato troops turned out to be a not-true assumption. >> would afghanistan have played out differently had nato forces stepped up to the plate with combat troops? >> we really, from my perspective, fought afghanistan for years from an economy of force standpoint. and i have said for a long time that we didn't have enough forces there. we didn't have enough u.s. forces and we didn't have enough nato forces. that was, from my perspective, because we have, we were heavily focused on iraq and i was literally looking at the resources that were headed in both directions. and so i -- as we have changed the strategy, focused, and gotten the resources right over the course of the last year, this is the first time we really are where we need to be in terms of executing a comprehensive

strategy. >> but would you agree with the premise that some nato forces did not perform in the way you expected them to perform in terms of combat? >> i'd actually come at it from a different point of view. we've worked with our nato forces, our nato partners over many years now, and, in fact, as we have increased forces over the course of the last year, they have also added an additional 10,000 forces. so while it was underresourced kind of across the board, now we have the resources and the unity in nato that we just didn't have before. >> i want to read you something, and i know you have probably read yourself, this came from president hamid karzai in an interview with "the washington post" where he said, "the time has come to the reduce military operations. the time has come to reduce the presence of, you know, boots in afghanistan, to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily afghan life." i have to tell you, when i read that, i thought, most americans would say, great, bring them home. >> well, i think what president karzai is expressing is his concern as the head of state of

a sovereign country, that he has and that his people have. and certainly, we recognize that, in terms of the challenges that are there. >> you know, we're over there helping him, and he's in the front page of "the washington post" going, i wish you guys would leave. >> well, i think, again, these are concerns that he raised over an extended period of time, each one of them, specifically. and as i look at president karzai and look back over the last year, certainly we have taken these concerns into consideration in what we've done. we need to do that. we need -- as the president has said, we need to listen to him. but he also needs to listen to us, and i think that's an important part of this partnership, specifically. president karzai is also, you know, some measure of him from my perspective is what he's actually done, and what we've been able to do, it's not just been the discussion or the rhetoric specifically, so i measure him in that regard from a partnership standpoint. and in that regard, he's been supportive, general petraeus has met with him frequently and very

recently, and walked him through what our plan is and president karzai is supportive. >> but a difficult relationship? >> well, it is one, certainly, that has had its ups and downs. no question about it. >> let me ask you about north korea. it is making some news today. they took a u.s. scientist through a, what he described as a very modern facility. they looked prepared to be able to enrich uranium there. what do you make of the timing of this and what is north korea trying to say? >> well, from my perspective, it's north korea continuing on a path that is destabilizing for the region. it confirms or validates the concern we've had for years about their enriching uranium which they've denied routinely and that when i look at this, i look at the sinking of the "ceonan" a few months ago where they killed 46 south korean sailors. you know, all of this is consistent with belligerent behavior and the kind of

instability creation in a part of the world that is very dangerous. >> and just on a scale of one to ten, how worried are you that this kind of continuing belligerence might lead to some sort of, a rather larger military conflict than some of the smaller ones we've seen? >> i've been concerned for a long time about instability in that region and quite frankly, north korea's been at the center of that. we've worked hard with other countries to try to bring pressure on them to have them comply. they haven't done that, and this, in fact, violates. the united nations security council resolutions 1718 and 1874. it violates what they said they'd do in 2005 with respect to getting to the six-party talks. so they're a country that routinely we are unable to believe that they would do what they say. >> i want to you stick with me for a minute. we're going to be right back. up next, what will it take for president obama to get a new

nuclear treaty with russia and the repeal of don't ask, don't tell? much more with admiral mullen we come back. re to talk to your dor before you begin an aspirin regimen. check with your doctor because it can happen to anybody. you don't love me anymore do you billy? what? i didn't buy this cereal to sweet talk your taste buds it's for my heart health. so i can't have any? if you can deprive me of what can help lower my cholesterol... and live with yourself. right. mmm, i worry about your mother. cry herself to sleep every night over my arteries, but have yourself a bowl. good speech dad. [ whimper ] [ male announcer ] honey nut cheerios tastes great and its whole grain oats can help lower cholesterol. bee happy. bee healthy. you know, if we had let fedex office print our presentation, they could have shipped it too. saved ourselves the hassle. i'm not too sure about this. look at this. [ security agent ] right. you never kick off with sales figures. kicking off with sales figures!

i'm yawning. i'm yawning some more. aaaaaaaand... [ snores ] i see your point. yeah. [ snores ] [ male announcer ] we understand.® you need a partner who delivers convenience. next time use fedex office. had a tree that bore the most rare and magical fruit, which provided for their every financial need. [ thunder rumbling ] [ thunder crashing ] and then, in one blinding blink of an eye, their tree had given its last. but with their raymond james financial advisor, they had prepared for even the unthinkable. ♪ and they danced. see what a raymond james advisor can do for you. i was living on welfare and supporting a family of four. after i got the job at walmart, things started changing immediately. then i wrote a letter to the food stamp office. "thank you very much, i don't need your help any more." you know now, i can actually say i bought my home.

i knew that the more i dedicated... the harder i worked, the more it was going to benefit my family. this my son, mario and he now works at walmart. i believe mario is following in my footsteps. my name is noemi, and i work at walmart. ♪ the president is playing against the odds in a head-on confrontation with republicans over a missile deal with russia known as s.t.a.r.t. he wants senate ratification before congress leaves for the year. the republican point man on the issue, arizona's jon kyl, pretty much blew up that timetable this week, writing in a statement, "when majority leader harry reid asked me if i thought the treaty

could be considered in a lame-duck session, i replied, i did not think so given the combination of other work congress must do and the complex and unresolved issues related to s.t.a.r.t. and modernization." president obama and russian president medvedev signed the treaty in april, if the senate does not approve it before leaving, u.s./russian relations will senate at a time when the obama administration is trying to bolster support. a two-thirds vote in the senate is needed to approve a treaty, meaning the white house needs every democrat and nine republicans on board, 14 if the issue spills into next year and the new senate. they are pulling out all the stops and a republican hero. >> this is a continuation of a bipartisan policy started with ronald reagan in this case. >> keep in mind that every president since ronald reagan has presented a arms treaty with russia and been able to get ratification. >> we'll get joint chiefs

chairman the admiral mullen's take on this when we come back.

we are back with admiral mike mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. let's move to the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. the president has said, he said it again at the nato meeting. there's an urgency, he wants congress -- the senate to are the any this treaty before they leave by the end of the year. we've had this treaty since april waiting to be ratified. we haven't had inspectors in russia looking at their missile facilities for a year. what is the rush now? >> well, i'm extremely concerned, just because of what you said. because we haven't had -- what we had before, a level of transparency, a level of predictability, a level of certainty with the russians and

between the two countries, this is an arsenal that is -- comprises over 90% of nuclear weapons in the world. that dependability in terms of verification, that dependability in terms of understanding each other is something we've had for decades in treaties before. >> you waited a year, can't you wait another couple months? i'm trying to figure out why this has to get done by the end of the year. is there some threat to u.s. security if it isn't? >> i think it clearly is a treaty that as time goes on, the lack of the transparency, the lack of predictability with the russians is something that i worry about a great deal. >> would it be fatal in some way for it to be done in february or march? >> again, i wouldn't describe it in any other way than i have in terms of there's a sense of urgency that i think, and there's an opportunity to get this done now, and from a

national security perspective, i really believe we need to do that. >> let me move you to don't ask, don't tell and the repeal of that. there's been some criticism that this big study you've been doing hasn't been about whether repealing don't ask, don't tell and allowing people to serve openly as gay or lesbian in the services, whether this survey you're doing is about how to implement it or whether or not -- or how the troops feel about it. which is this study about? >> very clearly, this was a study that was initiated to look at if and when the law changes, how we would implement it. key is, the leadership that it's going to take to implement it when the law changes, specifically. and to understand, as clearly as we could, the issues that surface from those it would affect the most. our men and women and their families. we've received that data, we are in the final throes of putting the report together. that's being done by general

hamm and mr. johnson. and that report will be delivered to secretary gates here by december 1st. >> and i'm going to assume that this finds a pathway to repeal don't ask, don't tell, simply because so many military leaders have said, look, it's time, and you have been quite passionate on this. i want to ask you about your marine corps commandant, general amos, who has been opposed to this. who has been opposed to gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. if the day comes where this is going to be implemented and you're going to lift that ban, can he serve effectively in trying to get this integrated into the services? >> i don't think there's any question he can. in fact, i've spoken with him as recently as last week, and he recounted a town hall that he'd had on the east coast recently, and he was very clear and very public to his marines. and he basically said that if this law changes, we are going

to implement it and we are going to implement it better than anybody else. so i have great confidence in him that if it gets to the change in the law, that the marine corps will implement it as he's described. >> and let me circle back around to one subject, afghanistan, because i would be remiss if i didn't ask you about this report that's coming up in december, about how things are going in afghanistan. i'm sure you have seen at least some preliminaries on it. as far as you're concerned, are things going well and do you think that will be reflected in this report? >> we've started to make progress. thing has have started to turn. it's fragile, it's reversible, particularly on the security side. the gathering of the data, if you will, has been ongoing for the last couple of months, and it is really a review that would look at how we are implementing the strategy. how are we doing? i don't expect any great strategic shift tied to this particular review, but it's focusing on having gotten all

the inputs right, how are we doing in implementation? and it's starting to move in the right direction. >> so you expect in the end when you've collected all of this you'll say, okay, we're moving forward. >> again, i'm not going to pre-determine what the review will, in fact, generate, in terms of outcome, but we're very focused on putting the information together right now, focusing on the strategy and seeing how it's implemented. and there will be challenges associated with that. this isn't just about security. because we've got development challenges, we've got governance challenges. how well are we doing in training the afghan security forces? which has gone pretty well. better than we expected, but we still have challenges. so it's a comprehensive review about where we are. >> chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mullen, thank you so much for joining us. >> thanks, candy, good to be with you. up next, is the tsa going too far with those full body scans and aggressive pat downs? we'll talk to the head of the tsa and one of its fiercest critics. ner!

[ garth ] we get double miles every time we use our card. and since double miles add up fast, we can bring the whole gang! it's hard to beat double miles! i want a maze, a sword, a... oww! [ male announcer ] get the venture card from capital one and earn double miles on every purchase, every day. go to capitalone.com. i wonder what it could be?! what's in your wallet? ♪ i'm gonna get my hair cut ♪ even if i have to cut it myself ♪

♪ i'm gonna get my hair cut ♪ even if i have to cut it myself ♪ ♪ but it makes me out of breath ♪ ♪ when you say ♪ ♪ love is a game -♪ a game for two -[ ring ] ♪ love is a game i want to play with you ♪ [ female announcer ] introducing the dell streak 5 pocket tablet exclusively at dell.com and best buy. ♪ my country ♪ 'tis of thee ♪ sweet land ♪ of liberty ♪ of thee i sing [ laughs ] ♪ oh, land ♪ where my fathers died ♪ land of the pilgrims' pride ♪ from every mountainside ♪ let freedom ring ♪ is a powerful force. set it in motion...

and it goes out into the world like fuel for the economy. one opportunity leading to another... and another. we all have a hand in it. because opportunity can start anywhere, and go everywhere. let's keep it moving. ♪ the right to privacy and the threat of terrorism have run afoul of each other at the nation's airports, setting off a white-to the debate which boils down to this -- how far is too far? a number of groups including the electronic privacy information center have questioned the graphic pictures from the new full body scan machines, now in operation in 70 u.s. airports. other critics say there is potential danger from the radiation. a recent cbs poll found 81% of americans approve of the scanners.

a finding somewhat muted by other figures showing that fewer than half of americans have even flown in the past year. some statistics say the flying public is closer to just 33% of all americans. adding volume to the uproar for many recent fliers is the alternative to body scans. the government refers to them as enhanced pat downs. >> i stood there, she said to spread your feet apart, hold your arms out, she proceeded to pat down my arms, my upper back, my lower back, and then she told me she was going to reach inside my waistband, which sort of -- you know, i got really uncomfortable. >> she basically touched me everywhere on my body, including up my legs, the inside of my legs, under my arms, across my breasts, around my breasts, everywhere. she touched me everywhere. >> i felt like it was a violation of, you know, my body, my privacy. >> tsa administrator john pistole was called before the senate commerce committee this week. >> do i understand the

sensitivities of people? yes. if you're asking, am i going to change the policies? no. >> john pistole is next. e. it's the only complete multivitamin with ginkgo to support memory and concentration. plus it supports heart health. [ bat cracks ] that's a hit. one a day men's. don't want to deal with a lot of flibbity-flab or mumbo-jumbo. sounds like you need to name your price. no gobbledy-gook? never. do i still get all the dagnabbit coverage i need? sure. we give you a quote

and you can adjust your price up and down to find something that works for you. ♪ this thing is okey-mcsmokey skiddly-doo. great! i think. diggity. oh! still not sure. the "name your price" tool. only from progressive. call or click today.

joining me now john pistole, administrator for the transportation security administration. thanks for joining us for what i know is not the most fun part of your job, so i appreciate it. i wanted to -- hillary clinton was on a couple of shows today, she's in portugal at this point with the president. she was asked about these new enhanced security measures and

she said she understands how offensive it might be. she says there is a need for the government to strike the right balance and to get it better and less intrusive and more precise. she was asked if she would submit to a pat down, and she said, not if i could avoid it. i mean, no, who would? she then said the government security experts are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public. in what ways are you looking? are you looking for ways to calm this uproar and change what's going on? >> there are a number of issues here, obviously, candy, that we are addressing. the most focused is on what the current threat environment is, given the current threat stream, being informed by the latest intelligence, we know that we face a determined enemy who has been adept at devising and conceali concealing explosive devices, bombs, that will target not only aviatio aviation, in terms of commercial aircraft, but cargo aircraft, as

we saw in yemen recently. so absolutely right the challenge is how do we balance the security that everybody wants, everybody wants to make sure they get to their destination safely with the privacy everybody wants also, how do we find that precise blend for each person. >> do you think you have it? >> i think it is situational, frankly. so for you, you may say, i want this level of security because i want to know that everybody else on that plane has been screened thoroughly. somebody else may say, well, i would rather manage some risk and say i don't want that thorough of screening, so i would rather take a higher risk. that's a public policy debate, for us in tsa, it comes down to how do we give the highest level of confidence to everybody on that flight that everybody else has been properly screened, including you and me. >> well, i'm asking the question because the secretary of state seemed to indicate in saying "we're rooking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public," seems to be slightly in conflict with your

saying, "i'm not changing this," what you said to congress. has something changed? >> so what i -- the construct is that tsa is really the last line of defense for the u.s. government in trying to keep the traveling public safe so we hope to be informed by all of the latest intelligence as i mentioned earlier, to make sure that we have all available techniques and technology to provide the best level of scrutiny, knowing that there's no 100% guarantee here. if all the other levels or layers of security have not worked and somebody literally gets to the airport and is able to get past behavioral detection officers, all the information we have, the travelers, the watch lists, all those things, if somebody is actually able to get to an airport with a bomb that is nonmetallic, so it's not going to alert a walk-through metal detecter, the ait gives us the best opportunity to detect that device. and everybody has the right to opt out.

if they opt out we want to make sure for example christmas day they receive a thorough pat down so they don't pose a risk to that plane. >> she seems to indicate that you're looking for ways to make these pat downs less onerous, to make these -- and/or to make the full body scans, the electronic strip search, are you looking for ways to make the pat down less onerous? >> let me say, very few people actually receive the pat down, in spite of all the public furor, very few people do -- >> sure but they have rights and we should care about them as well. >> i do and want to be as sensitive as i can to the folks and i'm very attuned, given all the concerns that have been raised. to answer the question directly, no, we're not changing the policies, because of that, because of the risks that have been identified because of the current threat, we have a travel advisory to europe now. we know through intelligence

that there are determined people, terrorists who are trying to kill not only americans, but innocent people around the world. >> so when the secretary of state says the government security experts are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public, you don't know what that is? >> no, i think what she's talking about is trying to be informed by the latest intelligence to say, how can we use these layers of security in the most efficient, effective way while protecting the privacy of people and blending that with the security that everybody wants. >> let me get you to look at a couple -- we have three sort of quick videos. i want to ask you, over the line, under the line, however you want to look at it. >> sure. >> here's the first one. these are from the airport, obviously. so, that okay? >> that would -- yes, that's okay if it is a result of this person alerting some way through an alarm on a walk-through metal detector or the advanced imaging technology machine. >> next one. this is a hand obviously going inside the pants.

is that okay? >> that's okay around the belt line. what we're doing here, candy, just so people are aware on christmas day with the underwear bomber, what we're looking for here is -- you notice the officer with the gloves on, those gloves will then be tested for explosive trace residue, so it's not simply a matter of physically determining whether there's something in the belt or in the waistband, but is there some explosive trace residue that can be picked up and determined, again, to prevent somebody from getting on a plane like abdulmutallab did on christmas day. >> okay. i want to talk to you a little bit about that, but here's the last one. is that okay? >> yes. clearly, it's invasive, it's not comfortable, it really comes down to what is that balance between privacy and security and without profiling, people have talked about, well, why don't we profile, of course, we don't here that in the u.s., but we use all the latest intelligence. we have watch lists.

we know about people who pose a threat to aviation security against those who we don't know, so it's that balance between privacy and security. >> >> something from the president of the allied pilots association talking in general, not just about pilots who said recently there's absolutely no denying that the enhanced pat-down is a demeaning experience. do you agree with that? >> i agree it is more intrusive than it has been. >> is it demeaning? >> it really comes down to the person. i've talked to a number of people who have said, this is exactly what we need to be doing. it is thorough. that's what i want. i want thoroughness when i get on a plane to know everybody has been screened properly. to some people it is demeaning. >> what's over the line? what's over the line? all of the things were fine. you saw a whoman whose breasts were being felt, a man whose, you know, had another man's hand in his crotch. what's over the line? >> i think that's for the public to help inform that discussion. clearly, if we are to detect terrorists who have, again, proven innovative and creative

in their design and implementation of bombs that are going to blow up airplanes and kill people, then we have to do something that prevents that. so it really comes down to the question -- >> the public didn't have any choice in this and there is outcry, and they don't really know -- i know you've driven everybody to the tsa website and said, "look here." but because you don't want to reveal to terrorists what's going to be checked, there's no way for anybody to look at that website and know where they're going to be touched and where it's not allowed to be touched. so what you seem to be saying is, you can be touched anywhere? >> i'm not saying that at all. there are standard operating procedures for the pat downs. so some of these horror stories i've heard are simply inaccurate, either misinformation or whatever. there are a number of people who have been touched, as you say, patted down in a way that they never expected. so one of the things -- and that's my responsibility, because i did not advertise this, if you will, to say we are going to do this new type of

pat down, because i did not want to provide a blueprint or a road map to the terrorists to say, here's our new security procedure. here is all you have to do to -- >> the public can't figure out what's right and what's wrong, what's okay and isn't okay and yet once they get in there they have to let people do whatever they're going to do or they get fined $11,000 and hauled out. >> so, again, very few people actually receive the pat down. >> still, we're worried about them. >> so if you don't alarm through the walk-through metal detector, i think everybody knows walk-through melt detectors have been around 40 plus years. everybody understands that. the advanced imaging technology is designed to detect non-metallic. so take everything out of your pockets. so if there's no alarm, there's no pat down. it's layers of security. how can we recognize that reasonable people can disagree as to what their proper balance is for you or me or for the general public. it's easy to talk theoretically

or philosophically about what's the proper balance. what it comes down to, how do we actually apply it to provide that security while respecting technology, as we do with the advanced imaging technology. >> the incidents we have had on planes since 9/11 have been from planes coming from overseas. the underwear bomber, the shoe bomber, they all came from overseas. are peopling overseas coming into the u.s. having these sorts of pat downs. i haven't seen a security expert anywhere saying, yes, they're doing this at this airport in this way. or that many of them are even using these enhanced things. so basically, two people came from outside the u.s., who were threats to the was, and now we're doing this to basically innocent american citizens. >> i've traveled in europe in several times in the last couple of months and i've witnessed and experienced thorough matdopat d. and i've seen a very similar type of screening that is done in several european cities, airports. so i think we're consistent. and of course, we know in some

places around the world, it's much more thorough than what we do here. >> where is it more thorough? >> well, some places that don't -- i don't want to say a particular country or -- >> with people going through the airports, no, so who has a more thorough? >> well, i think the israeli model, which a number of people have talked about, uses intelligence in a different way, profiling. and then in terms of a pat down, if they suspect you of something, you receive a very thorough pat down there. that is top-notch security. the question is, do we profile here in the u.s.? no, we don't. so how, then, do we use intelligence that informs decisions and judgments? and given what we saw last night in terms of this new web publication that describes in detail how the cargo bombs were done, how they designed, concealed, and how they are using technology to disguise and defeat the screening mechanisms we have in place, look, it's a difficult question, candy. there's no doubt. and i understand the public debate. i'm sympathetic to it.

>> but you're still not going to change anything? >> no, not going to change. >> okay. i have to ask this for a friend, 14-year-old daughter, she's disabled, she can't stand without crutches, meaning that she -- metal crutches, which means that she always, always gets a pat down. what about the disabled, veterans, older people? we have a story of a woman being patted down who was a breast cancer victim, who had a prosthesis and she had to take it out. what are the -- what sort of things are there set in place for the disabled that have to go through what really sounded like an over-the-top experience. >> absolutely, i want to be sympathetic to each of those negative experiences. we've had extensive outreach to a number of different disability community groups, a number of different outreach efforts to try to say, how can we best work with those in your community to affect security while respecting your dignity and privacy. all those things that are important to us as americans. again, making sure that we are working as a partnership to say,

let's get through this together, let's work together, let's ensure that we are doing everything we can while inspecting the privacy and dignidig anything anity of each passenger. >> john pistole, thanks for joining us. up next, we'll hear from congressman john micah of florida. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] here's hoping you find something special in your driveway this holiday. ♪ [ santa ] ho ho ho! [ male announcer ] get an exceptional offer on the mercedes-benz you've always wanted at the winter event going on now. but hurry -- the offer ends soon.

that's not how successful investing is done. at e-trade it's harnessing some of the most powerful yet easy to use trading tools on the planet to help diversify, identify opportunities, take action. it's using professional grade research and your brain to seek maximum returns to reach your goals. it's investing with intelligence and cold hard conviction. you made the money. you should have everything you need to invest it. e-trade. investing unleashed. everything you need to stretch out on long trips.

residence inn. ♪ everything you need to stay balanced on long trips. residence inn. try capzasin-hp. it penetrates deep to block pain signals for hours of relief. capzasin-hp. take the pain out of arthritis.

joining me now from orlando, florida, republican congressman john micah who will be chairman of the house transportation and infrastructure committee come january. thank you for joining us. right off the bat, what could congress do about these pat downs and about these machines? anything? >> well, just like the president and, as you alluded to with administer pistole, secretary clinton, we've already -- we've sent a message and democrats, republicans, liberals and conservatives, to the administrator that we want this process reviewed. >> and you have said -- look, he's got a balancing act, we all understand that. but we all have a balancing act. you cannot stop everything. so to you, what's the most heinous of what's going on, if

anything? >> well, first of all, let me say that john pistole just came on board. we didn't -- and what you're seeing now with the pat downs and implementation of this new technology is just symptomatic, a slight tip of the iceberg of the problems of tsa. we didn't have an administrator for a year and a half. he's only been on the job a couple of months. and i think one of the first things i did to john is i sat down and i said, john, have you seen these reports of the failures of tsa? and i think he's trying to react to make certain that we have some means in place to detect the threat that we face. now, i don't think the rollout was good, and the application is even worse. this does need to be refined, but he's saying it's the only tool, and i believe that's wrong. >> let me ask you about -- you have called or asked some

airports to consider a private screeners, private companies to do security for the airport. let's just say, off the topping with that you do receive campaign money from some companies that are involved in this these screening processes, but the question i want to ask you is, the tsa sets the rules. so if you're going through san francisco airport, which has a private contractor dealing with security, what's the difference between that and going through a national airport here in washington, which uses the tsa? >> well, let me say, first of all, you know, i've taken on a pretty big bureaucracy, so they throw some things out there, like 18 years of campaign contributions, all rolled into one. that's not the issue here. the issue is, is the very best security in place? whether the tsa does it, private screeners. and actually, the system i put up, i wrote the law and i put in there a provision that also the airports could do this. but we've got to get it right. we've got to make certain that,

again, whether we have private, public, or the airport doing it, that we have in place the soundest the -- now, your question was about san francisco. that was one of our private screening initial -- we had five initial airports that screened privately. and that went on for two years and we had two models. and then we tested it. and i can tell you the results that came back convinced me and also others, who independently analyzed this, that the private screeners can perform statistically significantly better. not my words, their words. so we've got to take the best of the models, whether it's in israel, europe, or what we've experimented with on our own watch here, and put that in place. >> but in terms of passengers, if the tsa sets the rules, there are still pat downs going in san francisco or other places where they have. so i just wanted to make that clear. >> well -- >> let me just -- >> well, yeah, we've got two problems, though.

you know, we've -- when i took this over in 2001, we had 16,500 screeners and we converted them to federal with the model i described. the tsa has grown to almost 300,000, making on average $105,000 a person. >> a big, bloated bureaucracy. >> and then we've got headed in the wrong direction, as far as who they're screening and how they're doing it. so, yeah, they make the decisions, but i've got a heck of a big overhead and i'm not getting the results that i should have. >> i need a quick yes or no question from you, because we've run out of time. are you for or against the opt-out on wednesday? that is, an effort to kind of slow down the whole process. for it or against it? >> well, i just urge the public -- i think the public needs to work with us and we'll get it right. i'm not going to support that, but we need to get it right and

we will. >> thank you so much, congressman john micah, we really appreciate your time. up next, our "sound of sunday," highlights from the other sunday morning talk shows. and then, an outgoing congressman adds a little mustard, literally, to one of his final policy fights. [ commentator ] lindsey vonn! she stays tough!

earlier, she had an all-over achy cold... what's her advantage? it's speedy alka-seltzer! [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus rushes relief for all-over achy colds. the official cold medicine of the u.s. ski team. alka-seltzer plus. we helped keep your skin clear. now we have a solution for wrinkles. neutrogena anti wrinkle with retinol sa smoothes even deep wrinkles. it works...beautifully. neutrogena. it works...beautifully. i'm bob kearn, president of coit cleaning services. these pictures are the history of my family and they're also the history of coit. we've been in business for 60 years and our greatest asset has always been our people. we use the plum card from american express open to purchase everything we can and with the savings from the early pay discount, we were able to invest back into our business

by hiring more great people like ruben here. how can the plum card's trade terms get your business booming? booming is a new employee named ruben. before getting to today's "sound of sunday," a quick check of today's headlines. ireland plans to ask for an international bailout from its financial crisis. fears that ireland will be swamped by a crisis in its banking sector have put a strain on the euro in world markets ppt. palestinian president mahmoud abbas says he will not resume peace talks with israel unless there's a freeze on settlement in jerusalem. israeli hardliners says they will reject any plans that includes east jerusalem. hillary clinton aappeared on three shows to push for immediate ratification of the u.s./russia missile reduction treat. showing her diplomatic skills,

she confronted republican reluctance with the gentle art of reassurance and a republican hero. >> i think that the questions that are being asked by republicans deserve thoughtful answers, and every one of the administration stands ready, from bob gates to jim clapper, the head of the director of national intelligence, because we all see it in the same way. and we're in the tradition of both republican and democratic presidents going back to ronald reagan, who famously said, trust, but verify. >> and a couple of sunday no-goes to scratch off your list of 2012 presidential players. firmly and apparently happily ensconced in the diplomatic world, secretary clinton dropped the knnuance on this one. >> i am committed to doing what i can to enhance the security and traditions and values of the united states of america. i'm very proud and grateful to be doing it. >> so you're done with elective

office? >> i am. i am very happy doing what i'm doing and i am not in any way interested in or pursuining anything in elective office. >> on the republican side, cross out the name rick perry. seems his texas-sized job is plenty big enough for him. >> i think being the president -- or excuse me, being the governor of a state like texas, or for that matter, arizona or new mexico, is a more pivotal job in the future. i don't want the president of the united states, i want to work with these governors across the country to make the states more pivotal, more powerful, as they should be. >> and that's today's "sound of sunday." up next, one democrat's fight against grey poupon conservatives. popping stock cat. pull up the price chart. see what the analysts say. as i jump back, streaming video news confirms what i thought. pull the trigger -- done. i can even do most of this on my smartphone. really, it's incredible. like nothing i've ever experienced.

unleash your investing and trade free for 60 days with e-trade. ♪ an accidental touch can turn ordinary into something more. moments can change anytime -- just like that. and when they do men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a clinically proven, low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications, and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] don't 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, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you.

for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com.

-- for the wealthy has dominated washington for months. we have heard it all, until congressman alan grayson took to the house floor to contemplate

what top earners might do with their tax breaks. >> they can buy 20,000 jars of their favorite mustard, grey poup poupon. >> libzine liberals, soccer moms, and now grey poupon conservatives. the prestigious urban dictionary describe s grey poupon as a special type of mustard known for the preferred choice of the wealthy. old people use it, so do rich people. so do presidents. >> a spicy mustard, like dijon? >> some of his critics accuse the president of being an elitist for with wanting dijon, but grey poupon wrote him a letter. for the record, grey poupon retails for a little over three bucks, about the same as its competitor, helmand's dijonaise, but still grey poupon conservatives has a sound bites to it, or maybe this. >> they can bhi