founder of the happy thon project and he is the author of this new data counts and how tracking it can change the world". texas governor pick rery announced he is deploying as many as a thousand national guard troops to the border. perry is one of one of the most criticizing of the president and he said it is necessary to protect from crime and save taxpayers from the cost of the new arrives. that is from the hill. you can read more from thehill.com. >> this weekend on booktv afterwards. >> i thought it would be compelling to tell the story of a white family and black family

with the same name and come from the same place and follow them from slavery, civil war, reconstruction, jim crowe and up until today and compare and contrast. >> chris tomlinson on his family slave-owning history and how the legacy of slavery still affects american society. he talked to the brother of former nfl running back about the family's former lineage from the hill. now a conversation on the ongoing violence in iraq and the threat and influence of the group known as isis. we will hear from the state department advisor. the atlantic council hosted his

90-minute event. welcome to the atlantic council i am the direct of the center here. i am happy to welcome you to a converation on the state of play in syria, iraq and the broader region and whether the threat of isis or whatever i should call it today could forge a coalition among states in ways that rarely see eye-to-eye and we want to push this dimension of the overall question. i am particularly pleased to welcome ambassador lukman faily, thank you ambassador come

coming. iraq is really at a breaking point as many of you know. there are daily headlines illustrating the ongoing conflict and battles. syria continues in its conflict and isis appears to be making some significant gains in various ways and despite efforts for a more inclusive government which many see as the key helping to stabalize the county. it doesn't like it is heading in that direction it looks like a more intensive sectarian war. isis is continuing to challenge the iraqi forces and have been successful in taking oil fields including the city of mosul as many of you know and there is an ongoing battle for parts of tucrete as we speak. the iraqi government no longer controls all of its territory.

and the kurdish government in the north is announcing a refrendum for its in dependence. many regional and global players have reassessed their policy in the middle east. this is a big time of flux among the outside players as well and that is why we want to have this important discussion. certainly the united states, key gulf states, iran and syria, share certain interests in defeating isis and the overall stability of iraq, but it is clear this commonality has significant units and we will see if it can effect collaborations on tasks with this challenge. we have heard u.s. and iranian

officials regarding a willingness to cooperate interact and we have seen iran's deputy foreign minister beginning a tour of the gulf to discuss possible solutions in iraq. but we look at isis as indicative of a more epidemic challenge and that is the continue rise of powers in a broad range of actors in key regions across the world and see the headlines in eastern ukraine as another example of this trend. so the trend is bearing out this factor of individual empowerment that the global trends report highlighted and it is a central focus of my initiative.

the fact a group in a remote part of the world is able to deny sovereignty to two nation states and claim part of each as its own with no immediate challenge is but one very, very concern development but there is a range of others that will surprise all of us over the next several years. back to the specific issue, a coalition among the countries i talked about obviously presents enormous diplomatic and economic challenges. we are here to discuss what the partnerships might mean for global security and go politics. it builds on the work at the centers here at the atlantic council and it is part of larger effort we are undertaking to understand the threats and

opportunities and in all cases the impact on the regional order as well as the global order. so i would like to stop talking now and introduce ambassador faily but before i do note this is on the record. #aciraq. ambassador faily was iraq's ambassador to japan and before this assignment he was an ambassad ambassador at the iraq minister of foreign affairs. he has experience in the technology sector and i got hints about managing my e-mail and a number of things that make me want to hire him as a consultant. he has vast experience in that

sector and will prove helpful. he had senior management positions in major american company saies and a broad range other things but with that i thank him for coming and look forward to your remarks. >> first of all, good morning, everybody. thank you for this opportunity. it is my first event at the council being on the other side. it is interesting to see the work that we have done here and thank you very much for giving

me the attention today. i also would like to thank you for focusing on this important issue. today i will use the isil. that is my preferred name for it. i want to thank the american people for the great sacrifices that you have made to help the iraq people free ourselves from the brutal deterant and put us on the path of democracy. our democratic path has been rocky and up hill. but we have perservered. we are at a dangerous point confronting the terrorism.

iraq faces a threat. the likes of which we in the region haven't seen before. we are grateful that united states didn't abandoned the iraqi people during the darkest d days of the war and we are hopefully you will not abandoned us now as we struggle against the same poress forces of viole extremist that have goals beyond the middle east and the rest of the world. as we meet this morning, the iraqi people are under direct attacks by an unholy alliance of al-qaeda inspired jihadist and royalist. some would believe this isn't a sunni rebellion against a shitte

government. this is an ally -- this is an all out insurgeon led by the is insurgeants that want to take over from the mediterranean sea to the most eastern iraqi province. isil targets everybody that doesn't swear to their backyard views. if them establishing their recent claim in syria and iraq, isil has declared their objective is to fight people everywhere. religiously, regionally and

globally. it can only be closed with a strategy that included military action, political, economical, huma humain -- humanitarian and other forces. and we must make a common effort to defeat them. this is a dangerous new development in the middle east that requires a new doctrine to combat terrorism. on the military front, with its defectiveness, isil is sewing the seeds of its own eventual defeat. until then, ethnic clensing and systematic destruction of cultures will suffer. occupied muslim, isil has

destroy destroy destroy destroyed mosques and is -- shrines -- if they don't comply with switching religions they will face the sword. thousands of other minorities communities have been forced to flee their home often leaving all of their belongings behind. isil has systematically killed many different religions by labelling them as cruseders, heretics or devil worshipers.

they have been reenergized by t forces that were issued to join the forces and defend the homeland. thousands of iraqis are answering to call to fight back against isil. this hasn't been made by anyone since the early 1920's. he rarely speaks about government issues and when he does he is a force of national unity. for democracy and rule of law. after the attack on the mosque back in 2006 he spoke out for unity among shitte and sunni.

now he is working with other religious leaders to quell the tension and stregthen the ties between the shittes and sunnis during this critical time we are facing. this is truly the time to remind all iraqis are enemy isn't those who worship in different ways. our enemy is those who is attacking us. and sill isil is attacking sunni, kurds, and shittes and because of that we are seeking to unite them all. the democratic process doesn't proceed as rapidly as terrorist but ultimately the presentive

government and the rule of law do offer the greatest opportunities of ensuring everyone has a voice. following the election where 60% of the people of iraq participated. the process of forming a new government is moving forward. this process is underway in line with constitutional framework and must not be undermined. the election of the speaker of parliament and his two deputies last week was a significant breakthrough and showed that iraqi political leaders can put their differences behind them and come together for the sake of our country unity during this pivotal time. on wednesday, july 23ered, the iraqi consultate of

representatives is expected to elect a new president who is likely to be a kurd. there is every possibility that the new government will be formed within the stipulation timeline. just to remind you, in recent history this process took nine and six months. this time we are talking about only six weeks. the terrible violence has created not only a security crisis but also a humanitarian crisis. while isil glories in murdered and mayhem the iraqi people are trying to ease the suffering of those who found themselves in the line of fire. crisis last month alone caused 650,000 people to three their

home in the areas. on the economic front, they understand what they are doing. using violence to vandalize what had been one of the world's fastest growing economy. the terrorist understand that economically activities denies them support. and that increasing joblessness and hopelessness offer them a pool of potential recruits. if they expand to the southern provinces the potential impact on the international oil networks will be disastrous. it was increasing by 15% since 2005 and were expected economy

markets stable, despite increased tensions in iran. why theone more reason world community has a stake in afeating isil and in securing stable and prosperous iraq. make no mistake, the current conflict in iraq is not only a threat to iraq alone. isil and the very elect and violent players threatens the entire region and the entire world. here, the united states also has a stake in turning -- turning the tide against the transnational terrorist. we welcome president obama prossor yes decision to -- president obama's decision to send the advisor to iraq. however, speaking as a friend

and admirer of the united states, there seems to me to be an additional option to consider at this difficult that urgent moment. u.s. counterterrorism coordination should be expanded to >> it should be included to include strikeouts and that would serve the border from terrorist in syria. second, you should offer air support targeting camps and supply convoys in the remote area and third, in order to enable us to effectively conduct counter terrorism operation in urban areas occupied by isil we need a precision airstrikes. the effort of just outlying are not new military concept for the united states or iraq. together we put together a

similar strategy that beat al-qaeda in 2005 and onward. iraq has chosen the united states as its preferred partner. our relationship is governed by the strategic framework agreement which we don't have with any country. our government has purchased more than $10 billion worth of equipment from the united states and we are planning to buy billions more. and we are doing this with our own funds. still, there are some confusions about american intentions. there are some in iraq who are unsure about the administration's response to iraq. the administration wants us to believe they are providing limited support to us now and are using the prospect of u.s. air support and other military

assi assistance to encourage reform in baghdad. however, i have to tell you that not everyone in baghdad believes this. we have people unsure and think washington's intention is to create precondition we cannot satisfy and move the goal post to make sure we don't satisfy them. such suspicions are highly corrosive to the relationship. if iraqis don't believe that meaningful u.s. assistance is forthcoming then they will not have enough incentives to adopt and stand by the political reform the united states is urging us. they need to refute the suspicious by making clear it

will give the united states -- the government of iraq -- aeir support and that can turn the tide against isil. if the iraq political leaders make headway in formation of the government. in a nutshell, clarity is crucial. now more than ever, the united states needs to be careful not to send mixed signals about intentions. these mixed signals will create a vacuum that is filled by others. the situation on the ground is developing rapidally and and threatens iraq. much has been said about the regional effects of the violence from syria but a spillover in jordan, saudi arabia and other

where would have consequences that do not bear thinking about. let us all deal with the isil evil now before. time is not on our side or the united states side. decisive actions will result in a stable and pure iraq. the united states and iraq are forever tide together because of our lost lives and treasures expanded by both of our countries over the last decade

in our common fight against extremism. together we can defeat the terrorist who are our common enemy. thank you america for everything you have done together and everything that we will do together. if we act decisively at this crucial moment years from now our children and grand children will read about. this is our goal and i know it is yours as well. let me thank the council again were the opportunity.

thank you, again. thank you, mr. ambassador, for not just stark but heartfelt remarks. they are appreciated and raise a lot of important issues which we will be addressing. let me briefly introduce our other panelist. first to the left is michael sing and he is the director of policy institute and was a whitehouse official where he spent a lot of time coordinating

u.s. policy toward the region stretching from morocco to iran with focus on irans activities, israeli-palestinian conflict, security in the middle east and other minor duties -- which is clearly a joke. to his left we have frederic hof. he was appointed to be special advisor in syria by president obama on march 28th, 2012 and he previously was the special coordinator for affairs and office of the special envoy for middle east peace and has decades of experience in the region. if you don't follow frederic hof views on syria then you are not really following syria in my opinion. and at the end of the panel, but

not the least important at all is bal sal. i have tremendous admireration for what has been built and it is an honor to be on the panel with these fellows.

i am not live tweeting my owns but i have my notes on my phone. i am going to speak briefly about the u.s. and iran in iraq and prospects for cooperation because it has been a hot topic as the crisis has unfolded. i'm going to say isis. we have similar positions. we are both opposed to isis but does that flow from the same interest? i would say no. i want to use an example how i

see the difference in physicians and interests. this is about nafta. that is the north american pretrade agreement and it was opposed by labor unions and environmental groups. they had the same position. they were against it. why was each against it? not for the same reasons. environmentalist for environmental reasons and the labor unions for their own concern. i think we can see a similar dichotomy between iraq and iran.

we have seen this in iraq itself from time to time but the most telling support is iranian support for hamas. the conflict in gaza is made possible by the fact iran ships weapons to hamas as well as the palestinian islamic jihad. which are sunni it ... groups. we have also seen iranian support for sunni extremist groups in places like lebanon, alia, as well as even for qaeda and the taliban in a more limited way, which you would think would be enemies of iran and our innocence, but iran has rounded in hits interest to provide limited amounts of support to those groups from time to time. when it comes to this issue for the united states, the u.s. opposing isis am a it is about many things, but one thing is about counterterrorism, our

general counterterror does opposition to terrorism as a tool and tactic and to those groups who use that tool. and there is obviously a lot of reasons for that. i don't see that same interest flowing out of the iran. one other reason the united states opposes isis is because we support the sovereignty and stability of iraq. the other of sight is common interest between the u.s. and iran and the stability of iraq. well, again, ask yourself, is stability of the iranian top interest in iraq? remember, the countries have hierarchies of interest. and on think we have seen iran behave in a way that suggests the stability of iraq is there top interest. suddenly when the united states was involved and trying to help the iraqis to build a stable and sovereign democracy and ron was completely and helpful to that task. there were, in fact, the chief

agent for promoting instability in the iraq in an effort to drive u.s. forces out which was an interest would strummed, would say, any concerns about the stability of iraq even when it became clear that the united states was withdrawing its forces from iraq after president obama was elected. what would -- what did we see from iran? not a diminution of their support to extremists and militants but an increase. as u.s. troops were leaving we saw an increase in support for those groups. for what reason, you have to ask, but perhaps to ensure that u.s. forces would leave. and certainly there have been other times and the iran iraq history when the stability of iraq was certainly not the foremost concern of iran. what we have seen instead from tehran is that with the most want to see an iraq is a government which is friendly or sort of disposed toward it iran,

whenever that happens to mean. i of think they're having a particular interest in democracy or pluralism are all the things we have talked about and that the ambassador talked about wanting to see in iraq. the american approach is very different. we have, i think, a genuine interest in seeing democracy in iraq, and seeing pluralism, in seeing not the domination of one sector or group over another but to see them come together in a multi-party democracy. again, i don't think that in state is necessarily what iran has in mind. you know, the -- just to continue on this point but not to delve too much into that topic because my co-panelists who did that. some might raise the question of what about bofa interest in iraq and how they play into it. let me say as well, i don't see an alignment between americans and often dressed.

the united states has been frustrated in the past by the refusal to embrace or help on the path toward democracy. at the same time i think we see a fundamentally different approach from gulf governments than we have seen from iran. in the gulf governments have been willing to support the overall regional security architecture which the united states has undergird it. they have, i think, believe that that u.s.-led security architecture has been in their interest and good for the region. this is one of the big dangers of the u.s. retreating and no longer supporting the security architecture. you see those disparate interests playing out in march does prevent dangerous and destabilizing ways which is one thing the united states needs to keep in mind. once we retreat other things will try to fill that vacuum.

just again on the topic of cooperation, if you posit i am wrong and there are common interest, would we want to see u.s.-iran corp? i think the answer is no. first, let's think about the efficacy of iranian involvement in iraq. it is not clear from the experience of iran in syria which the ambassador addressed at greater length that teaneck -- iran has the ability to defeat a group like isis and iraq in a way that stabilizes the country. they certainly have not been able to do so in syria. in syria you see that the cat assad government has managed to avoid collapse and being overthrown which is, perhaps, in defiance of expectations given that we heard for a long time now the collapse was inevitable, but it has not been able to recapture its own territory or extend its authority which is what we want to see the

government in baghdad do certainly. i say if we saw the same outcome in iraq that we have seen in syria where iran has been involved we would consider that a failure, an abysmal failure of u.s. policy, and i don't think iraq would welcome it either. the tactics that iran would pursue in iraq would be similar to what they have done in syria and is not something we would like to see in iraq peat more a threat more involvement for example by hezbollah. the activation and harming and funding of shia militias as opposed to national institutions . and in syria we have seen forces waged war against civilians which is certainly not something we want to see inside iraq. he would also, i think, see as fallout from u.s.-iran corp in iraq and a lot of unhappiness among its u.s. partners in the

gulf. we are already facing a very skeptical allies, and i think this will only deepen that skepticism and complicate a lot of other policy issues for the united states. and then just finally on thised. finally on this, why i think that u.s.-iran cooperation in iraq would be a negative thing, there is a moral dimension to e is a mue. they're is a moral complication to cooperating with the force like with a force like iran's revolutionary guards, which are the iranian sort of force would has responsibility in iranian assistance for iraq. a group that has been designated by the treasury department as supporting terrorism. we designated iran as a state sponsor of terror, and this is a group which has been responsible for a tremendous number of deaths of american servicemen in iraq and terrorist acts around the world. it is simply not, i think, in

the united states' nature to cooperate with such a group, even if it is in pursuit of common goals. i am going to essentially rapid of their and simply say i do not think looking to iran will give us any answers in iraq. i think we need to, frankly, look forward in iraq. we honestly have a long history in iraq, a controversial history, that i think if we're going to help iraq to stabilize and help iraq along the path it would like to take, we need a forward-looking policy. we cannot be consumed in the debates of the past, debates about who is responsible. we have to look forward and have a forward-looking policy. >> thank you. i might ask you a quick question, and then we will go on to ambassador hof and bilal saab . you present a very compelling case for why u.s.-iranian cooperation is not necessarily

desirable and will not be productive for a number of reasons. but i wonder, if things proceed in the direction that ambassador discussed and if we think this is going to go on for quite a while, even if it extends roughly four months and there is a u.s.-iranian deal or a p5 plus one deal on the nuclear program, i mean, what happens if u.s. forces and iranian forces are on the same battlefield looking for the same ends? i would understand and certainly agree with almost all of your points on why we should not plan such corporation, but we could very well end up being tactically on the same space. or should the u.s. make it a condition? we are building a few of hypotheticals, but should big u.s. make it a condition of their active military involvement that there would not be any engagement on the same

side with iranian forces in iraq? obviously ais hypothetical scenario, but it is an important one. because if we do provide more assistance to iraq, which i think we should, frankly, and i be sooner that should rather than later in coming. we could find ourselves sort of playing in the same theater as the iranians. look, my concern is a different concern. in fact, for iran, keeping the united states out of iraq, keeping the united states from any kind of re-engagement militarily in iraq, will be an interest which trumps their orerest in the feeding isis stabilizing iraq, and we will find ourselves more at odds with the revolutionary gods in -- guards in iraq. i think we should try to prevent that by sending messages through the channels that we have two iran about what our intentions are and what we are trying to do and what consequences iran should expect it a find

themselves running afoul of that. i do not the that requires tactical battlefield cooperation or that sort of thing, in part, because iran operates fundamentally differently than the united states does. i do not think there would be any sort of natural overlap. >> thank you very much. ambassador hof, give us your latest insights on how syria plays into this and the broader thoughts on the entire situation. >> thanks. perhaps it would be useful if i give sort of an overview of the prospect of some kind of practical cooperation between the united states and the assad regime with respect to the isis threat in syria. i, too, will use isis as the word. this issue has come into considerable prominence recently as a result of an op-ed that appeared in the "washington post " written by three very

accomplished americans who implied that the united states ways toin fact, seek cooperate with the assad regime to confront what they described as the greater evil of isis. made by thispoint trio of former distinguished the blue mats was that it -- diplomats was that it makes no sense for the united states to confront the assad regime and .sis simultaneously the president of the united states and the secretary of state, at least until now, have taken a different position entirely. they have considered bashar al-assad to be part of the andlem in the isis context certainly not part of the solution. theersonal view is that president and the secretary of state are correct on this.

, this is not just a matter of the assad regime having spent the better part of a decade burying al qaeda-type personnel mayhem.q to create it is not just a matter of the regime having emptied its prisons of violent islamist the syrianjust as uprising was beginning. and it is not just a matter of the regime's sectarian program of mass homicide drawing foreign fighters into syria. one can, if one wishes, simply dismiss all of this as ancient history and say it is no longer relevant given the current threat. operational fact of

the matter, however, is that the regime and isis in syria, with the exception of some recent clashes around some oil fields, are focusing their military efforts almost 100% not against ae another, but against target they have in common, a target they wish to eliminate, that being the nationalist opposition to the assad regime in syria. this opposition is therefore forced to fight and defend on two reince thomas against the regime -- on two fronts, against the regime and against isis. a socke work with the crowd seems to be implying, therefore, is the following -- let this nationalist opposition support, so asof

to hasten what they believe to be the inevitable conflict between the regime and isis. -- would such a course of action serve american interests? in my view, the answer is no. set aside the scandalous and humiliating spectacle of working with a regime on which the united states has facilitated the accumulation of literally tons of archival material that will eventually form the basis for international prosecutions having to do with passive for crimes and crimes against humanity. set aside the betrayal of those areas who have advertised great verification of some kind of meaningful assistance from the united states and its allies. sacrifice of

credibility and reputation that is being asks of the president of the united states here. set all of that aside. what exactly would it mean to work with the assad regime in a practical sense? is there a role here to the american taxpayer to play? iran and russia have secured the assad regime in western syria. if the assad regime elects at some point to fight isis in nd russiarely iran a can be prime candidates to bear that burden. now, look, in world war ii, the united states did, indeed, collaborate with a mass murderer to defeat hitler, but no one questioned the sacrifice of the

soviet peoples infighting and defeating the greater threat posed by not see germany -- by nazi germany. if bashar al-assad decides at some point to confront isis, i think we can bet on one thing -- he will seek a free ride. already, the casualties his forces have suffered in this conflict in syria have caused a great deal of resentment in certain parts of the country. if either by commission or we cause the nationalist opposition to lose militarily, in my view, we will still have no dog in the hunt in confrontation. my sense is that both sides, the regime and isis, well for their own reasons try to avoid an all-out showdown.

consolidatent to ance ofbaric govern syrian-populated areas under its control, and iran, which is the one party must responsible for the survival of the assad regime , iran is quite content to have the assad regime firmly in the where it western syria can be of use to iran in the context of hezbollah. now, clashes will likely take , and ultimately, there may be a showdown between the assad regime and the monstrosity it has helped to create. our best course is to move now, helpingew, with nationalist fighters inside syria now and to build a large

and powerful syrian stabilization force outside of the country. saying toclude by work with the assad regime is not merely to work with the devil. it is to work with the devil who, on a good day, on a good day, will meet you 10% of the way before trying to walk back on that 10%. ask russia. ask iran. if this comes down to a sod versus isis assad in syria, in my view, it is there problem. if we, the united states, judge that and isis presence in syria or iraq constitutes a threat to the american homeland, we can my view,hat threat, in

without the costly and ultimately ineffective .ssistance of the assad regime >> thanks. let me ask you to clarify your large and powerful syrian stabilization force, number one, and number of two, what if the u.s. took the recommendation of ambassador faily and played a military role in iraq, how would that affect what you are talking about in syria? >> i am hoping now that the administration has made the decision to go to congress with an initial request for $500 million to assist the armed opposition, i am hoping that what the administration has in mind is an effort that would go along two lines. first, obviously, the necessity of getting arms, equipment, money into syria nationalist

forces currently carrying the fight against both the regime and isis on two fronts. that beyond that, it seems to me that there really needs to be, this is something that cannot be put together in 20 minutes, figuratively speaking, but there needs to be created outside of syria in places like jordan, turkey, elsewhere, a large, powerful stabilization force consisting led by syrians, capable ultimately of entering the country and restoring law and order everywhere. or haps in cooperation with some existing forces on the ground, perhaps not. this clearly has to be a force that would do enforcement in nature that with shoot to kill

capability. your second point? >> if the u.s. does take action in iraq -- >> i think the united states has a bit of a dilemma right now in iraq. there are some attractive targets, some attractive isis targets in iraq. i imagine that a good deal of target acquisition has been taking place. it is a bit of a chicken and egg dilemma for the united states right now. if we were to engage those targets effectively in iraq, would affect would this actually have on the formation of a broad representative iraqi government? would it encourage that evolution or would it stop it in its tracks? i think, clearly, there are arguments to be made on both sides, but it is a real issue. way for theble

united states to avoid this engage isist be to targets in syria. engagement could obviously, basically hitting syria, whereas in that engagement could have a positive effect on the tactical situation in iraq without necessarily getting directly into this chicken and egg dilemma. it would also have, conceivably, for syrianve impacts nationalist fighters. you know, getting arms, isipment, into these folks not the easiest logistical operation in the world. yet, time is of the essence. if the united states chooses to militarily in the

near future, what i am may being is that syria a more appropriate place to do it. >> thank you, fred. bilal, you have been very patient. please weigh in on these issues. >> thinks. he won arab gulf country with the biggest stake in what happens in iraq and whose strategic interests are affected the most by what happens in iraq is saudi arabia. i will focus more on saudi arabia, but i am happy to talk can'--he other gulf: gulf country string the q&a. iran and saudi arabia are struggling to determine the best way to move forward in iraq. it is a delicate balancing act in iraq. .et me start with iran the iranian rhetoric has been pretty strong on iraq, but i think that the response has been

pretty limited. so it is kind of a disconnect between the two. here is isis threatening to destroy holy shiite shrines in that and you would expect the iranians would send hundreds, if not thousands, of their own troops and militias to iraq, possibly even hezbollah since they have done a pretty good job in syria, but none of that has happened. dave sent in arms to help the iraqi army. shut down amuch website to go fight in iraq alongside religions in a rock o, kind of surprising. the response has been kind of reserved. more to protect their strategic interest in iraq .

i think the iranian leadership knows there will be dire consequences should they act more forcefully in iraq. and a moreattrition, intense rivalry with saudi arabia that the iranians might not need right now. they are also talking to washington. >> there is something brewing in the u.s. with the relations and they don't want to mess it up by coving hard in iraq to put then in a difficult position. celebrated among makers will object to the ada to cooperate with washington. the key people who matter in

the rain and we have not heard much but i know that the former president talk about ending cooperating with washington and iraq. going over to saudi arabia which is a fascinating story i a little puzzled by the policy and thinking of iraq across the the release. >> if you don't understand what isis is the group's like isis goes to the saudi kingdom i will not go very were surprised but the depth and the spread of the infrastructure in the kingdom. that was an ugly surprise. after the u.s. invasion of iraq,

there was a massive insurgency by osama bin laden. that was one of his key goals, the third front. it was battle at all stakes, monarchy, which he thought was a corrupt monarchy. this was not easy to crush. it was a pretty major uprising. i am not really talking about gun battles in remote areas. this was happening across the country. i study this very carefully. some pretty major cities in saudi arabia. the country was on fire. it took a long time to crush the uprising. it was pretty much widespread. saudi arabia does not want to see that happen again.

extent of isis'virtual presence in the kingdom is not what aq had in the early 2000. i know that, too. the concern here is not isis but the rise of radicalization across the region and what might happen inside the kingdom as a result of that. saudi arabia sees opportunity in what isis is doing in iraq. it sees opportunity. andortunity to weaken iran iraq and to strengthen its bargaining hand vis-à-vis the iranians. have pretty much all i today.

it is a highly risky approach. but that is the only strategy they have in iraq. david ignatius got it partially right as far as the sunni tribes, which i call the x factor. attacking maliki. it is saudi arabia that is using maliki.er to attack why give up the bargaining hand today? a new prime minister in baghdad and the sunnis back to government inaghd . >> with saudi arabia immediate interest to cooperate with iran but with isis defeated riyadh has no

cards to play in iran. they have done some dumb things over the years ahead will not shooting itself in the foot in saudi arabia wants isis all last you do is ask the city tries to finish it off. that simple. much more than isis there are the sunii tribes there at the forefront of the rebellion it is the most brutal years of pretty important facts only 20% by isis. challenge that. but while making a speech

with if it gets closer to the kingdom? after all the small town near the saudi border my point is the concern is not isis but what the city militancy and the radicalization could cause like a ticking time bomb. to deal with the consequences. here is my conclusion in iraq there is terror between the iranians and the saudis. the only thing that can break it is compromise. how concerned should we be that isis steps is us threat

to use of territory or asset ? >> saturday arabia? returning to the saudis asset as well. but most experts were surprised by iraq this year and to to get ahead of the next surprise is this one of them? >> isis gains in iraq claimed by a number of analysts having to do with the iraqi army and getting support from the suze tribes not exactly what isis could do but a reflection from the of their side. i think the countries that should be most concerned about territorial gains not

exactly saudi arabia led the very nature that setting arabia should not be that concerned about what isis would do. but the x factor is this kind of phenomenon and the sydney tribes is for this group to operate and i do think they have an influence over some tribes but that kind of leverage to influence reassures them in the kingdom that this is day unmanageable threat and i would be surprised otherwise have. >> we will open up to questions now i will ask the ambassador the first question but then please i will call on you and we will

bring microphones to you. but do you have thoughts on what was said? how can u.s. avoid what was characterized in the press ban a comment by general petraeus to be the air force for the shia against the city? how can we avoid that geometric issue while still achieving common interest? >> with that election regis had the boy who is the sunni from the province such as the defense ministry's so there are checks and balances that we can discuss

moving forward so then you have a key position within the system has other aspects of it. and what you have now is said sunni chia. this situation in for one day in rhode mosques literally. it is much more dangerous. but we have now is a

mutation to the elements with this situation it cannot be controlled with the situation that cold war mentality for either party that you can trust the threat to be afraid they're not immune. been in this sense but to the saudis what they say is right and that is a risky game.

and then they're playing fire with the situation. and to talk about a do narrative to deal with it and then with the decade-long term with that sectarian narrative. i am afraid they will not be in that position in the way with saw high risk of inaction. >> now we will open it for questions. >> please identify yourself. >> thank you.

i am from the hill and i have a question for your ambassador. hoping you could provide clarity on something, with the delivery of apaches to issue pavement in from your perspective is there any delayed to do so? >> will whole issue has become a chapter you could have prevented with the quest it was stuck in congress and the white house and that delay already has the impact and unfortunately

to pay the bills now it will not address the immediate threat the questions that may talk about not only might own opinion but back home with u.s. commitment to the democracy of iraq. unfortunately those examples with the whole institution. >> the pilots are not there.

>> i am with the national coalition. in fighting isis for a long time to see the iraqi government would gain largely neutral with the revolution. >> looking for those issues for a long time that this issue would not resolve over night with the regime strength and therefore has much by the way with the situation in turkey from

bahrain had intentionally said we don't get involved in the neighbors internal a fair. >> but in the day and age where borders are particular them is extremely porous has led to the breath of the problems facing today i think the days when we could say this is only the internal affair. >> would reside with? with those issues it is not that beggars cannot be juicers but to get involvement with the issues but those in the southern gulf countries but then to

accommodate with those issues but we know for a fact of them are for agile to get involved with internally fares -- internal affairs. but we have got away from it. to have democracy and transparency and we should respect that. >> up on that dynamic the united states has had and i predict will have a very difficult request for

whatever emerges in iraq to ddi areas use of airspace and grounds base to the aside rajiv in syria and for iraq to deny iran the ability to transport to the assad regime we all . i think any iraqi government can expect that the united states will continue to press on this front. he wasn't sure regarding that, why arabians are not involved. iny have offered this help

relation to security and others and they said no. they have offered with militia and we have said no. we have the same situation in syria. which i to keep away our young ones from going to syria. we have said no to the iranians. as to ourestions relationship with the united states. our military, our army and y we needg else -- wh to go to the iranians and break international sanctions? in a sense we would try to play the mature player. a vacuum is being created. that is the reality of it. >> thanks very much.

this gentleman in the second row. >> >> and in the zero week of the advance of isis 1100 commuters with isis and then the most safest insecure all these years? in the british soldiers went to kirk. and basically the government

and to begin with the terrorist? but besides that. >> do you have a question? >> with 70 in that area but in seven months with $50 billion per year so then i asked immediately to release the budget of kurdistan? and immediately bordering isis one of the best allies

should not have a weapon to defend itself. >> would pitcher question? >> i am asking so with that area for the kurdish people? bennett yes. the issue is between baghdad prior to this situation now. end with the cold case is are the hot cases to not be a dozen in isolation as the package to understand. and it takes more than

anybody else already a of a quarter of a million refugees may be half a million to a dozen great jobs that others are working with with the issues of crossed it is a serious issue. >> additional questions? >> david i would like to ask the ambassador and anyone else, if you still consider iraq in arab country? if the answer is yes, it can do imagine any situation that the arab league that iraq is still a member could play a useful role in this crisis? remember how the worst fears were stabilized by the

establishment of the arab forces but it did reduce the level of violence. do you think there is anything with that extra intervention with legitimacy in the region? >> this is a tough question i am occurred myself. but. >> guest: to keep that with our current foreign minister in they have been a die-hard.

into always pushed tooling gauge. >> going to the arab league. we have felt their eppley has up positive role for iraq with the country's have been picky if they want to deal with it. the arabs have to address that but what was the position in the bf different than elsewhere? seeking support in various

conferences stan port -- so with that nutation but nobody is immune from that. and what would be useful to as the debate in but you have now is for the whole region. objectively so with that decision. there are internal factors but with those geopolitical implications is next to

europe and that needs to be the view. >> in support of this it is hard to imagine right now regional response because of the fragmentation that we see but one of the stories of the past few years years, especially with the arab uprising you see that our regional security architecture collapse and at the center was the united states but connected were strong u.s. allies like mubarak who were no longer there. and what we have seen is a vacuum is created that there is no other extra power to regional power or coalition.

so i do think for the foreseeable future there is not a purely regional substitute but what we have seen is an example but not the only one we needed new regional strategy and that the center of that may not be precisely the same but the central role. we have allies to contribute with the leadership but something we did not pay attention to in the past was more regional integration of the economic side and in the middle east to maybe asia bayou have the tremendous amount of what is utterly lacking what is the new

american strategy? pennis to be another regional elements spinach like it or not is primarily saudi arabia a used to be egypt but it is out of the pitcher. and the iranian saudis said is a question is unfortunate with the one thing that will save iraq although happening

defacto is a compromise to trade in the saudis led to the depth of the differences the pragmatic realist in the management with the cold war between the americans and us soviets with aid to extinguish many of the buyers is a the region they're not ready for that yet something much worse has to happen first. >> what if this gets much worse? in terms of the regional approach? if this gets worse?

>> i always known that for some time within the group is pretty significant as well if i called the arab league saudi arabia today some people with nothing to do the same group. so in a cohesive for collective response for me is a myth. with those individual approaches and saudi arabia will be speaking the loudest and what they will do in iraq and other places. with that analytical content >> we are out of time to wish we could go on longer. please join me to think our fantastic panelists today.

[applause] [inaudible conversations] . .

next politico consultants posters and journalist talk about the 2014 and 2016 elections.

part of the conversation looks at the effect -- effectiveness of the political lens. this 90 minute event was supposed -- posted by politico. [applause] that has started this exciting new service from zero testimonial to the work that they are doing. what may call people and say you are bidding all of campaign and maybe you want to see the governor's races or just the senate races. are you getting too much? they say no, we wanted also it's a sign of the great coverage so i really appreciated. welcome to all of you. we appreciate your being here as we go along. if you will send us a question at hashtag campaign pro-i will get it here on my twitter machine and if it's a good question i will ask it. what a treat we have with the

people on this stage. this morning i want -- when into jim's up as i said i think we might have the best politico event ever because we have visual aids and the people who created them so some of the hottest commercials of this cycle so far we will see and we are lucky enough to have onstage the people that made them. starting with mark putnam who has worked on for presidential campaigns and right now has three of the hottest senate races mark begich in alaska mary landrieu in louisiana and of course alison grimes in kentucky. mark is a founding partner at putnam and ashley o'connor sounding of burning glass consulting. congratulations she just wanted thad cochran primary. i'm sure everyone in this room actually predicted the outcome of that runoff. and she now is doing his general and she also is doing lisa

hutchison's republican for governor in arkansas. arkansas such a republican, such a political hot spot right now and todd harris who couldn't think of a name for his new firm so he called the something else strategies. is there ever going to be another name? >> no, that's it. i'm not paying five granted by something else.com. >> so mark does marco rubio and his 545 statewide republican primaries this year. so verse are quick to ashley o'connor while we were standing back there you told us the best thing about the romney campaign. she worked at romney hq what was the best thing about the romney campaign? >> the north end of boston. we had a great location and of course our candidate mitt romney. >> in just two seconds we are

going to take a look at squeal where joni ernst the republican senate candidate in iowa todd harris wrote this ad and had the idea for her. it is called squeal but what is really called? >> well we call it squeal. most people outside the campaign will call it the ad. >> let's take a look. >> i'm joni ernst. i grew up castrating hogs on iowa farm so when i get to washington i will know how to cut pork. joni ernst. >> it's time to force washington to do the same period to cut wasteful spending repeal obamacare and balance the budget. i'm joni ernst and i approve this message because washington is full of big spenders. let's make them squeal.

>> taught you wrote that. what was the germ of that idea? >> that is what came about, this was about a year ago. i was in iowa meeting with joni and one other consultant and director working on a stump speech for her. so i had said, so tell me about how you grew up. she said well you know it was very normal. i grew up canning food and walking beans. i was like walking beans? i'm from california and i had no idea what that means. she said you now and we feed the hogs, the hogs. she just kept going. what? she said we would the hogs. >> i made a little mode of that and we came back to it the next day and we came up with the line

about cutting pork but it was originally an idea to use a sort of a one-liner in a speech. we had a debate coming up so we thought all right, let's use this in the debate and see if it works. and it did, and so i just filed it away and tell was time to make some tv. >> the republican sunday candidate mark putnam a democrat. why sat at effective? >> because it captures joni ernst. the most effective advertising -- advertising catches the spirit of the candidate. it really stuck out to me. that was bad that i mentioned to you because i think it's such a memorable metaphor, she comes off really well in the ad. >> there were a bunch of candidates.

>> there were six candidates running including one that was a self funder and that was not us. >> ashley o'connor what is the effectiveness of this ad tell us right now about what's moving toward consumers are what's working? >> well i think mark touched on a good point. he you really have to capture something real. i think there are so many political ads out there that voters can really sniff out if you are not being authentic and i think that's one of the things that's incredibly important right now is authenticity. >> all three of us were joking before we came out here because we have all had clients who see a spot that we have made maybe for one client. i have had other clients they like, how come i don't have a spot like squeal with 600,000 views on youtube?

>> i said fine, if you grew up castrating hogs and did not tell me you know then we will make a spot like that. but the authenticity piece is so critical and i do think that comes through and that is real. >> the second ad we are going to look at is called father son. this was a commercial for a democratic candidate for congress who lost his primary so is no longer in congress candidates are tino. in massachusetts. go ahead. >> he is proud of it. tea party. >> it was bad enough to take down the big banks and legislature. >> to protect women entering abortion clinics from rs met.

>> a1 oblate to the supreme court. >> islamic drives him crazy. >> he wants to go to congress to take on the nra and the tea party. >> i won't give up. >> background checks or banning high-capacity magazines. >> there are-somethings you don't stop fighting for. also the right to choose equal pay for women and equal rights for welcome everybody. >> he has been at this for 35 years. >> it's why i approve of this message and i still love you dad. >> you too son. >> this candidate is a man living with aids. the setup was he was coming out as a liberal democrat. todd perez you saw this ad and you send an e-mail to the nrcc and it said what? >> when the spot came out i e-mailed several people at the nrcc and they said this anyone know who the media consultant on this campaign is and someone broke back inside yeah is mark

putnam and i wrote back and i said i hope i never go up against this guy. [laughter] i love that ad. >> here you are consulting. >> mark this reached a huge amount of money. tell us how i came about and the effective it. >> what todd was thing about getting to know your candidate. i spent time with carl and learned his father was in the tea party. he was a dues paying member however you pay dues to the tea party and it was something that paul would occasionally talk about on the stump but not all that often. win a campaign all just thought this was a great piece of his message. you missed the beginning of the ad but he says i will never forget the day when i had to tell my dad and the father says wait for this. that is their relationship. i tell him i'm a massachusetts liberal so the message which was really the most important thing.

you have to capture the candidate's personality but it has to be driven by a strategy and messagewise we needed to prove that paul was the most progressive candidate in the race in the democratic party in massachusetts so we did not shy away from massachusetts. we want to figure out a way to make that interesting to people and to have the mod to add. the challenge we face as we had very little money. carcarl wasn't able to reach his fund-raising goals for a variety of reasons most importantly there are a lot of other candidates in the race who had larger shares of the district so i went into this thing and i was going to write two, 30-second ads. >> by the way mark. >> i started this concept in the idea came to my head at this conversation i realized i couldn't do it justice in 30 seconds so i made an executive decision. we are going to make a 62nd ad and put our chips line that ad. we went on cable, initially very small and we got a lot of money

on line that we had no idea was out there. we raised $200,000 in a week. >> i was struck, remember the first time i watched it and i watched it again yesterday. i was struck again by the same thing that struck me the first time. they are both so likeable in it. there are so much message in it and at the very end it's clear that they love each other. so it takes all of the political messaging side but it ends in a heartwarming way and they pulled it off. >> ashley o'connor these two ads address something you told me as one of the biggest concerns of consultants right now and that is the overcrowded airwaves. you have super pacs, all advertising aggressively already.

>> i think that these are two great examples. creative is incredibly important. you need something that's going to cut through in both of these examples are primaries so you find something that really cuts through. i also think there are a couple of other strategies of using surrogates to cut through or testimonials. we have seen a lot of testimonials and advertising cycles. >> what's a good example of a effective surrogate? >> the chamber did one in mississippi that was very effective. i think monica's testimonial opened her campaign and it was fantastic. i think that's probably one of the biggest challenges right now is cutting through crowded airwaves. >> how much of a difference did bret farrar's make in the runoff for senator cochran?

>> i think we won because of his record. there's a lot of times he points out just how conservative that is. >> mark putnam you have an article in "the new york times." this is a very harsh article. if we call tough but fair. the headline was political ad man finds the personal democratic hopefuls. he talked about your effective use in the cycle of real people and unless i'm misreading it the subtext is you are a little bit turning on its head the assumption of us and a lot of you that only negative ads work. they take them and talk them down but at the end they work. you are doing something different. >> again i think it gets back to capturing what's unique about your candidate and with all of the super pacs and the advertising out there they airwaves or fold with -- is filled with plenty of information about your opponent. that's not to say a candidate

doesn't have worse possibility to point out with what they disagree with than their opponents record that we have this unique thing in the race which as we can capture or candidate. those ads actually in this flurry of negative advertising do stick out. one of the campaigns that article talked about was mark begich in alaska. he has a unique story to tell. it starts with a history of public service and also his own doggedness at getting things done for alaska. those were stories we could tell using senator begich and having him really tell his own stories. no ad maker behind the scenes making things up. it's really him and those types of ads do stick out. yes the negative comparative advertising by other groups does help the rays can't argue that it doesn't but it elevates positive advertising because that's the only chance the voters get to hear from their incumbent or challenger. >> mark putnam wanted a

high-wire acts he pulled off and obama's election a 30 minute commercial for seven networks watched by 35 million people and when i was reading this "new york times" article as is often the case the most interesting sentences in the second to the last paragraph. i'm going to read it to you and you are going to tell me what it means. it says doma cretz would have worked with him say he can be reluctant to give up on his concepts even if they don't test well. >> ad testing is not perfect. there are many examples where ads that do okay in testing and up catching fire. i respect it. there's a lot of uses for it that what people tell you is i think i've good idea i'm going to push for it. in the end it's a team decision as to what a campaign is to do and not do. i am dogged when it comes to an idea i want to give it a fair

shot. >> know was in an example of something that works well? >> there were some advertising a number of years back that we had done for john kerry in the presidential campaign. we worked on the dnc side of things. there was advertising they got a decent response but then we put it on the air. >> hold up the camera to talk about a concept or technique. is there something you found always works better on the air than in the lab? >> where your gut maybe is better than the data. >> is a good question. >> i think sometimes campaigns are reluctant to have their candidate talk straight to the camera and want to figure out, think the main thing is figuring out how a candidate is most successful. sometimes they speak into the camera sometimes it's an

interview. there are been times when our concept that candidates are a little bit, a good example can think of as governor richardson when he was running for president. for a lot of people that questioned the series of ads where he was interviewing. they were funny and he was self-deprecating and he lived at this unique intersection of being very greatly underestimated as a candidate and an amazing resume and a great sense of humor. there were some in the campaign that weren't so sure that he should be shown that way. if we put those ads on the air and they tested okay but we put them on the air in iowa and new hampshire and we jumped 12 or 14 points in two weeks time. we were onto something with that. in that race we had john edwards hillary clinton and barack obama at the top and reagan in the top three. we put him into the considerations that with a technique that was unsure about

the campaign but when we did it worked. >> if i could add to that, i know when we do ad testing the stuff that always seems to underperform in the test is the softer stuff. maybe it's the candidate either straight to camera or interview style and they are telling a compelling little story about growing up or their mom or their dad or whatever. you show that in a focus group and the people say where's the substance? i like to hear about policy. i always research everything. and so then the whole group goes on this tangent about there needs to be more facts and more meat in the spot because that is what focus groups do. then you put the spot on television and put it in the context of a crowded environment with a lot of clutter and that's

why cuts through. >> ashley you are about to jump in. >> we had a similar experience in 04 with the windsurfing ad of john kerry. we had some news footage. he was out windsurfing and we set it to blue danube and through testing it was like cho yeah. it didn't test poorly and it didn't test really off the charts but i think at that point when you're in a crowded field and there's ad after ad in the put something up like that they really caught people's eye and a kind of got the message. >> that really was -- why was it so much more effective than you would have thought in the lab or that the data might have suggested? >> i think sometimes taking risk, you really have to trust your gut and in focus groups people would be very critical of what they're watching. >> what was the reluctance about the windsurfing ad which an in

richer spec seems like such a home run. >> i think in focus groups eager people say well i don't know he just didn't test off the charts. we sort of thought this captured something here. it's message driven which is the greatest point of all. >> ashley something you didn't know for the got a lot of attention as the kino video for the 2004 convention called the pitch. tell us why networks pick that up. tell us why. >> the pitch was something that introduce the president in 2004 the convention and it was something that came together late in the game. we put together some different convention films. i thought that's great but what else? we sat down and started thinking what can we really tell about

the president that people don't already know? their will is this amazing photograph from the white house but delve into data and took moments, telling pivotal points about his presidency and what happened at 9/11 and interlacing real people through it. i just think it was very personal and showed a slide of the president that people had forgotten about. >> my thanks to christine and alexis were making these clips possible. we have another set of clips that we are going to queue up right now. >> we want to go in a different direction. we want to have in america to celebrate success, gets jobs for people who are hurting and stop the war on call now. >> is who we need in washington d.c.. >> senator mcconnell is our

voice. >> barack obama will be gone in three years. the call will still be in the ground. we are going to have a future when we get past this administration. >> i am its mcconnell and i approve this message. >> sistan disney from clover lake in tech and he is a question for senator mcconnell. >> retired coalminer and i want to know why you voted to raise by medicare cost is $6000. how are my wife and i supposed to afford that? >> i don't think it's going to answer that. i approve this message because i worked to strengthen medicare. >> mark putnam the question will be one in the series. we will give the idea for what you are trying to do. >> first off she is celebrating and giving them a voice and a platform that they would not

ordinarily have. senator mcconnell is notorious for first volleys not campaigning much and it's hard to see him and hard to ask him a question. so this is giving regular people a chance to ask a question. it's obviously delivering information people need to know about in his record but without the usual harsh attack ad going into someone's face and saying what a horrible person they are. in a way it's a device that we think will get peoples attention and it sticks out. that pregnant pods where you work like he's about to answer that question because how can he answer that question? >> what gave you the idea for the thought? during the pregnant pods there's a dog barking in the background. >> we were really being clever trade maybe that would be the hound dogs from 1984 that we just wanted to accentuate the silence. sometimes you need a little

something with the silence there. >> tell us about the fire truck that was find them. >> we shot these ads and small towns in kentucky and we found that location and thought this looks great. it's really trying to capture a little piece of kentucky americana. >> now todd harris you told me that you think there is a spending ceiling for super pacs that this curve has a limit. >> i thought there were suspending ceiling but there was an effective the ceiling. spending is going up year after year but i do think that you reach a point of diminishing returns when you have an outside group after outside group throwing these pure posts, spo

spots. your post means spots with the vo that some editor uses stock footage. it is your stereotypical negative campaign ad. you saw this in 2012 in the last two or three weeks. you saw outside groups on the house and senate side from both parties literally just throwing money onto the airwaves with ads that if you had actually six months earlier plotted out is this is the spot that we want to put in know a million dollars behind the last week of the race the answer would be no. and so i do think that there is a limit to how effective the outside spending can be in the current context that is him and one of the big reasons for that is what mark alluded to before is that the only people who

control the candidate themselves as the campaign. we have the ability to take the candidate and put them to camera, put them in interview format. put them at their kids and what their family. this really matters in statewide races. for congressional races the bar to get to know actually who your member of congress is not as high for people and if you are running for senator running for governor people do want to have a sense of who you are and most super pacs have a hard time delivering that kind of information. >> ashley o'connor will have tivos or some version of them. we are all trying to speed to your best work. what are ad make her stealing to try to get out that? >> i think that broadcast has always been sort of the widest reach, broadcast television and certainly as cable has grown and

become more targeted it's another effective way to reach voters that it's been interesting to watch the role of digital grow as well. you can target both geographically and demographically and you can do pre-roll advertising. to me, it's truly a combination of all and of course radio. i think radio is also effective in different areas but i think it's more about building an echo chamber so voters can see you through tv, through the nightly news, cable. if there are 43 other commercials, you are serving them as on line and hearing you on the radio. just really having that echo chamber is one way. >> now we are going to the final set of clips. >> i have seen a tv ad with my mom. it made her celebrity and made my dad a little jealous.

i've been here the whole time. i helped my dad a lot. he gave me a good name. a lot of common sense. that said don't spend what you don't have. stand on principle. if you want to beet you have to work. i am tom cotton. i approve this message. >> are you a once a week christian? tom cotton says predator mark pryor is saying pryor made a negative comment about pryor's faith. >> i'm not ashamed to say that i believe in god and i believe in this word. the bible teaches us no one has all the answers. only god does. i mark pryor and i approve this message because this is who i am and what i believe. >> mark putnam break this down. tell us what works or doesn't

work about the stats. what have you noticed about the mechanics? >> first of all i thought the father/son approach is what works. you have seen a lot of ads over the years with the candidate and their parent and oftentimes they are corny and a little forced and there's too much affection between the two. it doesn't feel real or it's just a little bit of tension between a father and the sun in the ad. i did a series of ads with senator landrieu and her father. they are kind of ribbing each other. there's a little bit of tension. it's really how a family really is. so i like that piece of it. congressman cotton comes off as likeable so you get a sense of where he came from and the values of the family. so i think that work. i think the response from senator pryor's campaign is effective in one area you don't want to go into his questioning somebody's faith. that's a third rail that can get you in a lot of trouble so that's something that the cotton

campaign might work. >> d. agree that the opponents say this a third rail or do you think that's overstated? >> it's probably accurate. >> we have a twitter question asking the flipside of what we have been talking about. has driven a political ad or stairwell known political and not one of yours but one that is notorious in the profession. that tested well but plopped? >> probably lots. [laughter] i will say and i'm not going to name any names but i know of a campaign. i was not involved in this campaign. they put a bio spot featuring the candidate which was the only thing on the air and their negatives went up. [laughter] >> to that candidate win or