uma farouk abdulmutal host: good morning some of the head lines include the "new york times". senator reid apologizes for comments on president barack obama's color and dialect and in other organizatio's we'll get to a reaction of that. part of a new book titled, game

change. your reaction and phone calls and in the "washington post" editorial. a defense of the agency after the suicide bombing attacks. it killed 7 in afghanistan. sunday morning, january c 10th. probably saw that senator reid made and the response from the white house accepting the senator's apology. was it a poor choice of words. (202) 737-0002 for democrats and (202) 737-0001 for republicans and independent, (202) 628-0205. or you can send it toe mal at journal,p span dot org. the story. front page in the "new york times". exerts from this piece. senator reid moves to respond to the incumbent in the book game

change in addition to calling president barack obama on saturday mr. reid reached out to several black political leaders to curb the fall out after making comments about raise. he's in a difficult re-election raise in nevada and fight over healthcare on capitol hill had fought speculation he might step down. republicans sharply criticized him but there's no indications his democrat allies would abandon him. inside the "washington post," reid apologizes for comments made in 2008. more excerpts from the book as well. the swiftest apology under scoring the sensitivity involving the subject of raise. back in 2002. trent lot said at the hundredth birthday party for strom

thurmond. it would not have had a problem if on the pro regular degree gaks campaign would have been successful. the mississippi republican was forced from this host in 2007. and the senate campaign committee jumping on the "washington post". for those that hope one day to live in a color blind society. it appears terry reid is more than a few steps behind them. we called civil rights leaders and african-american congressman to apologize for the comments. again your reaction? was it racist, a poor choice of word? first abdul from north carolina. good morning. caller: how you doing this morning. you in this - i think it was a poor choice of words. you can just about know what's

in a man's heart. only god knows what's really in his heart but senator reid is trying do the right thing and he just made mistakes. steve, i want to say one last thing. the lady that called you last sunday. her name was patty. i think she really disrespected the program when she came in and she got about 3-5 minutes. i think that was wrong. you have an excellent show and then, the lady from california, called the president a punk. i think when you hear that type of commentary from anybody, you know you - i think you should say, look this is very disrespectful. you don't have to agree with what the president says but don't call him a punk. >> it's a fine line in an open forum. caller: that was extreme. one last thing i want to say. i'm a muslim.

i have family members service all the wars from maybe possibly during the civil war. i served this country and my wife and i, we do have a program once a week. and we speak out against radicalism and stuff like that and the word jihad is very disrespectful to use towards "tsuásrsáy we have a small sanction that has this radical plane and we speak out against it all the time and for callers to call in i think they cater to rush limbaugh. i been listening to your program for about - well years and last couple you have got a lot of radical calls that want to talk very negative and bad. sorry to agree to disagree. i want to say, there's two people i think you should get

on your program. abdul mallik is from harlem university and i think they would give you a different stand. a lot of times when they want to look, they get somebody from a broad. host: thank you for the call. your comments we appreciate from greenville, north carolina and thank you for your suggestions for future guests. go to "politico".com. go to the website. and ben smith who writes about one of the enduring mistress of the 2008 campaign is what got ted kennedy so mad at bill clinton. at some point it backfired and explanation never emerged. finally my copy on game change. reported that's hillary bungled caroline bill's handling is worse. the day after he pressed for endorsement making case for his

wife. but bill then went on belittled president barack obama in a matter that deeply offended senator kennedy. later. he fumed clinton said a few years ago this guy would have been getting us coffee. this is what the cover looks like and comments made by the senate democratic leader. was it a poor choice of words. joy on the democrat line. good morning. >> i don't think it's a poor choice of words and first, let me say i'm a black grandmother. just a few years shy of 80 years old and i don't understand what's all the upset because he was telling the truth. if obama was the color of his dad he would not be president today. i don't know why everybody is upset about it. he told the truth. democratic party is like that. he was not - please, i know, i'm

going to upset a lot of people, but if he was - let me reiterate. if obama it was color of his dad i don't care how he talked, he would not be president of the united states today. thank you. host: thanks for the call. good morning. caller: i wanted to say, i think absolutely right. first of all. dialect. i don't know what that is. second of all the no bearing on whether or not he's qualified for the position at all. really makes me see senator reid in the light he truly is because his true colors came out when he said what he said. that's what he thought. now he's trying, you know, change his words up because of the political fall out but he said absolutely what he felt and

i think he should help the conflict in his re-election. host: this is what he said according to the book game change. quote, a light skinned african-american with no negro dialect unless he wanted to have one. that describing barack obama and this response issued by the senate leader yesterday. i deeply regret using such a poor choice of words and i apologize for offending any americans. i was proud and enthused to support president barack obama and have worked as hard as i can to advance the president legislative agenda. john from new york city on the democrat line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. first of all, maybe it was a poor choice of words but i don't understand why this is a c-span

topic. i don't know whz chose this and if there's politics behind making this a topic on c-span and make it an issue. host: front page story, "washington post". in every news broadcast and out with a new book involving the president, so why wouldn't we talk about it? caller: maybe there's politics on your part. there's more important things to discuss and if we're going to be upset with harry reed if you'll allow me to make one quick point about how harry reed i feel who has let us down on the healthcare reform. i think ultimately not only the republicans but th democrats of which i am one, are chicken to really step up to the plate and ta&k the talk and walk the walk, because healthcare reform could be paid for. it could be paid for and there's a way to structure it so that it doesn't - so that medicare does

not go bankrupt and there's a way to charge people 5.25% and up, allow us to buy into medicare and pay the full premium. there's a lot of healthy people to pay into medicare and it would counter balance all the older people using medicare and gove)nment insurance, health insurance funds. harry reed let us down on the healthcare reform and there's way - europeans have a gas tax to pay for healthcare. we use 84 million barrels of oil in this country a day. we could pay for healthcare by putting a dollar a tax on gasoline and harry reed let us down by not walking the walk. count less hours on that issue as well. app)eciate your comments on senator reid. roy, republican line.

you're on c-span. good morning. caller: i love my country and all it's people so much. i'm so tired of groups being pitted against each other. this is simple when you think about it. the people who support god given free will verses those that don't and you call in and they tell you what you should and shouldn't talk about. that makes my point right there. sir, you can talk about anything you want to and we have a constitution, a bill of rights and a lot of american people call us tea baggers, what you want but we stand up for everyone's freedom and we love this country. happy new year. >> randy, independent line. your reaction to senate reid and his comments in a new book? what do you think? caller: i - you know i watch you every day. i'm a little bit nervous.

- um... i'm an independent - i'm for truth justice and american way party. i'm running for congress for this next term. i wanted to run against heather wilson and the reason i wanted to run against heather wilson is because every time she talked, something gets passed and she was going for the senate and that's exactly the way i wanted to get in. and any way, they showed what he said and i don't see anything racist. he said he's light skinned african-american. it's true. what's wrong with that? there's something else - i didn't - like i said, i tuned in about five minutes late and i didn't even know what this was.

light skinned african-american with no - i don't know i lost it. no negro dialect unless he wanted to have it. yes. a light skinned african-american. true. with no negro dialect. you know, the negro dialect, because i lived or listened to you every morning and people have to say that they are african-american because if you) educated, you - you know like i'm spanish. my name is randy sanchez and i'm spanish. do have a hispanic dialect. i don't think so. i have an american dialect. i was brought up in american. that's true, justice and american way party.

what i'm running for is healthcare. i cannot get healthcare. and my thing is the 25/75 like the song. i think there should be a $100 a month and it's $25 and $75. you pay $25 and carrier $75. host: thanks for the call. let's stay focused if we could for the first hour at least to get reaction for the story circulating over the last 24-hours. a lot of cable chatter yesterday and more on the sunday morning programs all from the new book called game change. co-written by john hallman wallace from san antonio texas. democrat line. caller: morning. seem like a ploy to sell a book to me. it's time that the american

people wake up and remove the sleep from their eyes. this country is in front within and if we do not unify we're going to continue to fall. we're circling the toilet boil and we want to be remes!ered in history. unification is the key. the british have used divide and conquer far too long. host: joe, republican line. a kron, ohio. your reaction? caller: morning. i'll try and be brief. i believe many people did vote for barack obama but harry reed should re-assign. it was a poor choice of words and i only wish nancy pelosi would have said it so she would re-assign though. ho host from the "new york post". all of this from the book, game change. chuck berry. senator charles schumer betrayed

hillary clinton to make sure a democrat would win the white house actively recruiting barack obama to runs a an alternative in áhis explosive new book. hillary and bill learned about the move months later and betrayal of hillary by her coledges in the senate that hit õher like a ton of bricks according to the book in the 2008 book. but schumer yesterday immediately denied the claim he made in , game change. this is ridiculous shade senator shoq man. we had conversations long before senator clinton and told him he would be a candidate. he told senator obama that should hillary clinton be elected he would fully back her. next a twitter comment saying, i

do not know what's in people's hearts but i do know what they say. twit another is c-spanwj. next ron at new york. independent line. caller: good morning. as an african-american i have to say this. harry reed is telling the truth but i wish he would explain himself. there's a bit of history here if you look at michelle obama and how she was treated. they said she was angry and this is language for - i don't know. som african-americans perceive verses others. and threatening verses nonthreatening and you know, we just have to be honest with ourselves so we can move forward and pass this. and so this - you know divide and conquer rhetoric where is it racist and should he re-assign.

maybe he has a reason to understand why he said it. i didn't read the book but still. host: book hasn't been released but exerts are in the new yorker. caller: and so the concept of high he said that? i mean, you cannot understand african-americans sometimes, even with african-americans among's ourselves. we're somewhat more viewed more threatening than others and unfortunately, and i know this sounds bad but we have to say he's not one of the threatening african-americans, president barack obama because he doesn't speak from - like jesse jackson a little more angry about how we've been treated the country in the past but it's a perception thing. if we step back and be honest

about it, african-americans have been saying this for a long time publically. there's a lot of other african-americans that say such things. host: thanks ron if your listening on c-span radio or xm channel 130. there's a new book out this week called, game change. senator reid commenting saying he used poor choice of words. we'll show you what the president said, harry reed called me today and apologized for an unfortunate comment reported today and i accepted the apology without question because i've known him for years and seen the passionate leadership he's shown on issues such as social justice and i know what's in his heart. as far as i'm concerned, the book is closed and this comment from gary saying sad truth is

americans have no or little contact with blacks would not likely elect a darker skin black man. south carolina. good morning on the democrats line. caller: how are you? good. listen, i'm a 65 year old black man and a practicing attorney. over the years and historically, there is a variety of strategies and treatments for black people depending upon the color of their skin and the col texture their hair and tone of their voice. i wish we could have an honest conversation about raise so bad that we would not waiste the resources that we waist on harry reed's statement which happens to be true.

i just think it's time we accept the fact that america is still a racist country. and let's deal with it solve problems and try to make life better for everybody. thank you, sir. host: thank you for the call. matt in long island. rick in virginia? caller: good morning. yes, well just to repeat the last two callers. america is still a very racist place. i think that up until we as americans, finally come to grips that they're still running everything, they're going to bring up these subjects. just to make they're situation stronger which is, no matter what party your from that the white man can change it to keep

the black man down. host: story also this morning in the las vegas sun. this is on the website. harry reed's latest gap reveals when it could hurt against harry reed seeking re-election this year. good morning. republican line? caller: good morning. i just wanted to point out to people, there's a double standard here in the media. rush limbaugh used the word negro and he was widely disparaged for using it. prevented him in large part from owning ann fl team and when he used word for that song, it wasn't him using it like in the first person. his own personal use of the word. he was making fun of the fact that an l.a. times opportunity

editorial piece used it. people said i know what's in harry reed's heart. even when the right makes fun of the use by the left and word they're in turn, hateful and prejudice. i know what is in rush limbaugh's heart for raise and what he wants is equality and success. he was making fun of someone else's use of the word. harry reed used word himself and he should suffer the consequences in the media far more than someone like rush limbaugh. host: "new york times" says the video during the pakistan and taliban link. 7 americans were killed inside a camp in afghanistan and there's a related story honoring the shadow warriors inside the new york daily news. this story more details and a look at the camp.

basically a reconstruction of what happened as a result of the cia bombing and this from leon paneti. it wasn't poor trade craft in afghanistan. the main lesson is that like our military, cia officers are on the front lines against al qaida and they take risks gathering information to disrupt this operation. this savvy house enemy, one that has struck our country and wants to do so again. we have found consolation in the strength in the strength of fallen officers and their families but we find no condolences on what's being described as poor trade craft. that's like saying marines who died in a fire fight have poor fighting skills and then finally

he says our focus is on the 7 american heroes and those beside them knew the value of work with terrorism and did it with full appreciating of the risks involved. john from new york city from the democrat line? caller: yes, i guess - i guess he's speaking about when obama went down south, he got a little more southern twapg to his speech but i mean all politicians do that. bush would go to texts texas a a little honky tonk down there. as far as what clinton said in the book. not letting him off the hook but he was losing his mind at the time. you know he was not in the right state of mind, and i guess the last thing i want to say is the

fact that we accept there is an african-american dialect is racist in itself. thanks for the call and i appreciate it. host ho thanks. kansas city, good morning. caller: you hear me? i wanted to talk about this. what's african-american dialect. i got an african-american dialect. a will lot of people have it. it's all right. it ain't nothing but who he is and how you talk. people in the south talk different from people in new york. they have funny dialect. a dialect don't make a man nothing but a man with a dialect. harry reed has a dialect. let the president talk like he want to talk and do what he want to do and get rid of that harry

reed. host: twitter says racist are out in droves. tea backers want they're country back. republican line, good morning to you, sam. caller: i'm call together say hillary is right. there's a dialect and this is coming from a republican and even more important is this. i see like interview people like michelle. please bring us intelligent thinkers. don't sway your thoughts. i am one of it but most of it's wrong. please talk about trying pull it a side on c-span which is our only last, remaining true network. i mean, why - when you know

definitely what they're going to say. why you bring them? we don't need so many intelligence people in america. middle of the line, host: sam, i expect you will hear all points of view on this network. we have three networks we're here 3 hours every morning. caller: yeah but this is making country so polarized. everything obama says is that way. bring in educators on the issues. especially on the economy. look what happened when he came to this and - [inaudible] let me tell you that most of your expected [inaudible] no are by african would buy a ticket with

credit card. africa.it card exists with they buy with cash so they bought it with cash and it skews the idea of a so-called - host: one of the comments from laura said senator reid commented on the reality as we know it. obama was less likely to be elected with darker skin. sad but true. hopefully we can share on more views. scott pattison will talk about the position in huge budget deficits and later the sunday roundtable with two experts. mcinturff and peter hart. they are the gentlemen behind the "wall street journal" pole and on news makers at 10:00 eastern time. our guest is douglas shoe man and the question is whether or not taxes will be levied on cell-phone users.

here's an exert. >> this past year you put out a proposal for employers to how to allocate as a fringe benefit for tax purposes and then later you called on congress to actually pass legislation to simplify this and remove, you know cell-phone as a fringe benefit so employers didn't have to know how to tax them. here we are in 2010. congress did not act on that last year. what are your plans? you going forward with your initial proposal or give congress more time to sort that out? >> this is an example of the fact that the tax laws effect everybody and as technology changes, they need to adopt to the times. this is - in the past having a cell-phone the laws were written in the late 90's.

having a cell-phone was a fringe benefit but now everybody has one. we ask congress just to clarify this and treat them in a very commune form name so we don't have to come up with a set of rules. we're quite helpful that congress will act on this. congress had a busy year last year. our hope is tax writing committees take this up. in the meantime we're not doing anything special or moving forward with any legislation. our hope is there will be things to clean this up. >> 10:00 and program reairs at 6:00 eastern for those of you on the west coast. bobby jackson of c-span radio with issues and topics. bobby? >> steve, terrorism and intelligence continue to be main issues on sunday shows and economy and 2010 election.

the guests on nbc's meet the press hosted by david gregory is republican governor schwarzenegger and committee chairman tim mccain and national committee chair, michael steel this week. george step november lpáu returns and he'll be speaking with kristena roper. chair of economic advisors. hosted by chris wallace. michael steel and tim cane. senate republican whip john kyle and senatq arms services leader jim reid. on face the nation from cbs. host bob sheafer with senate intelligence chair. die an feinstein and republican peter hospithosptra. and then john mccain and independent, joseph lieberman.

you can listen to all five of the sunday morning talk shows started here. 91 fm, nation wide xm satellite or on the web at c-span radio dot org and follow us on face book and twitter. >> "wall street journal" on fed chairman ben bernanke and the role he played after the collapse of 2008. he'll discuss his book, in fed retrust. former federal vice chair and director of the budget office. afterwards, part of this weekend's book t.v. on c-span two. >> i'm always concerned about the poñential unforeseen consequences of an regulations. regulations of any kind, act as a tax. when you tax or regulate something you tend to get less of it and diminish it. >> monday.

republican commissioner robert mcdowell on efforts to create a national broadband plan. that's 8 eastern on c-span too. "washington journal" continues. host: in states as a way to acclimate you on what's happening around the country. those states facing the top five budget deficil9ñ arizona with 2 billion. california at 6.3 billion. illinois five billion. new york almost 3 point 5 billion. scott, scott pattison is the director, good morning. thanks for being with us. these state haves a requirement to balance the budget. caller: that's correct. it's very difficult for them. they're not a national government. states don't have that option. they have to balance like we do in our family budgets.

host: we heard from governor schwarzenegger in his statement and governor scott pattison but one of the things coming out of schwarzenegger's budget is expectations that the federal government with it's 12,000,000 overall debt will come to the rescue for states like california. how many states are counting on this? guest: california is asking for well over 6 million in additional funds an" obviously there's a lot of issues associated with that and it'll be interesting how that plays out. it's certainly legitimate with the federal requirements and mandates that require quite a bit of additional moneys in states in addition to the federal funds they receive. so it's certainly legitimate to ask for that, we'll just have to see how it place out. host: governor schwarzenegger said this in part last week.

>> the strength of the economy is the foundation of all jobs. we here in this chamber must reform the budget and must reform our tax incentive. there will be a huge stimulus. the basic problem is our tax system does not reflect our economy. in 2009. economic growth declined only 2 point 8% but tax revenues were down more than 8 times more than that much. our tax system is not growing. 100 and 44 taxpayers pay almost 5.25% percent of all personal income taxes. think about that. 38 million californians have to rely on people for their schools and healthcare and so many other services. it makes absolutely no sense. here's what we need to accept. our economy is 21'st century and

our tax sis is tell is 20th century. it is stuck in the wrong century. >> part of what he was talking about was the way that budgets are resolved and proposition and tax structure in the state. what specifically does he want changed? guest: he's right in a lot of aspects that a lot of things 20th century and we need to think about them in the 20th century. placed like california need to look at the proposition system. you vote for initiatives in isolation that you might like more spending or no new taxes but what happens is then the budget is kind of ham strung and it's difficult to have the flexibility when revenues go down under the other problem is you have to have a 2/3 vote in california in the legislature to pass the budget. it's hard to get there and

please that many people in the legislature to get a budget out that structurely balanced. hosá: in arizona, the unseen pain in the cuts to the budgets and other states feeling the same impact. will taxes be raised? will services be cut? what are you looking at? guest: i think both in those states. very interesting on a per capita basis. arizona is about the worse. we hear about california, but unfortunately places like nevada and arizona are even worse off. to some extent. housing sector crashed so much there that it's created a real difficult situation for them. it's unfortunate there's this pressure because we have to balance the budget there's enormous political pressure to

balance without raising taxes. i'm not advocating new taxes, but it's just - it's point together the fact that it gets really hard political choices to balance the budget. host: we're seeing tax revenues fall anywhere from 8-15 percent. guest: that's correct. this is unprecedented. a recent release found that we've had 2 years in a row of out right decline in state spending. we only had one year in the past over decades 1993 where that happened. it shows we're in a dire fiscal situation. this recession as most people know has been long, severe and hit the states really hard. you have human multi-faceted deficits in most cases. host: if your listening via

c-span radio, democrat, (202) 737-0002, republicans? (202) 737-0001. twitter.com/c-spanwj. we talked about out west, governor patterson talking about just how extensive the problem has grown in the empire state. here's an exert. >> so, when we look to this current situation where our budtet deficits exescalate at record paces from the middle of august to the middle of september. our budget deficit increased by 60 million dollars every day. and because of that, we have a terrific challenge. host: your response? guest: i think new york is a

good example of a lot of other states as well that are in dire situations. it's difficult in the sense that you have to balance the budget so you have to cut services or raise taxes or both. i know it's difficult for áhe average citizen. they don't want to see either but there's not a lot of choice. i get asked a lot, is there a magic bullet and unfortunately, no. there's not. you have to cut services or raise taxes or both. host: democrat line texas? caller: scott could you tell me specifically. i'm a pensioner from new york state. the pension situation is in because of this crisis. can you get specific about that

please? guest: good question. i can say we're worried about the long-term situations for pensions like california, illinois and new york. but as an individual person, we're - well i'm not going to worry. overall there's not a situation for the in a built for states to i pay out now or over the next few years. the problem is more long-term. i think you will see reform overtime to effect incoming employees so. really as an individual person getting pension i wouldn't worry but over the long-term, elected officials will have to deal with pensions. i think you have to see changes in assumptions about what kind of investments that investment returns are received and i think you'll see changes in terms of either states putting more money in them or they're going to have to have reform for future

employees. host: is there a fire wall in a save you cannot use pension funds for state services. guest: fortunately they're separate and protected. the problem is during the recessions. states don't have the money to put into the pensions and the investment returns that money gets, has gone way down. unfortunately it's a double whammy right now. host: in addition to the national association of state budget offices if you want a site with detail information you can go to the nelson rockefeller information for government. this is what it looks like and they outline a state by state basis and most revenue is down from 8-15 percent this year. republican line. philadelphia. how are you.

caller: good morning. i have been listening with dismay and the comment i would like to make is that the end result of all of this red inc. is a constitutional crisis. i believe the states make the federal government and made the federal power and states and state's alone, if need be can break the cycle of power. the problem here is, is that, if this government bankrupts itself, then the state may decide on their own we have to be separate entities on our own. print our own currencies and form ou) own national army's and protect borders because the federal government has failed us and we cannot continue to subsidize their mandate or pay their taxes. the burden is on many states especially southern states are

absolutely crushing and it threatened the entire prosperity of each state in the union. guest: what i'll say to that. interesting you mention, steve. the governor of california proposed a budget requesting additional federal funds. there's an interesting dynamic. states get a lot of money for or from the federal government. recovery funds were helpful. mandates and expectations though are significant. they cost us at the state level quite a bit of money. what really needs to happen though is a lot more cooperation in terms of the inner governmental aspects. states and governments working more. we unfortunately have an understand that i don't think there's an understanding as to how much the federal government mandates are not only costing the states particula)ly in

healthcare but also that they're directing the priorities of the state as to where the money goes. host: l.a. times website has some details about what the governor announced in his address. in almost 20 million dollar budget gap that the november governor calls for a 5% increase in what each employee pays into his or her pension plan and asking them to take a 5% reduction in their salary. that's ten percent hit. guest: it shows how serious it is. a lot of states have to furlough employees and we're seeing lay-off's in like states like virginia's state. so it's an indicator how bad it is at the state level. host: danny, independent line. jacksonville, florida. caller: never done this before but first, i am an independent

and a member of the tea party nation and i've been listening to what's going on and personally i don't think anyone is too big to fail. i think that the government has over extended itself by of course spending more than it takes in. i was raised that you just can't do that. you have to budget your money and you have to spend only what you take in and keep some back for qsq)gency situations. the government wants to spend, spend, spend and print, print, print. i wasn't aware we went off the gold standard which we should have st stayed on. if anyone listened to what governor schwarzenegger said, there's only a group of people - um... who are taking care of millions of people who are not paying any taxes whatsoever. those are people mostly on the

welfare system that was set up wrong and set up to keep people down. it wasn't set up to help anyone, because it's not set up to get anybody off the welfare system and those people have no inclination to go out and find any jobs even if there were jobs to find. they're going to get paid everything they need to stay home and not to go look for a job and they're the ones becoming the unsustainable burden on society. guest: we do have a situation at the state level, again which i mentioned is what we call the zero sum game. we have to balance the budget. what really has to happen is, some very tough political choice us and as a result. citizens and others need to be reactive in helping the elected officials determine. how you deal with the choices. do you cut programs or services

or do you raise certain taxes or revenues and put fees on state parks and other things. what are the choices you have to make. they're very difficult and they really need to be made with citizen's understanding the full fiscal situation in their political state. host: our guest is scott pattison. link is available at c-span dot org. bill from forming on the illinois. caller: first of all, to the one caller. the welfare system was only supposed to be temporary to help people out. it was never supposed to be a permanent situation. secondly, i'm from illinois and illinois deficit is probably three times higher than what your posting on the screen. number one, is that for the last 20 years the state of illinois has not been contributeing the full amount to the pension

system. they've been borrowing on bonds just to make the payments for the pay out. we're raising our service fees on everything. 20 to 35 percent a pop and have one of the highest taxs in the nation in chicago. until we get a governor that will impose a higher state tax you're going to see a bankrupt state of illinois. we have state workers that can retire at 48 years old with 85 percent of their pay that includes overtime calculateed there. our teachers are the same way. what they do is the last couple of years before they retire the system let's them utilize all the overtime they can get. now this system was based 25 years ago when the life expectancy was 65 years old. host: did you say 85 percent of their salary? caller: yes. plus, full

benefits. these guys are 48, 49 years old. the only requirement for some of the jobs is a g.e.d.. they must get a cvl if they're a highway maintainer. they go out and get another job as soon as they're retired from state of illinois and management people that go out at 48 which at 85 they're hired back for 95 days a year because that doesn't effect their pension. host: response? guest: there's no question states will have to look harder at the pension system. some states are in great shape like virginia would be a good example. well funded pension system and there's a lot like illinois áhat do have these issues. i think what you'll see. you have to have an analysis as

to whether the assumption as to investment returns. that will be re-evaluated and states have to figure out what they need to put in. as soon as we see an expense in the economy they need to put more funds into the pension system and benefits received, and i know it's hard for current employees to hear this and future state employees but that has to look tat the funding. in some cases, the structure of benefits is not sustainable and e be its is not sustainable and re-examined. one general level a long the lines what you'll have to see in states and it's going to be politically difficult is re-exam nation of all the spending. laura there than just pay for a service, what are you getting for the service?

we have to pay #or value and not just pay out the money. analysis of what's performing and what's effective. host: governor schwarzenegger making his appearance on meet the press. he's cut 60 billion from the program this year. looking at a 5% increase in what individuals pay to the pension plan and asking state employees to take that pay cut. guest: it's unbelievable how bad the situation is in states like california. you've seen enormous cuts. arizona. illinois. rhode island. minnesota and they've done the same type of very significant service cuts. furloughs, lay-off's and it's just an indicator this recession has been so long and so severe it's caused huge revenue losses. there has been a reluctance to raise general funds and sales up

income taxes and therefore, there's been a heavy faem sis on the skuts of it. host: this is scott pattison. graduated from george washington university now the executive director, budget officers executive director. current states debts they're facing. connecticut, good morning? caller: scott, i'm going to touch on three issues i think is important in the discussion this morning. i'm in government in connecticut and a couple of the real problems. out of management, we don't have a union, but the unions and employees unions in the state are bankrupting the system number one. number two, our healthcare is costing so much because we have a segment of society.

who contributes something. who pays nothing towards healthcare so the people that do pay have to carry them. three a big problem we see in the state is the amount of people that are bearing children that can't afford them. people working, paying taxes can barely afford to have one child. the only people with a third and fourth children are people that pay nothing whatsoever and it's the old story. you have too few people pulling with a dpon and too many people being drug along behind the wagon. guess guess i would say that's an interesting point to, point out. healthcare in the flare, is really costly to the state. medicare in particular is the system for low income individuals and their healthcare is very expensive for the state

and is growing at a great rate and the other thing unfortunate for the state. when our revenue is crashing like it has during this recession period, we have an increase in medicaid cost because more people become eligible because the economy is bad. we do have to deal with healthcare cost issues. it's unbelievably difficult for states and it's unsustainable. õwe'll refer back to one caller who said we can't have the separate state governments with the fed aggressively mandating on the states. we have to have more inner governmental cooperation so that there's some understanding what the states are capable of and how we can get payment in terms of healthcare and medicaid. it's unsustainable. host: what can be done other than raise taxes? guest: that's good question.

certainly you'll see, i think, more aggressive looks. paying for value and an analysis of performance. not just years and years, we've had, at least in good times, you've had your base budget and just increased it a bit. we really can't do that anymore. we have to analyze the performance programs. i think we'll have to re-evaluate structures. i think there's a lot of things within states we have to look at, whether they should be more feed based. we can't continue on this path because as the governor of california said, we have a 20th century tax funding system funding 21'st century. caller: my question is pack in the 80's it was said that we would be better off being in the service industry rather than

manufacturing industry. our country, excuse me. can you tell me, how that has benefitted the american people when being a manufacturing country we had jobs here and now we don't? guest: certainly the changes in the economy have had an effect. particularly with state budgets. the fact that the auto industry has declined. states like michigan and ohio have had a difficult time over the past few years. you have that situation. of course speaking on behalf of the states we don't have the same control over the national economy you might have in other situations, and certainly what the national government has, so we unfortunately, have to bear either the consequences or benefits of changes in the economy. one thing that is interesting based on what the caller said is our sale's tax are based on

good. a manufacturing economy from the 1950's and we're really on this. and we tend to not tax those services. i'm not advocating for or against new taxes but i think we need to examine do we need a continuous structure based on good rather than service? host: our last call, democrats line. new york? caller: good morning. scott and steve. sir, i've noticed i've been paying attention to politics for the last 20 years and, i know this some things happening in this country tilting the playing field toward corporations and businesses and against working people. when you see someone working for the government their salary will be lower than the same job if they were doing for the public. so, that matter of someone

working for the government and being able to retire, that's deal they made, so if you're going to go back on your deal, that's not the way this country works. we had something happen back during the gingrich revolution where this technical computer based industry came into being. and the bubble popped. .

caller: and then allows someone to come into the office and write their own bill for how the industry will operate, it ended up costing this country and all these states a lot of revenue because -- and correct me if i'm wrong, i i don't think there's any sales tax on anything you buy online. happy new decade. guest: thank you. i think the caller's point reflect the basic issue that we have an economic situation and the system that has really created a difficult fiscal situation for the states. we have structures for the state

based on past economic activity. we do not necessarily tax all the current economic activity. what it comes down to is simple math and simple budgeting. the bottom line is what must happen in the states is difficult politically. the citizens through elected officials must determine what level of services they want and what level of taxation. it is an unsustainable to have the level of services we have been getting used to at the tax structure level we are used to. those are tough political choices. some states will go with lower taxes and fewer services, others just the opposite. again, we will have to look of the performance of programs and how effective they are. host: our guest is the national executive director of the state

budget officers. the book is called "notes from the cracked ceiling." it is a look at women in politics in 2008 and beyond. anne kornblut will join us over the next hour. two men who keep a close polls on the american electorate -- peter hart and bill mcinturff -- these individuals behind the poll. "washington journal" continues in a moment. we will take a short break and look at some of the week's events and viewed through cartoonists around. the around >> i am always concerned about

the unintended consequences of new regulations. they act as a tax. you tend to get less of something when you tax the regulate it. >> monday, the republican commissioner on efforts to create a national broadband plan, net today, and the wireless industry. >> today, a look at president obama's strategy in afghanistan. remarks from two authors. >> the difference between the soviet occupation and 42 other countries involved is like night and day. market touched on this briefly. it is important to remember that one and a half million afghans were killed by the soviets. 5 million became refugees. the largest refugee population

in history at the time. the soviets also left the most heavily mined country in the world. >> you can see we actually do not have any vital interest in afghanistan itself except for domestic. national security domestic ok. what is the threat here in the u.s. or in the west? i have done a comprehensive survey of all al qaeda-like plots both successful and unsuccessful in the west in the past 20 years. and there has been no al qaeda resurgence us trumpeted three years ago but even some on this panel. >> you can see this entire program on president obama's strategy beginning at 3:25 p.m. eastern.

"washington journal" continues. host: we're pleased to welcome back peter hart and . the two men behind this poll. what is the mood of the country? that is my question to you, bill. guest: it is pretty grim. we do a simple generation for two or three generations. do you think the country is going in the right direction? the mood improved since april, but then we have seeing a continued erosion.

55% today said the country is on the wrong track. with increasing unemployment we are seeing a long-term depression and a lack of confidence that is a huge phenomena. peter, i did a question that asked who would be the leading power in 20 years. people in this country said it china. we were stunned. the fact that americans do not see themselves as a country to lead the world is a huge change and says a lot. host: bill mcinturff in his latest report sys one of the critical trends is that will be a long time before the confidence rebounds. guest: i think that bill is right. it will be quite a bit of time before the economy rebounds, and

economic confidence. at the heart of all this is unemployment. you look at unemployment with a couple of digits and when you continue to lose it is a problem. the biggest thing we learned in our nbc/wall street journal poll last month is that one out of four americans seek less money coming into their wallets and more going out. that is supporting some other family member or an adult child. that is a tremendous drag on the number of households throughout the country. host: you also do focus groups. you did one last november for the annenberg policy center. what is the difference? guest: polls simply put our cross section of americans, a quantitative study. focus groups are aimed at getting underneath, it to get people talking about the problems and the socks.

it is qualitative. you get about a dozen people around the table. but understand -- is not meant to be a cross-section. it is a way to hear people talk. host: one year after the election of barack obama in pennsylvania here is an excerpt of the exchange that took place two months ago. >> has the hope disappeared? >> not quite. >> anybody else? >> is going away. >> is the excitement:? >> i think everybody was extremely helpful. the first black man to become president of the u.s. -- it was historic. everybody is like oh, my god,

this will really make a change. it has fallen out from underneath. host: bill mcinturff, if you are inside the white house, what does that not shut tell you about the american electorate? guest: this is the trouble for the president and party. this particular president -- he is a defining gravity. we have seen two generations of numbers. how they relate with each other. he was operating way above those. at what point does gravity affected barack obama? that was around june that he began to look like a typical political figure. his personal favorable rating dropped to around 50 around november. they sold the that this would be a new era, generation of

politics. the president in august 2008 said this would be the most transparent administration ever. we would have health debate on c-span. it was a new generation promise that they have not kept. nothing is more concrete than the deal-making to get health care done. it is emblematic -- oh, my gosh, just one more politician. it is not a good place to be. host: if you look at all this was change we can believe in. --calle guest: -- if you look il of this it was a change we can believe then and i thought it was a magical on. the problems are still there. there are huge problems. he has made a lot of headway with the economy. at the beginning of the year if

you look at where we were with all the problems of financial institutions and the auto industry etc -- nonetheless the public looks at unemployment and the fact we do not have the healthcare bill through, and the problems with terrorism, and also iraq and afghanistan. the magic does not hold. the ability to be able to make headway is slow and difficult. that is the challenge facing the president. host: how long have the two of you known each other? guest: 20 + years. we have been working on the poll sends 2004. we have worked closely every month since then. host: how do you pull this poll together? guest: it is a marvelous

collaboration. essentially the two firms, bill and myself, and the people we work with, we spent an awful lot of time crafting these questions. we have different perspectives and points of view. i am a democrat. bill is a republican me gowe are trying to understand what the public is thinking. i have been added now 20 + years previous to bill. -- i have been at it 420 + years. this collaboration began back with al hunt and tim russert. they but together and that by having two people involved in politics we would bring a different perspective. in terms of sampling we do the same as we do with everything else which is a national cross- section. it is done by telephone. we include people who have cell

phones, and random digit dialing to give people who are unlisted. it gives every american "an equal chance with every other american." guest: michael jordan, scottie, peter the man. i have looked like an all-star because peter has taken the lead on this for a long time. [laughter] guest: he is a solid citizen. i thank you for a nice complemeiment. host: thank you for doing your sunday morning tennis game. do you think the 2010 elections will determine the 2012 presidential election? guest: no, this is the most important thing. i think republicans will have a very successful 2010.

the worst thing we could do is to interpret that as some kind of mandate for 2012. in 1992 republicans lost 26 seats and reagan carried so many states one year later. same thing with bill clinton's victory after that. midterm elections are a break election -- put the brake on and help to provide new direction. tell this part if it is going too far. it is very different election about what direction we are ultimately heading. the republican party will thrive on giving a signal on the democrats that they have gone too far too fast. it does not solve the party's troubles in terms of where we would take the country differently which is a much more fundamental, difficult question. host: let me get your reaction, peter hart, to some of the news of the weekend.

senator harry reid in this book is quoted as saying all light- skinned african-american with no negro dialect unless he wanted to have one. that was his description of barack obama before the 2008 election. he said that harry reid called him today and apologized for an unfortunate comment. the book is closed and i accept his apology without question. guest: i think it is one of those things behind everyone and i don't think it will be an issue. the book gets behind the scenes on a lot of things. as you said earlier think that john edwards has taken the roughest pasting out of all of this. let me pick up on bill's point. always the question about 2010 is whether it will be more like 1982 or more like 1994. in each case the incumbent party lost seats.

the difference between 1982 where ronald reagan was the president is that it was not a personal repudiation. 1994 was much more a referendum about bill clinton. my sense is that 19 -- is that will be much more about the congressional party and how the house leadership has done. then on barack obama. host: you talked to some of your focus group participants on the. first we will go to dean from kentucky on the republican line. caller: good morning. a quick comment about the administration. i personally feel this is one of the most evil administration's our country has ever seen in possibly ever will. we have obamaism and his czar

comrades and tried to take away our freedoms, change the constitution. he sets the tone whenever he lifted the ban on supporting dollars being used to kill babies in foreign countries. that is nothing but the most evil, hideous act i believe one can even imagine. he has live and has been on tv several times where he has lied. he has denied it. right now is the time i feel for states to take full advantage of the 10th amendment to declare sovereignty and literally see seed from the union. if we don't do something soon we're going right down the tube for the gates of hell. host: let me take the caller's comment. peter, i will return to you and your poll. you asked about the tea bag

move. sarah palin announced she will speak at the tea party convention. guest: two different things are happening. the anger out there that bill and i have both tapped into -- tremendous amount of unhappiness. it is being reflected in a lot of different ways. the tea party movement is one of those. the second thing, exactly what's bill addressed -- that is, does the republican party have a voice and a phase? one of the problems they have had in to those in 2009 -- thero natural voice for the republican party. unlike other years where it be out party has a voice as a new gingrich in 1994 or tip o'neill

in 1992, i do not know what that rallying point is. part of the problem republicans will face is the purity problem. in various primaries republicans who will have to make decisions between two different candidates -- the tea party will probably be part of that. host: yesterday in "the new york times" -- in this editorial he says according to a gallup report republicans were more than twice as likely as democrats and a third more likely than independents to have a pessimistic outlook for the country over the next 20 years. that might be the fourth stage of grief -- oppression. guest: this is what the new york people think.

i think the of tea party movement is a legitimate force in terms of a way to capture a lot of people who are concerned about the country's direction. they are incredibly concerned about the role of government and its spending. the history of the two parties and history is whenever there is something like a legitimate third party movement, then one of the parties absorbers' it. when you look at at our poll to a% of the country are unhappy and negative about both parties. in common they share that they think the country is doing too much. -- that is 12% of the country who thinare unhappy. we do not live in australia and

have 92% letting rates. what has happened in 2009 is every once in awhile actual elections break out. what happened is they were decidedly older, less african- american, and hispanic, and tons more republicans. the people unhappy with the president are incredibly cranked up. when see advantages that are nearly unique. they are more fired up about putting them there democrat counterparts. if we cannot translate that energy into some positive force as republicans, then shame on us. ultimately, i believe it will be part of that effort and a messy way of connecting back to the electorate to. host: let me turn to the recent

election coming up in massachusetts. one reporter saying this could be a big surprise. scott brown is within striking distance of six hitting the state attorney general in the seat previously held by the late senator kennedy. guest: bill is right that turnout will count. you can take a state as democratic as they come and say in a special election given the unhappiness with all that is going on and the sense of urgency in terms of the republican party and interests, yes, you could get a base state surprise. the democrats probably prevail there. bill knows the numbers better than i. in the last poll we had a generic trial heat -- who would you prefer to control the

congress? the democrats had a two point advantage. republicans though are more likely to turn out. guest: we call it a +8. among registered voters, a 53% -- among those they preferred a republican house by eight points. if i were democrats, here is one thing i can predict. there is the great line from "gladiator." the last 10 days for this republican and massachusetts will be quite adversarial. no one will do what i have done

will lead a republican keep up without an enormous negative. we have the state attorney general who won well and is a fine candidate with no scandal. if you're a democrat who was sweating winning massachusetts over the last 10 days -- it is like a used to joke, oh, my god we're tracking idaho. believe me, you know your party is in deep trouble. host: prediction on the january 19 election? guest: if this race is in single digits is a republican victory. it says some much about what we are talking about, how the for gold is for the democrats and predicting 2010. host: good morning, oregon. caller: i wanted to comment that

you mention the unhappiness with the public in general over the lack of transparency promised by the obama administration. one of the key points is when he first entered as president he opened the website -- with a forum for all the biggest problems we had. some of the biggest answers, most popular responses he got were on agriculture, food supply, manufacturing. all things that contribute to our economy and the loss of jobs we have had. they for basically ignored. not only is the transparency and only simulated, but it is not even really being approached in

and another at the american public can appreciate. host: take your comment and turn it into a question for our guests. caller: how would they be able to make them more transparent to the public and let us see that going on to regain our support? guest: it is really difficult in an administration to set this kind of standards. it is quite hard to run the country. i think, i know from their perspective they would argue they have done more than any administration. but my guess is a good place to start would be to keep the promises they made. one was like the health-care negotiations -- if they have those on c-span there would be like show trial, not like real

negotiations. a mistake they made was not even understanding that even if it did not turn not to be the final negotiation, that he made a very specific promise. the promised certain different things they would do. like anyone else, if you do not do it if you pay a political penalty. my first suggestion would be to go back and simply deliver. the other thing was the said it would open the spending bills city could see all the contracts. those are all things i think they could do a better job delivering and it would be in better shape for having done them. host: if you want to read the letter was sent to the senate and house democratic/republican leadership, it is available c- span.org online. peter hart, comment?

guest: i will take the caller's question a slightly different way. it is the economy. when you come back around to it, the obama administration has had so many events, issues on their radar screen. as i have said to them, there is only one 747 that is landing and that is the economy. if unemployment is in a double- digits, this and mr. shen will lose a lot of seats. if they can squeeze, down squeeze so many of the problems would disappear. there needs to be some sense of optimism that we are turning the corner. it feels like the nation is in a deepfreeze as on the weather at this stage. guest: it is a problem. when the president passed the stimulus they said that it would

not surpass 8.5%. they set their own standard. the board says we could have a five years at this rid. we lost 85,000 more jobs in december. there was the hope to break even. we could have 200,000 jobs credit for two years in a row and still only be at 9% or so unemployment because of the rising rate of those trying to re-enter the workforce. our country does not have -- here is what we have seen over 20 or 40 years and here is what has happened politically -- we don't have some. it to look at america's dealing with double-digit an employment for three or four years in a row. it will be very unstable. we have no precedent for that sustained, high unemployment, at least in our post world war ii lifetimes. host: buffalo, new york.

caller: i want to make a comment and then ask a question. the one apparent thing over the past year is that we have gone beyond party and perhaps even beyond race. by that, i think the african- american population expected barack obama to be a community organizer behind their interests. i think probably both republicans and democrats of the middle-class thought he would be a community organizer to get behind the problems of the middle-class. what has become apparent is that the economic needs of wall street once again come before the economic needs of main street. and, as far as the third party goes, i don't know how you define it, but it probably has something to do with that. barack obama has moved beyond

community organizing. he has hit the top. once you have hit the top you support the top. host: thank you. who has a higher rating, politicians or wall street executives? guest: it is a close contest. what comes down as much as anything is a this is so much of the anchor. -- the anger. his standing in the african- american community remains exceptionally high. they have not re-evaluated him. the real problem for the president is the sense of how to rein in what is happened with the financial institutions and how people feel? there is a tremendous amount of anger and the sense that they have really not heard the message which definitely is, look, we helped you out in your time of need. we expect you to make sacrifices and be able to

understand what is going on. this is a huge part of the anger out there right now. guest: the front page of "the new york times" was talking about record bonuses on wall street. they for talk about whether the bonuses will be seven figures or eight figures for some of these. eight figure bonuses. i have to acknowledge the we are at the moment where i said thank goodness, that john mccain is not president. if this were a republican president with those kind of wall street bonuses and that type of perceived historic inaction and that lady's comments are true -- but guess what? it is the obama administration, on his watch. i don't think the american public thought it would be repaid by if figure bonuses after bailing out these institutions with 10% unemployment happening.

it will be one more shock wave to hit the obama administration. host: speaking of salary and bonuses, this is a story from the head of fox news. a $23 million contract signed by rupert murdoch. fox and news is believed to make more money than cnn, msnbc, in the evening newscasts of nbc, abc, and cbs ,. guest: both bill and i know roger ales who has become the alex rodriguez in the news media. he has done exceptionally well. -- we both know roger ailes. we need some sort of financial

regulation coming through. it will be very interesting to see how the president and congress deal with that issue. the american public wants them to host: george, good morning on the republican line. caller: thank you. well, the way i see it -- host: turn down the volume as we're getting a little feedback. caller: the way i look at it if all the media and people like you two would have looked into the background of the president, we would not be in this mess we are in today. because nobody looked into his background, nobody knew who would he was. the only thing was he was black and was a community organizer. anything else you just -- it

escaped you. you did not look for it. that is the reason we are in this mess now. you did not have any experience and anything -- he did not have any experience and anything. all he had ever done before he got -- shoved into the senate in illinois was he was a community organizer. host: how does that sentiment play out this year? guest: you know, i was part of the campaign against now president obama. i worked at the polls for john mccain's campaign. there is an article today in "the washington post." one of the things we should remember, the president did not take public finance. they literally had a half a

million dollar general election campaign. everytime we got close the would drop another $50 million. like in healthcare the president said we would save $2,500 per person. but we would not have mandates. that is an easy message to sell. in the environment where we were being outspent by 5-1 in the general elections, yeah, it is very difficult to litigate those claims. look, that is the campaign. they ran a brilliant campaign. the other thing, once these have gone into this titian's collapsed in mid-september when it up on election day with seven out of tin in the country saying that the country was on the

wrong track. 70% of those of but for the party out of power. out of 53 the first 49 is just the first 7% of wrong track voters. that is hard to stop. frankly, lastly, to give the president his due, these men and women who survived this to become president go through more scrutiny and attention than almost any. things mr. obama is a very engaging, incredibly smart guy who has an extraordinary personal and oratorical skill. those things are true now and were true during the campaign. those skills do incredibly well during the american campaign. host: this one says that the president won the presidency fair and square, playing completely by the rule.

get over it, c-span callers. caller: as far as -- i want to comment on the banking system. people were upset about barack obama not cracking down on the banking systems. people do not understand the hidden agenda in politics because it is not advertised. these banking industry's give millions of dollars to people who campaigned for, to be elected to offices. hypothetically, if barack obama, president bush, or anywhere to put certain restrictions on those banks even the they don't tax them, that would be a very dicey subject. it is behind-the-scenes politics. where all these tea parties in anger and marching -- there was

a little, but not like now, when former president bush engaged us into this unjust iraqi war? host: e? guest: the anger was their in 2008. it is not as though president obama walton to the president, but the mood was incredibly favorable for democrat. whether it had been hillary clinton or barack obama, i think the democrats would have had a superb chance of winning the presidency as they did. the anger has been. been -- has been there. and at all institutions, not just at the president. it can to get through the banking industry, the legal industry, and you can look at the press. it is that the public is frustrated and unhappy that

we're not dealing with a problem. and the sense of partisanship is also a problem. both parties do not seem to be 19 to deal with the challenges facing the country. but each is broken off into their own little segment. host: one says that though tea party is nothing more than the southern strategy rebecs. it is still an appeal to racism. guest: one think i admire about president obama, given his quick apology -- in august there was this whole issue -- and the president said no. people in america have a chance to have legitimately different views. the president himself in his entire career has worked extraordinarily hard to keep race out of the questions. he deserves admiration and

credit for that. the president himself has addressed the. people have a very strong views and can express them and it is not racist. race, look, like what do we have seen this weekend there is an enormous sensitivity a aboutrace in this country that is easily ruptured -- about race in this country that is easily rupture. walking 300 extra yards to keep race out of the political equation. host: when you are polling are doing a focus group -- we want to show this ex. what is the view of congress? guest: it is a devastatingly negative. -- host: we want to show this excerpt soon. guest: it is aimed at both sides of the aisle.

the public is exceptionally unhappy. they wonder why we're not getting things done. as the previous caller said, all this money and use into the political process, not only the banking history that every industry, and they feel their voices drowned out and so is their agenda. host: you asked a simple question, what comes to mind when they think of congress? can you elaborate for a moment? guest: they essentially took every single word they could think of that was as-as it was, and when they talked about -- and negative as a the, what is and when a hate they took satan and everyevil figure so judgebeelzebub. host: this is from outside

philadelphia with the pollster peter hart. >> write one other thing on your blue piece of paper. when you think of the congress is there a face that comes your mind? [laughter] if you think of the philadelphia phillies or the eagles or whatever, who sort of is theview of the person you think of it? is there anyone face that comes to mind? just write it down. if you do not have anyone, that is also falling. what have you got, bill? >> that is hard. my first instinct is to push satan, but -- [laughter] >> two people wrote down

"satan." >> yes. >> i was not sure of the spelling of beelzebub. >> that is that the natiofascin. i would not have guess satan, but that is why we do a. >> there was not the face perce. i wrote stodgy old white dude. >> great. ok. good, who else? >> nancy pelosi and harry reid. >> she is right. -- guest: she is right. i have been in congress and there are a lot of staunchy old

white dudes. a set of words sethow people feel about reelecting congress and how much the want to reelect their own incumbent. this december the numbers today are worse than october 2006 or of october 1994. today the numbers are worse. if you are the democratic party and you have an 80-vote majority, it will be severely john. we can see it coming. poll we ask if you are likely to vote for someone who is 90% republican to vote with president obama, or with nancy pelosi? its is - 10 -9 , but -30 for

nancy pelosi. that is for fine. the democrat leadership in the house and senate has very low numbers. there toxic for nancy pelosi. sitting on top of the most anti- congressional mood we have seen since 1994. it does not take a rocket scientist or are years of experience to save whoops, the democratic majority is in huge trouble. host: both strategist and individuals behind nbc newss/ wall street journal survey. henry is joining us. caller: one of the major problems we have in this country is to many in foreign, misinform voters who are under the spell of propaganda like bill mcinturff who was posing as a

pollster but is really a propagandist. when you talk about transparency, bill, how transparent and the president began telling the people that health care reform is one of the most important legs to economic reform? he show them which senators and congressmen are on the payrolls of the healthcare, insurance company. he showed them who was on their side in the economic realm. bill paulson -- secretary paulson give $750 billion unconditionally to wall street. president obama came in and give them another $850 billion i think, but with attachments. with conditions attached. that they had to pay the money back. it was alone. the people in the media, you get to paint the picture for the people and to have it both ways.

people believe that president obama is propping up wall street one really president obama save and our economic bacon and made it an investment for the people, something never before done. guest: let me just say to the caller that i have worked with bill mcinturff for 20 years and he is the best. i have no problems with him. he looks at the issues and data as a straightforward as anyone can in the business. whether you are working from the democratic side or the republican, i'd i can guarantee you we analyze and strategizing. from the point, yes, we are part. as a n but in terms of doing the job and doing it right, bill mcinturff visit as well as anyone in the business. guest: you know, what the guy is referring to is what the obama administration would try to argue. they have tried to be more

transparent than the previous administration. they and not getting much credit. and they are not getting much credit because they felt that health care passes and that it is finally done and get to do a victory lap. people forget that they presumed health care would be done in august before the congressional recess and then they could turn to the economy. part of what is happening is there is only so much narrative you can cover from washington's. the obama administration has been thwarted in their ability to talk about the economy. what peter is talking about and i think is true is until people's personal economic situation improves these numbers about congress, the president, washington will not. that is the trouble. washington does not have that much impact on the american

economy that quickly. host: here is a story -- barack obama, jimmy carter and an "-" between the two of them. this reporter says that obama is battling the perception that he is a wimp on national security. guest: i don't think that is the problem. he handled himself exceptionally well this week on the issue of the terrorist attacks. this is one of his real strengths. as the journalist put it, that essentially his restraint and ability to look at things dispassionately work for him exceptionally well this week. the biggest problem -- and we see this in our focus groups -- when you ask people to talk about barack obama's backbone

they're not certain what it is. there's a time in every presidency when an individual is tested. at that stage we reach another conclusion. for ronald reagan i think it was a nine month in when he handled the air traffic controllers' strike. for john kennedy obviously it was the cuban missile crisis. in every presidency and for barack obama that moment has not arrived. the article in the newly times" is trying to do with that. -- indiana "the new york times" is trying to do that. guest: the president is doing a good job this week, but it happened december 25. the gap is interesting. president ronald reagan fired

the air traffic controllers for having an illegal strike. there was enormous public outrage and it hurt his approval rating at the time. you can go back to read what the russians were think you. it impressed the russians about ronald reagan's result and led to their retraction around the world because they saw a president with results. 20 years later reading the russian intelligence about their reaction is incredibly interesting. host: sam is next from lincoln, neb.. caller: good morning, gentlemen. my comment is i have been in the u.s. for the last 50 years. the way i'm looking at what is happening in our country, things are going backwards. my question is, if the congress and the government of the u.s.

care about us taxpayers and the american people, first -- my question is, why do they allow the credit card interest rates to go higher like 21% or even 29%, sometimes even higher? because that is part of the problem by a lot of people in this country are in trouble. because they cannot pay off these debts. the second question is if we care about the american public, there are so many people dying inside the west for gangs and from drug dealers. and it seems that the media is concentrating more than 90% on human and far away in different corners of the world where those people are living in caves.

but the american people are dying financially and dine physically from the gangs, drug, says and druglords in this country. host: thank you, sam. guest: a couple of different things mentioned here. first and foremost, the uppew poll as measured american public opinion abroad. it has indeed improved tremendously under president obama. that is one of the credits i think he obviously deserves. in terms of the issue at hand -- how the begin to deal with all the current problems domestically? we need to get to those. the drug problem is mentioned. the credit card problem -- both of those our domestic issues and need to be handled. both have both economic roots in

them as well as psychological. host: in your poll back in april 30% surveyed said healthcare reform was a pretty good idea, 26% said it was bad. in december it was 32% saying it was good, 47 percent signsbad. guest: we asked that question differently -- and we included do not know enough to have been a. opinion we have a high number who say they do not have an opinion. if he's a good or bad it really measures and to. and city part of what has happened in the debate is the president has not been able to mobilize his core constituents beyond 30 per. sign almost everyone else with an opinion has move negative. december was very difficult.

the time between the house and senate votes are very. difficult people watched people fighting. they say, gosh, it cannot be a. good they hear about this agreement and watch this tawdry legislative process. -- they say that it cannot be good. part of this health-care rating is not just about the bill itself, but about the process. for example, in some of the pulling the public from massachusetts -- that polling shows a net negative reaction amongst likely voters to the healthcare bill. when i talk about the importance of that election is a powerful sign. a negative reaction now -- imagine what will be like in most of the swing districts or states for 2010. host: in one phrase described

the mood of the country. guest:-and bleak. the public is looking for some light and help from all of the. this has been a tough time. -- negative and bleak. for president obama it is the billy not only to tell us where we are, but to charge where we will go ahead. the public wants to know if we should turn around and go back or move forward, and what does it look like an mean? host: the biggest challenge for republicans? guest: tone and tenor. as a party we cannot go too far. ultimately you have to fix the party's image with younger voters and latinos to build a majority coalition. . .

>> the 2010 elections and terrorist issues are topics today. and today we will meet republican national chair, michael steele and arnold

schwarzenegger. on abc this week, george stephanopolis is back today. the guest on fox news sunday, hosted by chris wallace includes the rnd and dnd chairs. republican, john karl and jack reed. on cbs you are hear bob sehffer and diane feinstein. also there be joseph lieberman, you can listen to all five c-span radio stations. that's on nbc and channel 132

and follow us on facebook and twitter. >> today on c-span, a look at president obama's strategy in afghanistan. and hear from peter bergman and mark sageman. by way of the 42 countries involved in afghanistan is like night and day. it's important to remember that one half afghans were killed by soviets, and one third of the population left. and the soviets left the most heavy-minded country in the world. to compare this to what is happening today is not very good history. >> you can see we don't have interest in afghanistan itself

except for national interest. so that leads to the next question, what is the threat here in the united states or west? i have done a comprehensive survey of al-qaeda-like plots successful and unsuccessful in the west since the creation of al-qaeda. well, there has been no al-qaeda resurgence as trumped three years ago even as seen as some people on this program. >> you can see this program in it's entirety at 3:25 on c-span. "washington journal" continues. host: we are talking with anne kornblut, her book, "notes from the cracked ceiling." >> thank you for having me. host: you say that this is a

letdown and drove apart mothers and daughters and setback the equality in the political sphere of decades, why? guest: there wasn't a bipartisan women's movement. and if you w'look what happene hillary clinton won a lot of women, and older women. but she split younger women. and when sarah palin was on the republican ticket, she was not able to bring over the democratic women or the independent women. so rather than being a ground swell of a women's movement, i look in the book that it splintered generationally across party lines. and elected officials, some who

went for obama and some for clinton. host: when hillary clinton withdrew from the race. >> although we were not able to shatter that ceiling this time, thanks to you it has about 18 million cracks from it. and the light is shining through like never before filling us all with the hope and the sure knowledge that the past will be a little easier next time. host: anne kornblut outside of giving you a title for a book, what did that mean for talking about clinton and others around the campaign? guest: it was the final speech, and by many reckoning her best, it was the first time in the campaign where she talked about

gender in a specific way. if you think back 2007 and 2008 her answer would be, i am not running because i am women. but that i am not running to be the first woman president. and it was talked about whether they should talk about the gender speech, and when president obama gave his landmark speech on race, she could not talk about it now. but that was the first time she tapped into what if she had won and been the first woman president. host: you write in the book that the casual approach was stunning, unlike the clinton's campaigns of the public would

perceive a woman in high command, the mccain camp made a calculation based on gut feelings. guest: you have to remember what was going on in the campaign, obama looked ahead and mccain looked who to pick, he wanted to pick joe lieberman where could there be obvious down sides. and he looked and saw this young, female governor in alaska, what they didn't think about in hindsight are some of the pitfalls that women candidates all over the country experience. one of the main ones is that

they are scrutinized for their credentials and challenged if they are experienced enough to run. and that's what happened. host: later sarah palin is speaking at the tea convention, what does that tell you? guest: that she is not going away, and it could be that she says she's got as good shot as host: she made a number of appearances including the oprah winfrey show. and the interview with katie couric. >> i have sources and alaska is not out of touch, believe me

alaska is like the microcosim of america. >> obviously you read books and magazines, why didn't you name them? >> obviously i have, of course, all my life, i am a lover of books and magazines. and by the time she asked that question, i was annoyed 7çnd it was unprofessional to name those. >> were you emotional? >> no, it was are you kidding me, and it was like she was undiscovering a nomaddic tribe, and asked me how are you paying attention to the world. i kind of rolled my eyes and thought this is the problem with the state of journalism

today, no matter what i say, i will be twisted and perceived negative. host: anne kornblut, what was happening in that campaign at that point? guest: she noted that the problems happened just weeks after she was picked. and she said she was annoyed with the question, and politicians get annoyed with questions. and the same was true in her debate preparation and getting ready for her interviews. other mccain aides who i interviewed said that she refused to prepare and built up resentment in the campaign. and many of those are still today, like the title of her book, "going rogue," that she

had gone off the reservation and they made a mistake to pick her and she didn't understand how to run. and she failed to understand not preparing for these interviews, any step she would have an added layer. she was young, and a woman, and these were new things and would have to answer what books and magazines she read and prove it, being a governor would not speak for itself. host: we will get your calls, e-mail comments and twitter comments, it's twitter.com/c-span wg. in the comments she was spoofed by her conscious and not known

and started to lose her bearings. guest: it was interesting she didn't have that many to provide that information, but a few said that she came in confident and knowledge-wise and her ability to perform. and especially with the katie couric interview she started to lose that talent, being in the national glare, and ridiculed by criticism and even by tina fey that these would damage her. host: we have bob joining us. caller: good morning, you start the program out with leftist journalist, and you end with a

leftist journalist. and i can prove this, and anything this woman would say about sarah palin, is not credible at all. these are msnbc hang-outs and the first two guests were msnbc hang-outs. host: caller, i have to disagree. caller: well, i don't care what you have to do. "the new york times" present this gal, and how many books were o'reilly had and never reviewed. it's just a bunch of leftist garbage. host: so do you have a question for anne kornblut? caller: no, she's not qualified for a call. host: we have our next caller.

caller: happy new year, i hate to follow that call. i want to give background and i am a strong supporter of secretary of state, hillary clinton. you can tell in my voice i am rather passionate. and i am also educated. and i am also middle class in my work experience and my wealth. and i am also very much a supporter of civil rights. i was in fact for years a corporate recruiter working in affirmative action recruiting. so i don't want anyone to think that because i backed hillary clinton that i am racist vcñor a class of person that can't

think for themselves. so let me just say back in the -- after the iowa primary we went to new hampshire. at that time a woman of strong intelligence and skills was asked how did she do it all. how could she work as hard as she was working to try to win and try to do everything she was trying to do. and she was caught off guard, hillary was caught off guard by the question and her eyes watered and the whole world said she was a cryer. host: elizabeth, let me jump in because we have that moment. >> it's not easy. and i couldn't do it if i just didn't passionately believe it was the right thing to do.

you know i have so many opportunities from this country, i just don't want to see us fall backwards. you know -- [applause] you know this is very personal for me. it's not just political, it's not just public. i see what is happening. we have to reverse it. and some people think that elections are a game. they think it's like who is up, who is down. it's about our country, it's about our kids' futures. it's about all of us together. some of us put ourselves out there and do this against some pretty difficult odds. and we do it, each one of us because we care about our country. guest: that was one of the most compelling moments of the campaign. and the caller's point, there was a lot of people that

rallied around the moment, where she did choke up, not cried. i am glad you referred to it, she didn't cry, she teared up. the day before that was she was in a debate in new hampshire, and obama said it was about her likeability. and said she was likeable enough. he was joking and some women felt it was dismissive. in the choking up, there was a lot of media criticism that she was finished. and there was an uprising and many came from out of state, saying we won't stand for this. it was a moment when hillary clinton was a woman being dismissed and female voters

wouldn't call for it. host: our next caller from virginia. caller: good morning, i have a question for your guest, it seemed to me during the campaign and primary, the main difference between president obama and hillary clinton was his vote on the war effort, he voted against it and she voted for it. i wondered if she felt that played in her loss in the primaries. great question, and i would say absolutely it played into it. she had been thinking about running for president, many years, as far back as the barack obama war vote. and she thought and her advisors how she would be on national security.

and not to say about her vote at that time, but that running as a democrat and a woman, she would have to demonstrate her toughness. and it's hard to imagine how things could have been different and been against the war and not have given obama the opening to run. host: the book is called "notes from the cracked ceiling," with hillary clinton's non-dry moment as nonsincere, that i doubt. guest: she's not someone who enjoys showing weakness. i interviewed advisors after that moment, they thought it was over after that moment. their blackberry's going off at the moment. some of them that spoke to her

afterwards, she said, i showed weakness, it's over, can i recover from this. but there was contrary that "a," she wasn't weak but "b," she seemed real. host: also you say that with a twist, her good looks were problematic in their own right drawing attention but really was a liability. guest: it was so interesting, her attractiveness was what her appeal, and the hot vp buttons that many thought was fun.wa+ but quickly the nickname caribou barbie was taking off.

in talking to strategists after the campaign was over, women that are attractive to the beauty queen level can suffer in the mind of voters of perhaps not up for the job. in michigan when running for governor, female voters said she was too pretty to be governor. and they went back and re-shot her ads, and this was not how the clinton campaign, and then they combined her looks and

then you wind up with a stereotype of a bimbo out shopping than preparing to be vice president. host: when and why did you write this book? guest: i started thinking it in the campaign to see the woman, yes, there were two women that ran. but ultimately they were losing, clinton had lost and then the mccain campaign. and when they both did lose, we probably should exam what happened here, this is the first time that two women ran at this level. and there were many aspects that were gender related and when and if another woman runs down the road, we have a chance to see what is gender and something else. host: we will go to tony from

florida on the republican line. caller: good morning, mrs. kornblut. most men in america did not vote for hillary clinton even if they were democratic, republican or independent. because she's unlikeable and perceived to hanging on to her husband that was an adulterer and then you have sarah palin, and she's attractive. i think you are dead wrong that her attractability detracted from her capability to win. there are bright women that are capable, and you had a woman that was pro-life who thinks

that abortion is killing babies. you had a woman who is 7!again homosexual marriages and you have a woman that was a born-again christian. these are attributes that anyone that is male or female in america. it's really that hillary clinton is pro-abortion and for gays and lesbians. but you have sarah palin that has morals and value and beauty. guest: the caller makes two great points, attractiveness can be an asset, it doesn't have to be a negative. but it's usually among women in focus groups it's found that men are all for it, but it's female voters say that how çca

she look so great and care for her job, i can't do it. it's not just sheer political terms, i am not saying that being pretty makes her less intelligent. and the other good point you made caller, party does often trump gender. they have found that very rarely people who disagree on social issues like abortion cross over because of a woman on the ticket. it was never likely that the mccain campaign would pullover these. host: our conversation is with anne kornblut who writes for "the washington post" and before that worked for "the new york times" and "boston globe,"

her book called "notes from the cracked ceiling." we have robert joining us. caller: good morning, i agree with the gentleman that called about hillary clinton who voted for the war in iraq and also her husband. and senator palin, i think she's honest and would be a good candidate for the republican party, and i think she would be a good candidate for them. for barack obama, i think that many americans are fighting not al-qaeda or the economy or the jobless situation, they are fighting barack obama because who he is. and they probably need someone who looks like them and i think they would be happier who is a republican.

thank you. host: going back to robert's earlier point, do you think that sarah palin will run in 2012? guest: i am not going to try to get inside of her head, but i think it's possible and i think she's got a base, it wouldn't surprise me at all. host: we have oscar joining us from tennessee. caller: good morning, i was listening to a couple of the most recent callers. the lady that mentioned from brentwood that mentioned the fact she didn't want to be considered a racist. being african-american who supported during the primaries, hillary clinton, i definitely would not, you know see anything against her support of hillary clinton. hillary clinton had a lot of

african-american supporters. i don't think that would be an issue. but the one thing i want to ask the author, this whole phenomena of last callers pointing out that women can't win, itnus doesn't look like as long as we have this notion that because of gender there is something wrong with their candidacy. there is going to be something wrong. and it's kind of disheartening because we are losing a lot of talent. a lot of committed individuals who happen to be woímo host: oscar, let me use your point and go back to what you included at the conclusion of your book. you quote secretary of state, hillary clinton, she appeared and said, i am not going to pretend that running for

presidency is not daunting, it's difficult but there is a woman that will be able to achieve that. guest: she's been very cautious not only as secretary of state, but before she ran, when she got the question, can a woman win. she said, we don't know until we try. the caller makes a good point there is something disheartening. before i covered the campaign, i thought of the challenges of women running. a lot of women in congress, and female house speaker and women on the supreme court. but when i did the research and looked at congress and looked at the numbers, i was surprised that it's less than one-fifth

of women in congress. and some obstacles they faced. i too was disspirited in ways i didn't think i would be. host: one of those moments came in the debate from congress women ferrell from new york and bush. >> let me help you, in iran, we were held by a foreign government. in leb anon -- lebanon we had this government. >> let me say i resent your attitude that you have to educate me. i have been in iran and have seen what has happened in the several months of your administration.

secondly, please don't categorize my answers, leave the interpretation of my answers to the people watching this debate. host: anne kornblut. guest: that's an example of what hillary clinton felt too, that she has credentials and can be tough. i had an interesting interview with geraldine ferrell, and she asked who her daughter had voted for, she voted for barack obama, and she went crazy where her daughter represented this split, where some voted for hillary clinton and others did

not. host: we have john joining us on the republican line. caller: good morning, i have been listening to ms. kornblut and she's called sarah palin a bimbo and gives hillary clinton the praise and says she's nonpartisan. the reason i think because you have the elites from the two coast, and then the center part of the nation. and sarah palin represented the common-day person. this is a person that was a mayor of a town and got involved in a governship because of her own work and what she had done. and hillary clinton and barack obama had machines behind them. it was all theatrics, and that is what most of the campaigns

are anymore, theatrics. host: tom, do you think that sarah palin should or will run in 2012? caller: i think she will try, when she announced her vice presidency, the press had set up lawyers to find anything. it will be insurmountable to overcome the press and the liberals on their attack on her. host: but what is the difference of someone like sarah palin and you can go back to dan quayle that was relatively unknown or back to 1984 when geraldine ferrell, was there any difference? caller: not that much

difference, but there was no old money behind her, and knew the nuances, a word from new york, that those people know the besñtricks of the game. host: good point. guest: i want to correct the caller, i am not calling sarah palin a bimbo. the point i was making is that people called her a bimbo in the campaign. i have taken a sympathetic look at her in this book i have written. host: and her being on the stage, you go back in history, is there any difference between her and others? guest: former president bush was sitting there when the new was on, and he got the news and saw on the crawler screen who was picked. and just as surprised.

and he said, she does not know what is about to hit her, and speaking from his own experience and his father's. and there was no one that could have survived it easily, it was going to be tough no matter what. host: he remarked was she the governor of guam. guest: no, he didn't. host: i think that was another book. what surprised you from this book? guest: well for women to run, this surprised me. and we see this in obama as with hillary clinton. in looking at the campaign i was surprised that she reacted to one incident, about her daughter and there was a tv

commentator who made a remark, that chelsea clinton was being pimped out. the clinton campaign had heard so much, and when senator clinton heard about this, she was very upset in a telephone call. one saying she cried. but it was one incident fairly late in the campaign, that got her emotions started. and that was not something i expected. host: we have john joining us this morning. caller: hi, give me one second to get some perspective. i am a world war ii trooper, i jumped in normandy and jumped throughout, so i know what war

is like. hillary clinton is not president today because she voted for the iraq war. she showed us what we have in politicians today. all they care about getting reelected. she didn't care she was voting to see g.i.'s to iraq to die or maimed for life. she only cared about precluding the -zvrepublicans from attack her from being soft or terror or not voting on the war. and today this is why she's not president today and deserves not to be president. i was a supporter until that blatant cover-your-[beep] vote.

guest: i would say that in every career there are those votes. i wouldn't get in her head about her emotions when she voted to authorize the nñwar in iraq. i know from her advisors that she's naturally hawkish on defense. we saw in this most recent afghanistan review policy, she % was an advocate to send more troops when others were not. host: let me have you respond to this from your book, you palin, it wasn't that they just lost but in resounding devastating ways. their candidacies unleached strains of sexism that many

thought were eradicated. guest: certainly, i thought they didn't exist and that we were past ridicule that they endured. when they covered their campaigns, i didn't think you could cover clinton and palin and find anything in common. but in fact the response o)zto them, the level of response and the intensity of the response, that they were so polarizing. and i add if you look at the three most senior women in elected politics today, or the most visible. pelosi, clinton and palin, they are extremely polarizing. host: you wrote that they sold out to wall street, and let

that stand. but she was good in campaigns. guest: she was with the president for eight years as first lady, and that gave her the stature to run in new york. and part of her fund-raising network was the part that she and her husband had been a team. and a lot of voters, not just male voters but i heard from young female. we want someone who got there on their own, not through their husband. who didn't see her rise as part of her own attributes. and as the campaign went on and her husband made inflammatory remarks and he became a liability as well. host: our next caller.

caller: good morning, steve. i would like to say a few things steve, and we will touch on women for sure. one as a non-hyphenated american, i would love to see condoleezza rice run, i would like to see her run and she's pretty dark skinned. host: speak of condoleezza rise. guest: there are a lot of republicans that would like to see her run, i am doubtful because of how tough that is. and running for the presidency would be a huge leap. and she told me as she watched the campaign, she was not

surprised to see obama pull ahead and win. she felt in this country we had crossed the bar on race, but on gender we still had pay -- still had a ways to go. and she said that it was tougher on her as a woman than african-american. but if i only had a quarter for said they wish that condoleezza rice would run. host: go ahead caller. caller: i was on the the war where they were waving the flags, and some were castrated in the media by the college kids. i want to say one thing about hillary clinton, when it comes to walter cronkite i think he's got the blood of kids on his hands. and now let's get to hillary

clinton. i worked in the post office in the early 80's, and there was a big push of affirmative action. and these programs were to be directed for male, blacks. to help keep the black families together and these male guys were at the post office and not able to percolate to the top. and in reality this is what happened, we had college girls come in and with six months of education, but they were called a minority -- host: we only have a minute left, do you have a question for anne kornblut? caller: i wanted to point out that i really -- host: are you still there? caller: yeah, i am here, what

happened is all of these girls, the females were getting these jobs and the blacks were not getting the jobs. even though they had so much more experience. believe me when you bring in inexperienced people, no matter how smart they are. it doesn't matter where, they are going to screw it up. host: thank you gary. guest: race versus gender, it's almost impossible to untangle. i will say that identity politics has been a big deal for many i]decades and will continue to be. host: one comment from our twitter page, if sarah palin wants to be considered relevant, shouldn't see be in an elected position? guest: i think that's going to be a question for her to run, last time it was about her credentials and now it's about her staying power.

host: what will it take for a woman to win? guest: it will take the right women, if it's not sarah palin in 2012, then it will be quite a ways off. host: anne kornblut from washington post, in her book, "notes from the cracked ceiling." guest: thank you. host: our phone lines are open, and we will look at some news of the week by leading cartoonists from around the country.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to open our phone lines, tell us what is on your mind, we have open phones here. some headlines include this story generating a lot of news, writing on apology of remarks on obama's color and dialect. senator reid apologizing on saturday once predicting that obama could become president because he had light skin and no negro dialect. and mr. reid said that he apologized and the president accepts his apology and it's considered case closed. and also is karzai with his cabinet list and with a

stand-off with a new list cabinet and others were rejected in the past week. but the parliament showed no sign of bowing to karzai's wishes. and the house speaker promising a thorough vetting of the candidates. we have gwen joining us. caller: good morning, steve, how are you. host: i am great. caller: happy new year. i am calling as an african-american woman, i want to make a comment. i think that senator reid's comment is onpoint. some people donxunderstand what he is saying. i understand where he is coming from. and that's why the african-american community jumps on his side. because we understand why he is

where he's coming from. i do not want o-any republican any other person in america to make this racial, because it's not. what he is saying is so true. and the other point is on the book that anne kornblut wrote, in alabama, we have one female and several gentlemen running for mayor, we have an election on 19th of february. the female came in because of [inaudible], but did you know that she lost the two gentlemen. and i think it's women will not vote for another woman. we have to get away from this issue that a man can win in everything. women have to embrace this politics. host: thank you, gwen. thew>i director says that it wa

poor prey craft in afghanistan of the c.i.a. resulting in seven deaths in december. saying that we found no commentary that this was brought because of poor trade craft. we have joan joining us from new jersey. caller: good morning, i wanted to call and say i always watch c-span and so impressed with your recent c.e.o.'s remarks about having the health span meetings open to the public and holding obama to his promise.

i thought in these times and in view of the media, their liberal agenda, this is refreshing. hats off to c-span and i will continue to be a viewer. host: joan, thank you for the call, if you want to read the letter sent on december 30th, available online at c-span.org. speaking of politics, kathleen parker writes that the race with scott brown for the seat to fill senator kennedy, and parker saying that the january 19th special election when hillary clinton was overtaken by barack obama, only this time it's a wonder kid from the right, overtaking an over confident woman on the left. ben is joining us this morning. caller: good morning, these people call and talk about

sarah palin. no one asked to call her anything, she calls herself. this woman is not qualified to be a president of the united states, she's probably not qualified to be anything at all. i don't know how she got to where she got to but not on brains. i think that the right women can be president of the united states. condoleezza rise i wouldn't vote for because of her involvement in that bush administration. and hillary clinton on that vote for the war, i don't know why she did it. but how much time does the president have? is the president really in charge or just a figurehead? because while in this new administration, i hear the same writers and words that wrote

for the past administration. it doesn't sound too much different. host: ben, thanks for the call. other headlines, the sunday post, the change in republicans winning and the change, of a surprise announcement. we have derrick calling in. caller: yes in regards to sarah palin, should she declare her candidacy as a republican, i would vote for her, i can't picture a better candidate for the republican party. host: we have had the lines of the chevy vote for the g.m., we

have ken joining from michigan, good morning. good morning ken, you are on the air. caller: i am on the air? host: yes, from michigan on the republican line, good morning. caller: yes, i want to make a remark about sarah palin running for president. if she does run, i will support her. secondly if she does run, she's not holding a public office, she's running on her own. they got paid to run, hillary got paid and biden got paid and mccain got paid. they all are getting paid for being a senator, they are not doing their job, but running for president. that's all i have to say. host: thanks, from tallahassee, florida, with two people

running for chair, and next month it seems certain that it won't be governor crist's party anymore. and could be governor jeb bush's, as insider say he worked behind-the-scenes to the embattled senator greer, and saying that two will run for the chair. next is our caller from athens, georgia. caller: good morning, i have a couple of things i want to go through, it's been a year-and-a-half. first of all, i voted for barack obama, and second i didn't appreciate the bailout. they are too big to fail, they

should fail. third, the health care bill, what the house and senate have done, it's garbage, should be thrown out. third, you shouldn't have sent 30,000 troops into afghanistan. next, the airplane bomber, it's security arrest, and it's not obama's fault. we need to work on these, happy new year, steve, and mr. obama, make the health care public. host: thank you caller, and correction that the plane bomber started in amsterdam. one headline about rupert

murdock that was to leave fox, instead he got a contract and fox news is to make more than cnn, msnbc and nbc, abc and cbs combined. our ñkunext caller. caller: good morning, i want to talk to the republicans out there. michael steele was on the air a couple of days ago, and talked about his new book, 12 steps to defeating the obama agenda. the fact that he writes a title like that, it's so telling. he writes about the 12 steps as addicted or some disease to get over. and defeating the obama agenda as if we are at war with obama. this is traitor and treasonist,

this is not the time for michael steele to get him out of office. let him do what we asked him to do, and then vote him out after four years. host: thanks for the call, we have dorothy joining us. caller: dorothy from michigan, right. host: please go ahead, quickly. caller: i want to say that barack obama won because all the truth was not told by the mainstream media. fox news is winning because they tried to inform people of the agenda. host: dorothy, thanks for the call. we are out of time, the "washington journal" continues tomorrow. and we have our guests, brian jenkins to talk about the