[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] host: and government panel investigating the gulf oil spill will hold hearings all this week in houston, beginning today at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. look for live coverage on c- span2 this morning. meanwhile, the papers are filled with headlines about the u.s. leaving iraq, the ongoing battle in afghanistan and next week mideast peace talks begin anew. good morning on this monday, august 23, 2010. a lot of bearing headlines. we will begin -- before we get to our guest -- the first 30 minutes talking to you. when it comes to public policy, what is on your mind? all numbers will be on your screen -- the phone numbers will be on your screen.

examples of some of the headlines in the papers. "the wall street journal," we will begin with that. credit card rates, levels hit nine-year high as new rules limiting penalty fees prompt new rise. the of that story in "the wall street journal" is another economic story about the situation in many states. facing budget gaps, city's self parking, airports, and zoos.

that is a story in "the wall street journal" if you want to read more about that. "usa today" as a front-page story about children and katrina. children still can't get past katrina. the study found there is emotional pain for thousands. we are covering a hearing today. go to c-span.org for when it will air. but it is a panel looking at children and disasters. it is 2010 report to congress. the fema director will be there. this morning, a little bit more

about the states. here is a piece in the opinion section of "the wall street journal" about how states hide their budget deficits, if you are interested in that story line. that is inside "the wall street journal." also paul krugman writes opinion piece in "the new york times," now, that's rich, looking at the bush tax cuts. he says --

the headline for his piece is called "now, that's rich." "the wall street journal" opinion piece on spending. how much the spending baseline has increased in 31 months, $4.40 trillion. it says -- new jersey, i ran on the democratic line. what is on your mind this

morning? caller: first of all, let's just say that i really support the end of the bush tax cuts. i am very sorry that our society has become of rich and the poor. the middle class has just dropped out of sight. may i also please comment about c-span. i think basically you really do a fair job but every morning when i see that number 0001 republicans, 0002 democrats, there is an unconscious thing, everybody knows number 1 is what you want to be. host: the watch it frequently? every month we change it up whether it is democrats first or republicans first. caller: i am very happy to hear that. it does not matter so much who is first or second but the fact that one is 001, 002, these have psychological impacts on people,

reading between the lines. host: annapolis. independent line. you are next. caller: i am an independent because the corruption in washington, these clowns who are running the country now bought and paid for by the finance industry is just beyond what i can believe is happening to this country. in terms of the things you talked about this morning, the idea of 16% interest rates climbing to 29% interest rates, this is outrageous. congressman -- senators have recently voted on this and voted down managing what used to be called use. -- usary laws. and selling off all of these properties, these cities. this is outrageous. highways, zoos, parking meters. do they want to uncover its people to visit our cities, and

if you have a private sector operation running these parking meters they are going to -- and jacking up the price, they are going to encourage people to come to cities? lastly on the income-tax, you know, the idea, the republicans as saying they want to cut the budget and yet people earning $250,000 or more are worried about the 3, 4, 5% increase about -- in the taxes. and the other tax, the one on people it will make profits on wall street and they call it a different income and they get a low rate of income tax when that is what it is -- host: consumer advocates agree with you, "the wall street journal" on that story about states. private water service can cost 59% more than publicly owned water, referring to plans in wisconsin, possible plans to sell water to private company.

buffalo, new york, edward, republican mike. go ahead. caller: i think we need to address the -- behind the financial issue. the basis of any civilization is the family. i think our problem in our nation is more of a standard and immorality it and a family issue. i think america is getting morally bankrupt and if we tend to our families at home and tried to get peace here and not in iraq and around the world, get a piece here first, and then work out word instead of outward and inward, if we could just rally that to gather and not have our attention is diverted here and there and work under some basics -- throw out of the credit-card, pay with cash.

and the traditional institutions -- real quick -- learning used to be in our country, school, family, church and now replaced by movies, internet, and sell phones and blackberrys and our attention and our focus -- your focus determines your reality. host: we will leave it there. "the new york times" has a piece, white house memo on president obama's vacation. it is called a vacation but for the obamas it is not that simple. looking at past vacations by presidents. the idea changed after world war ii with the dawn of the television age. dwight eisenhower was lampooned for frequent golfing especially amid recession in 1958, lyndon johnson, ronald reagan, george w. bush were mocked for retreating to their ranch is often and bill clinton was

ridiculed for hobnobbing with the rich and famous on martha's vineyard for several vacation. counting the time, mr. obama would vacation for 48 days or nearly seven weeks, according to a long time white -- white house correspondent for cbs news who keeps a record. at this point in his presidency, george w. bush was midway, 27- day stay at his crawford ranch, would bring his time to more than 16 weeks. also in "the boston globe" the front page, low-key visit. obama turns vineyard into aisle of seclusion. front page of "the boston globe" this morning. mobile, alabama. the democratic line. caller: the reason i am calling, it seems that they're rich, they continue to get richer. they never paid taxes, and the bottom line of it is is that we

do not want the bush tax cuts to continue. the bottom line of it is, is that germany is continuing to grow. i was watching cnn the other day and they are progressing. host: but you know, of germany, there were a couple of stories in the paper last week about germany and their ability to recover from this recession. that they have been cutting spending but have also raised taxes across the board. caller: yes. that is what should happen here. the rich should pay tax -- everybody is going to have to pitch in. host: are you willing to pay more? caller: yes. i think everybody should have to. and these candidates running around talking about nobody should have to pay -- that is a bunch of rubbish.

maybe a flat tax across -- everyone should have to pay. the politicians, they are lying. host: we will take a closer look at germany's recovery later this week over the weekend. tune -- goat to c-span.org, our website, for our schedule on that. here is a story on "the new york times" about medical privacy. tighter rules. the obama administration is rewriting the rules after an outpouring of criticism. if you are interested in that story, "the new york times" this morning. a georgia, robert, independent- minded caller: -- georgia, robert, republican line. caller: as far as surpluses and then after that things went downhill, and i, during world

war ii, everyone was asked to sacrifice and during this time, i consider this war world war iii, with as many troops and we have not asked anyone else to sacrifice six of for the families and the soldiers. -- except for the families and the soldiers. it is not fair especially in this situation. so, by letting the tax cuts expire, it is the right thing to do. that is all i have to say. host: charles n. jacksonville, florida, on the democratic line. good morning. you are on the air, sir. we lost charles. we will go to the next phone call in just a minute. but "the new york post" frontpage. holy war. rallies got ugly as protesters and supporters clashed. front-page of "the new york

post" this morning. primary day in a few states tomorrow. we will take a closer look at that, up here in about 15 minutes with kyle trygstad of "roll call" newspaper. here is the front page of the miami herald. who is in the lead? we will take a closer look at those races coming up at 7:30 a.m.. russell on the republican mike

caller: can you hear me? host: weekend. caller: i was calling in to settle this myth that a lot of your callers that the rich don't pay taxes. from the cbo, the top 1% of americans pay 45 -- 40% of all americans and a top 10% of american verse pay 71% of all the taxes, the top 25% pay 86% of the taxes and they only earn $66,000 a year. that is not a lot of money, greta. so, when these liberals call in here and say the rich are not paying any taxes, it is just an absolute lie. also from the cbo, the bottom 47% of americans earners paid nothing in federal taxes. they are getting a free ride. this is why the middle class is being squashed out of the american landscape, it is because a nearly half of the country is not paying anything and they are getting a free ride. so, that means that the people

who aren't trepang taxes have to pay more and more. furthermore, you combine that with the fact that the federal government is completely and utterly out of control with spending, this is what is causing the discrepancy between the wealthy and the non-wealthy. furthermore, just remember this, the rich keep getting rich in this country because we keep doing the same things over and over that make us rich. and the same thing can be said of the poor. until the poor start elevating their standard of living and the decision making process, they are going to continue to lag behind people who make quality decisions and don't squander their opportunities and squander their money. this is going to continue to happen. if i may say one more thing in closing about tax cuts costing the government money -- tax cuts -- tax cuts don't cost

anything. host: it is lost revenue. caller: it is not lost revenue, the government is just one giant consumption machine. what the government needs to do is they need to cut their waste spending, pork-barrel projects that bolt all across the country. tax cuts don't cost. tax's cost the consumers dearly in their day today existence here in america. host: bob on the democratic line in jacksonville, florida. caller: a three-minute call? let me say something real quick. in lieu of the fact that i am a 30-year subscriber to cable news, which i consider myself a stockholder in the c-span. " que. -- ok. i just talked dish network to

carry c-span 3. rupert murdoch and his organization just gave the republican party in million dollars. all right. i think they should be barred from c-span, if not barred, or maybe any time you put "the wall street journal" up that you did, three articles in a row or something -- anything referring to his organization you should put a disclaimer up there, these folks are pure republicans and they donate to republicans and this is a republican story. all right? do you want to respond? host: bob, if you notice, i used "the new york times" and the boston globe and "usa today," and i believe a story from "the washington post" as well -- "the new york post."

caller: none of those organizations gave money to the republican party. host: some of you "the new york times" as liberal, others view "the wall street journal" as conservative. we are not endorsing any of these papers but we just want you to see what people are reading in this town and giving you varying different opinions and headlines and stories. manhattan, new york. mike, independent-minded open phones. what is on your mind? caller: i cannot understand that last caller from the republicans. the rich get richer because they steal. they know how to steal. any law they are not willing to go by, they will change that law. most republicans are. but this thing here in new york about the mosque being built in open -- in the world trade center. i don't understand that.

muslims died and fight for america just like any other americans. one of the first world war ii aces in america was a mosque. host: allen, a republican line. caller: the other republican fellow that chatted about the budget. i am not willing to support tax increases or even repeal the bush cuts until politicians really address the true problem, it over bloated salaries that a lot of our civil service union workers have garnered these days. in our district in poughkeepsie, new york, we have kindergarten teachers, first grade teachers, jim teacher and a music teacher all making over $100,000 a year. no one seems to want to address this issue. i have heard pundits on here before talking about average salary of 36,000 up to 57,000, we are double that, and that is ridiculous. until those wages come down to something reasonable it does not make any sense. we also have security guards

making $150,000. 3 highlighted in the county, the highest paid civil servants employees. it has to stop. no politician wants to address the true problem. host: daniel, democratic live in california. good morning. caller: really hard for me to believe what this last caller just talked about. i know he read that stuff somewhere and i guess he did not make it up but there is a lot of misinformation out there and a lot of sources and i just believe security guards earning $150,000 a year, first year -- teachers earning $100,000. i really did not believe the facts. i wanted to call but some of the previous republican callers. one who talked about morality. how immoral is it that investors pay -- that the investor class of society pays almost no -- taxes. almost all paid by working people. they pile tax on top of tax.

and the income which they did not call income, they call a capital gains, of course, from investments, are virtually untaxed of the richest are virtually on tax. warren buffett says his secretary pays more in taxes than he does. where is the morality? that should be a morality issues that -- if the republicans are concerned about morality. the other republicans are about the poor deserving to be poor and rich deserving to be rich. i can't believe anybody really believes that. host: you can send us your comments and your questions via twitter as well to "washington journal." if you go to c-spanwj, which are handled. chicago, edwin, independent line. caller: the last time i spoke to you was prior to you taking and going on maternity leave. the reason why calling you today

is to let you know that these mortgage bankers that have come to washington and have come before committee meetings and talking about how they set up programs in order to help people keep their homes, i would like to let you know they are lying to the congress and the people. most of these banks -- i will give you an example -- bankamerica tell you they are working with the people to keep their homes and setting of different programs and everything. they are not. what they do is they have you send a numerous amount of papers to them, then it is transferred -- you start with one person and then you get another person and a person want you to sign the same papers again and then you go to another person. during the time you are doing that, they put your home up for sale and then an example, one person is paying $1,400 a month for a mortgage and by the time that the so-called program they are coming up with, when they

come back with a plan that is supposed to assist you, it is costing you $1,475 a month. -- and i think we got your point. if you go to c-span.org you will find a program note, the top of the page is to let you know we are going to be covering a hearing this morning, a government panel continues its investigation into the gulf oil spill. hearing's all this week in houston. the first one begins today at 9:00 a.m. eastern time on c- span2. and we are beginning -- continuing our summer series. this week, looking at defense issues. today we look at the f-35 fighter jet. this is part of secretary gates's initiative to cut spending at the pentagon by 100 bill with dollars. -- $100 billion. we will be talking later on, 9:15 a.m. eastern time, about this issue specifically.

that all week you can see there that we are going to be taking a look at different defense issues. on tuesday, minor resistance ambushed protected vehicles, wednesday, drones, thursday, military pay and benefits, friday, rehabilitation process. pittsburgh, and on the republic,. caller: i think i got a solution for middle ground for this mosque that i think will make everybody happy. they want to do this over good will. but then donate the $100 million to rebuild the trade center and have a mosque on the top floor. i did not think anyone would have objections and i think it would be good will shown. thank you. host: "the financial times caused what editorial on iraq. mission, unfulfilled. u.s. withdrawal is least bad option for still broken iraq. it says --

politicians still have not managed to form a new government. not only the state, but iraqi society is broken. a slow withdrawal is the least bad option. hollywood, florida. the democratic line. good morning. caller: the call about the poor people making bad decisions, i think that is really a myth because the bottom 50% of the people in this country control

just -- less than 1% of the wealth. and the top 10 percent -- 2% have -- i know it is 89 -- 80% or 90% of the wealth. how can you tax people who have nothing? i know many poor people who are very smart people. it has nothing but -- being rich has nothing to do with making good decisions were being intelligent. believe me, that is a fallacy. these republicans, these rich people think they are better than other people just because they have money. that they are more intelligent, more superior. i don't want to sound radical but the republican party has become a fascist party. host: all right. more on iraq. "usa today" of the torah, departure of combat forces bring new challenges.

gains are measurable but the potential to lose them is high. rating the opposing view this morning is -- chu, a member of congress and california. u.s. deadline improved iraq. that is the editorial this morning. new hampshire, mark, independent line of parity caller: thank you for taking my call. just wanted to make a couple of comments. the richest country in the world yet we are completely broke. you only get that way through spending. it is not through how much the government takes in but how much the government spends. this government and the last government has banned -- done a very good job of writing all of us, we are dividing ourselves in how much we may, how much we spend, where we work and what we drive and it is getting out of control. we are all neighbors, we are all americans. it is how much the government is spending and what they are spending it on. not how much and who is getting taxed and who is not getting

taxed. look at the spending, folks. that is the problem. host: one last phone call. minneapolis, patty on the republican line. you are on an open phones. caller: i would like to refer that california guy who did not believe that the security guard would make more than $100,000, i would like to remind him about the town in california where the mayor was making over $800,000 and the chief of police was making over $400,000 and people were up and arms. all over the news. one other point i would like to make, i wish you folks would take a look at how often you are referred to liberal papers -- everyone knows "the new york times" is considered liberal, "the boston globe." de constantly referred to them. you throw in a "wall street journal" here and there but really the majority of your papers are considered liberal and i wish you would read more from the editorials of "the wall street journal" -- host: were you watching earlier?

caller: i heard that -- like i said, you do take a few things from "the wall street journal" but what i am saying is predominantly, 75% liberal newspapers. one more thing is you need to challenge these democrats who live and call up on the republican line bashing republicans saying that they are republican and you know darn well just like we do out here that they are actually democrats -- they cannot even be honest about what party they are from and i wish you guys would not sit there like there is not that great big elephant on the line. host: it is a little difficult to tell sometimes, patty -- it is an open system. we did not screen the phone calls. we asked them what they want to talk about but there is an honest the aspect to this and you call it -- colin on your own mind, if you are republican or

democrat, independent, call in on that line so we can hear from, get the context of what you believe given what line you are calling in on. that does it for open phones. we are going to turn our attention to campaign 2010. there are primaries in florida and in arizona and alaska tomorrow. coming up next, we are going to talk about that. we will be right back.

>> senator mitchell boss a report is entirely wrong. i am saying that brian macnamee'stays and it's wrong. let me be clear, i have naked -- never taken steroids or hgh. >> go back and watch all of the hearings on steroid use in baseball online at the c-span video library, all free, every program since 1987. watch what he wants, when you want. >> history week on book tv prime time. tonight, three books on its lawyers. "new yorker" staff writer on the doomed 1925 expedition to find the lost city of el dorado. and the final journey of henry hudson searching for the

northwest passage which ended in a mutiny. and the life of french explorer champlain, the founder of quebec. all this week on c-span2. >> "washington journal) continues. host: kyle trygstad with "roll call" newspaper here to talk about the primary races tomorrow. let's begin with florida. here is the headline in "the wall street journal." money flows, and matchupkendrick meek, incumbent, versus billionaire geoff brain he spent $24 million of his own money -- kendrick meek versus billionaire jeff green who spent $24 million. guest: many expect meeks -- he was up by significant margins.

this is a late surge. jeff green spent $24 million of his own money. tv as all summer. people did not know who he was. some billionaire, the best man at his wedding was mike tyson. the outsider we have in florida this year. it will be pretty interesting. but kendrick meek got help from bill clinton, barack obama last week. it has been an interesting race. host: and his anti- establishment atmosphere, how did the incumbent who was down in the polls able to come back? more to do with kendrick meek or the issue over jeff green's money and his yacht? guest: kendrick meek brought up how did this guy makes his money. as he said in many of his ads, he has been pending against homeowners who has taken -- have

taken a big hit in florida in the past few years over foreclosures and things like that. host: let's jump ahead to the general election because whenever candidate comes out ahead, whether jeff green or kendrick meek, neither fares were well and a three-year matchup, charlie crist or marker rubio -- marko rubio. they both come in last place. meek said once the primary is over, democrats will start getting the kind of. right now lot of democrats are supporting charlie crist, current republican governor who dropped out of the primaries and has become an independent. host: this is a story in "the washington post," frontpage in florida. tea party favorite tempered his tone. a story about marco rubio.

what is his latest tactic? it is obviously by this headline favored by the tea party but needs to be able to attract conservative democrats and independents in the fall. guest: he has won over conservative republicans, the tea partiers but charlie crist has taken all of the moderates. he is picking up the democrats and is leading in the polls. what's rubio needs to do is pick up more of the moderate republicans and show he is the true republican candidate and they should support it. host: showing a picture of charlie crist running as an independent. what can we expect after this primary is over today as far as money and attention paid to this general election race? guest: this is where the start off is, where it is going to get pretty big. charlie crist has plenty of money to spend, so does rubio

and rubio now has the republican establishment support. kendrick meeks as the unions behind him and african-americans make up the large percentage of voters, so he will be picking up support as well. host: in the republican gubernatorial primary bid tomorrow, bill mccollum versus rick scott. guest: very similar to the senate race. bill mccollum has seen a resurgence. running against a very wealthy man in rick scott. just as in the senate primary, bill mccollum brought up rick scott's past as a health industry executive. his company was charged for medicare fraud and fined $1.70 billion. he brought this up and he has also gotten support from jeb bush and other republican establishment figures down there who have gotten behind him with money and support and people are

rallying around him and he is now seeing a resurgence. host: and whoever comes out ahead in this race would face to in the fall? guest: the chief financial officer. democrats really like her and they think she has a bright future. it is going to be a tough one. there is also an independent candidate, the son of a former governor, the late gov. lawton chiles. both races are very similar. host: in a general election match up there will be a three- way contest for governor. who is bearing ahead and hypothetical? guest: right now sink is up by a point or two but it is very close. host: we have run through the florida race is. what will people be watching for in washington? what tomorrow's primary says and

what florida will say about the mood of the country and what happens in november? guest: this has been the year of the outsider candidate so florida is kind of going against the grain. we have seen about five or six incumbents lose their primaries this year and all of the seven it has been the anti- establishment mood and all of the 70 establishment candidates are looking better. so, i think people are going to be kind of interested to see -- kind of different than what we have been seeing in the summer. host: arizona, john mccain faces a republican challenge from j.d. hayworth. guest: it is so good there has not been a pole and about a month. it is kind of telling. upholstered in not want to spend money when everybody knows what will happen in the last one shows mccain up 20 points. host: at first did not look good

for john mccain. guest: it looks very bad and people thought that this could be the year that this guy left -- it is the anti-establishment year, and who is more establishment and the former presidential nominee? it looked very bad. it was within 10 points for a while, even tan points in april. host: does -- hayworth have backing from the tea party? guest: he does not paired -- does not. it is a fractured group. but most tea party groups came out and said we did not support this guy. host: you think it hurt him? guest: absolutely. in many other places, including florida, tea party support and help someone, including sharron angle and next door in nevada. host: does he face a challenge from the left in the next election? guest: know, everyone expects him to win. host: what does he do strategy-

wise? because an order to fend off a j.d. hayworth, he says he was not a maverick, changed his tune on certain policy issues and so what do you think we will hear from him? guest: a good question. i think we will see him afloat around the country helping other candidate so we will hear quite a bit. but certainly, the biggest thing hayworth -- changing his stand on his sheep -- issues. host: republican line from jacksonville, florida. caller: i have been listening to your comments about florida. look, with all due respect, let me correct a few things. you referred to the candidate meeks as the incumbent -- he is not. he is a young man who only got into congress because his mother was the congressman and he took over for her. he is not the incumbent senator. you referred to green and his problems -- he just does not have any problems, he is successful.

but meeks has set severe ethical problems. if you look at any ads in florida about this election you can see that editorials from newspapers all over florida talking about meeks' at the core problems. that is important. you should know that. you mentioned alex cink -- yes, she is a smart young lady but the reason she is in politics, her husband also ran for governor of the last race and he was the democratic nominee, that is how she got in. with all due respect, but -- she is not that great a politician. host: who will you be voting for tomorrow? caller: i already voted. i voted republican ticket with a few additions. i think anybody in florida and the situation the state is and is not going to go democratic. meeks has got real problems and i would like to hear your young man from "roll call" go into them because the things they are quoting on ads and the board's

their showing on tv are just devastating. host: we will talk about it. could tell us who you will vote for any general election? caller: it will be rubio. i met the young man, he is nice and competent. charlie crist, someone we have the best the pope's four but over the years he just goes from one side to the other and it is sad. he takes one issue one day, goes on one side the next day -- honestly, the next day he is on the other side and i would like to hear your young man talk about that, too. host: let's talk about the general election match. problems ahead. guest: kendrick meeks has big problems because he is in very good politicians, charlie crist and marco rubio, likable people. they will get most of the support. kendrick meeks has an uphill climb -- he is not the incumbent but he is the establishment candidate for democrats and it seems florida democrats are coming home to the

establishment candidate because they did not know much about jeff greene. he has been on the air. but other than that, they did not know who this guy is. he does not have a record. so. meeks, they know -- host: michigan. michael, democratic line. talking about primary day tomorrow. go ahead. caller: i am happy to see that marco rubio is falling down in the polls. this is a precept for the failure of the upcoming election for the tea party favorite. these candidates on the tea party have proven to be extremist in all regards to policy -- financial, domestic, foreign policy. these are very primitive- thinking people. and marco rubio basically has 20

center solutions for 21st century world. host: what kind of support is he getting from the tea party members? financial? grass roots? what kind of support? guest: it is mainly grassroots. it is building up enthusiasm just for the election, period. the more people who know an election is coming of the more people who are walking around and knocking on doors and getting excited. those are all good things all candidates would love to have. host: is he losing some of the tea party enthusiasm as he, according to this headline, tries to temper his tongue? guest: i don't think he will. because elections are about contrast. he is up against charlie crist, who a lot of conservative republicans in florida don't like. they think he is too moderate and they did not want to vote for him for the senate. they ran him out of the primary. these are the people want to get to the polls and vote and they will vote for rubio. host: however they doing money

wise? guest: really well. they are kind of going neck and neck. they will have plenty of money to spend. host: where are they getting it from? guest: charlie crist has a nationwide network. he has built in support. and rubio, he has built up support. since charlie chris left -- rubio has establishment support. host: you have a primary in your state as well. who will you be voting for? caller: i voted for the -- i and somewhat embarrassed, i voted for the tea party candidate only because i am an anti-incumbency. host: you voted for -- who is that again? guest: i believe his name is miller or something like that. host: de would have for joe miller but you said you are embarrassed?

caller: i am not really a tea party person, more of a coffee person. host: all right. aklook at it had nine -- palin isn't interested onlooker. she endorsed joe miller against 70 summer cousy, the incumbent. guest: murkowski, there was a poll where she was up 30 points. but this guy, this attorney, joe miller, as support for mike huckabee and sarah palin, which certainly put his name on the map but it certainly has not been enough for people to turn away from murkowski who has been in office since 2002. host: newspaper said many expect murkowski be favored, in a state that about his security.

that is the headline in "the philadelphia inquirer were" in this race. security is the key issue in alaska's gop. she is running on the opposite campaign -- saying my security brings money home to this state and that is why you want to re- elect me. guest: she tied herself to the late ted stevens, and he was beloved. the airport is named after him. lots of knows -- roads are named after him. he brought back so much money. she says i will be a continued nation of that. host: that is the headline in "the new york times" this morning. in alaskan republican primary, two names not on ballad may play big roles, a matchup between sarah palin, who endorsed mr. miller, and lisa murkowski tying

herself to ted stevens. host: republican line, you are up next. caller: i want to clear out wanting of -- rick scott does have a lot of problems. host: jeff green? caller: talking about rick scott. i am sorry. he is. meeks -- but rick scott has problems. he has been going back and forth to cuba. he claims he did not. pictures of him on the boat. i am independent. i am voting for meeks, and before i vote for somebody -- bill mccollum. these crazy people, they call themselves the tea party. most people vote. they always tend to vote for

people who have their radical views. rick scott was supposed to have done a debate with bill mccollum and he did not show up rick scott has been dodging. he sent his mama to that place. that is all i got to say. host: in a general election matchup for the senate seat, you said you will support meeks. are you going -- you are an independent. in that three-way matchup, would you switch to charlie crist? caller: i mean -- charlie crist is my second choice. i don't have a problem. i just think his own party turned against him. all because he took a picture with president obama, and all of the sudden he is the enemy. host: charleston, west virginia.

jim on the democratic line. caller: the choice is simple for america. the party of hope versus the party of hate. the republicans hate public unions, they hate pop -- private unions, they hate welfare, they hate the port, the republicans hate the unemployed, the republicans hate health care for the poor. host: what about the overall themes of the democratic party versus the republican party and how it is playing out? guest: not playing out well for democrats this year. they are looking to lose anywhere between 20 and more than 40 seats in the house. they are going to lose probably at least five seats in the senate. the democratic party is not a good brand of this year for many reasons, but most of all, they have candidates running in districts that normally vote republican. the last two years, the last election cycle, people have not been excited about the republican party.

now it seems there is just as anti washington thing going on. host: president obama has been hitting the trail and doing some speeches. his latest version of the stump speeches, when you are driving the car you put it in d to go forward and r to go backwards. is that gaining traction? guest: i am not sure how much traction it is getting. i did not see too much. both parties accept the fact that democrats will be losing a lot of seats. i am not sure the president can do much about that but he can help them raise money. host: back to florida. republican line in port richey. go ahead. caller: i just want to say that we so it -- we should use the track of politicians to vote for them rather than watching their commercials on tv. the commercials on tv this year have been horrible.

it is just an outrage, the way that they spend so much money backing -- bashing each other. here we are, the american people are supposed to be intelligent, watching this ad when people are losing homes, people are losing jobs, all of our money should have been used for helping the people rather than telling people -- trying to shake people's views on politics. host: what about that ad wars in florida? guest: action a good point. the possibly could have been an oversaturation of jeff green and red spot ads. -- representative spot ads. they want to see you walking in a parade or those sorts of things and talking to people. maybe the green-scott campaign did not work. host: races and arizona -- gov.

brewer, primary day, what is her fate? guest: she is going really well. every cent she signed the immigration bill, the much- publicized immigration bill, her stock has risen. and all the republicans who wanted to run against her have dropped out. so, she is facing nominal opposition and she will win. host: a name that is popped up is ben quayle, how is it looking for him? guest: not too good. he had a few stumbles over the last few weeks. the biggest was him being tied to this scandalous website, he was a contributing writer to this website, the start up, and there are several other candidates in the race who are raising money, raising their profile, so i am not sure it is looking to good for him and i do not think many people expecting to win. host: the next phone call.

richard, independent line in new hampshire. caller: i did not catch to this gentleman's name. host: kyle trygstad from "roll call" newspaper. caller: the question in my mind is this. everything transpiring this morning is opinion. we are listening to your opinion. i am willing to listen to it because i think you are knowledgeable and i think greta is a good hostess -- excuse me, host, i guess. my point is this, it all boils down to opinion. for example, the discussion of arizona. the discussion of alaska, since death, everything has changed up there. my point is i just hope we get good, unbiased opinion. i think we're in getting this

this morning but i did not know what transpires later on. greta, you are doing a good job. i like you as well as i like the gentleman who started this network. he was fair and unbiased. host: brian lamb? thanks, appreciate it. guest: alaska is an interesting race. murkowski has been a good senator, i think most alaskans will say that for both parties, so i did not think there is too much trouble. sarah palin did endorse the other person and i think it's at the low bid more about sarah palin than it does about this gentleman. she thinks he is the more conservative guy and she is going to endorse the ball over the country who are more conservative. host: what does a about her relationship with lisa murkowski. they are not that -- guest: they are not that close. she defeated her father a few years ago. she knows who is going to win.

she knows miller is not going to win but she is taking kind of a stand. host: pine bluff, arkansas, vivien, democratic line. caller: i just wanted to follow up because there was a caller earlier who continent -- commented on congressman -- meek and his "at the" issues and i am hoping you could elaborate on that -- "s. nikole" issues. and in arkansas, a woman named joyce elliott is running for congress and she was not polled at least in the polls that were discussed and the media, polled when the primary, and she did. wondering if you could comment on her as well. guest: i have not followed the elliott raised to closely but i do know the questions about meek -- he took over his

mother's former seat and he supposedly took earmarks for a company she is now working for. that is where the problems have arisen. host: let us go to maryland, derek, independent line. caller: i am a regular listener. the only programming that i really enjoyed. it is unbiased. the c-span library is so great, if anybody has not going to it yet but that is not why i called. good morning. i read a great op-ed piece in "the new york times" today about the ground zero mosque and how it is playing into this election. it is just great. i think the democrats are actually going to do a lot better than all the pundits say.

president bush has been very, very quiet. but he's got a book coming out november 9. "decision points." i am sure it is going to get leaked before. nobody is talking about why we are in this predicament. people have really short memories. but once the book leaks, there will be lots of memories revived and people changing their minds about some of these extreme right wing candidates. host: the book does come out after primary day -- excuse me, after the election. guest: that is an interesting point. you will not see president bush on the campaign trail this year. probably a well-timed date. host: republican line, texas. good morning. go ahead. caller: i have a question for the gentleman.

with everything going on in the country i just wanted to ask you a question -- i think anyone who is a thinker and knows what is going on knows the democratic party is trying to create a revolution and take the country from socialist to communists. my question is, do you think we can get through this without a revolution in do you think -- i will hang up and listen to your answer. guest: i think it would be tough. nothing can get through the senate this year. it is a road block, these days. republicans will certainly take up in number of seats. we will see how things change. host: pour pdf, florida.

david, republican line. caller: mark rubio has some problems, and on the state republican tricks and things that he did. greene bet against the people with his real-estate. i feel like the american public needs to wake up to the fact that the democrats are trying to put this country back together. host: who are you going to vote for? caller: meeks and sink. host: if you could, tell us what

we can expect, what we should watch, in florida. guest: this is supposed to be one of the hottest races in the country. one of the more interesting races in a while. it is a three-way race with crist, meeks, and sink. host: so tomorrow, dealers can expect to see a race between meek and greene. up next, we will turn to training of afghan police with major general michael ward.

>> i am not saying the report is entirely wrong. i am insane -- saying brian wrong.a's claims are i have never taken steroids. >> want all of the hearings on steroid use in the c-span library, all free, every program since 1987. >> it is history week on the "book tv." 3 history books. the final journey of henry hudson, searching for the

northwest passage. the life of the french explorer samuel de champlain. "book tv" in prime time, all this week on c-span2. the c-span network provides coverage of politics, nonfiction books, and history. it is available to you on television, on-line, and in social the work sites -- network sites. the c-span that works. now available in more than 1 million homes. washington journal continues. host: major general michael ward us from afghanistan. he is the officer in charge of training the afghan police.

want to let our viewers know there is quite a bit of delay between us and you, so we will all have to be patient. i began with the question of how many afghan police forces are there, how many are trained on the ground, what is the status of the force? the force that we are currently training and working with coming here in 115,000 regular policemen. train the police. 70% of them have had formal that we would recognize from a police academy, basic training facility. that is the nature of the challenges that we have. we have to develop them to a recognize, we would

in a western country or central european country. that forces are beginning to draw down in afghanistan? is an interesting question. i am about to finish my year- long tour. the police then, and we have been able to accomplish, i am the police will be. when i got here, and there was not a lot of growth going on. we were challenged by partners in the international community to provide the training that they need, to change the way they protect the public. the future was not bright in terms of resources that would be provided in terms of resources

by the international community to make that happen. since i arrived, there have been a number of changes. first, changes with the changing of the president. second, mobilization of international support, specifically in the types of forces that we need here. we rely on certain french groups, italian police forces, police forces that most of to of policing that the afghans been to provide civil order and counterinsurgency. interesting to see how those contributions have helped us integrate with the afghans, integrate, and provide better sense of security and some parts of the nation.

look ahead in the year, i think we are on a pretty impressive track, albeit not without challenges, to give the death afghan people the police they require, as well as some of the tools, leadership development, higher standard of living, the ability to look after their police and better than they have up until now. i see confidence growing. we are beginning to see a turnaround, in terms of public perception. we would want to reinforce this as we go forward. host: as you speak about what type of training these forces are getting from you and others, what type of wage do they get for being a police officer?

your job there? the culture of afghanistan has had a large impact on the nature of the forces and how they view their responsibility. typically in the past, they were of an instrument of state security, not so much focus on providing local protection. we creating the national police force. the culture of nation and an emerging reflects much more globalization, put a tension between a modern state and a there is a challenge balancing

that out. of those soldiers or patrolmen were paid necessarily in the wage that they could support their family with previously. recently, we were able to increase the wage by 30% and that would help them buy food on duty. they are in a much more competitive place with others in society. may not be where it needs to be, but it is comparable for other people. the training has been the investment we have made, however, and that starts with recognizing that every policeman training.

case. bill level of training of the afghan national police was very low. we recruit these beliefs, -- they would have to training and would not be able to perform their identified. in a structure in which they have personal accountability, responsibility. the real turnaround for them will be providing to their leaders a comprehensive level of police education, which we have not seen in about 40 years. be a

police officer in afghanistan? think it has great potential to be honorable. i would parallel what we have seen in the afghan national , they were not held in high regard by the population. they had been suppressed under the soviet regime. soldiers were associated with a level of a lack of freedom which we would not accept in any western democratic society. but the army has been able to show people that their focus is on the defense of the nation. people are really starting to turn around.

we are starting to see the recruiting members search quickly. the police are five, six years behind the army. we need to change the focus of the policing to be much more dedicated to helping the people. that is a start to change in public perception petere. young people are now being encouraged to become police. it tends to happen more so in rural areas. host: we are going to get to phone calls. gregg on the independent line. savannah, georgia. caller: general come on and so

proud of you all over there. -- general, i am so proud of you all over there. what more can the american you and get you what you need? thank you for your expression of support. deeply how proud our own countrymen are. we see that through the care packages that we see, and as programs like this. i do not know if there is much done. everyone needs to recognize that get the afghans to where they need to be. it may not be 2011, 2012. we need to have an extended where we can see

that treasures, sacrifice that we are paying here are going to be worth it some day. host: we are speaking this morning about training of afghan police. st. petersburg. jim on the republican line. hello, major general. republican for more than 20 years. this seems like another vietnam. believe as soon as you leave, people lined up with you will be in big trouble. trouble" what do you mean? caller: i do not think they will be alive.

most people in that part of the know who the enemy is, the u.s. unfortunately, being a republican, for most of my life, i was a right wing republican. chile --ple, i was in th host: our time is limited with the general, so let's just mentioned this headline. the newspapers are about this as well, that police will be targeted. can you speak to that? caller: we have been well aware

that the police have been the target. taliban have been taking a larger hit. there are over 700 afghan police killed in delaware line of duty. line of duty. if we do not provide them with the leadership they need, we are not helping afghanistan for those individuals at risk. that is why we need to make sure the training center's we are running, and that when we leave, they show competency in

marksmanship, and that they can show competency in a situation that previously would have ended in casualties. i think all of us military and professionals, that would be our benchmark to make sure that we're doing what we were sent out here to do. host: you were asked, if you had all money in the world to address the problem, where would you put the money? a tweet asks -- if you could take that money question and put it toward improving recruits, and the person also asks -- think if we had more

invest in the afghan national police, i would spend it in a couple of places. right now we have a lot of money expand training centers, provide better instruction. what we want to do is raise belittled literacy, which will improve the perception in the public as to the profession of police. these horse had closed many of the schools. you have many adults here now that cannot write their name on a card, cannot do the basic job that we want them to do as a policeman. we would want them to invest in literacy program.

think we would want to do is invest in their quality of life. is difficult to get by, in terms of being set up in remote places for a long time, not seen family. perhaps giving them access to better morale, recreation fund, time on leave, and thereby stabilizing the force. we are staying in contact with left the force, trying to learn what caused them to leave. hand, we find they are tremendously pitcher and a job. on the other hand -- and this is unique to afghanistan -- they have developed family commitments, tribal

commitments, and sometimes that is too tough to achieve. choices as well. if our nation is looking after our interests, then the can take these things beforehand. is something that we have achieve with our afghan colleagues. it will be a hallmark of success future when they want to stay with their military police because they feel by their own people, fact, the job that they do is important to afghanistan. host: jeffrey on the independent line. confused. i hear about the economy and how we need to invest in the country. great taking overseas,

force, i know when this effort began, it of the willing. the many u.s. dollars are going to training, how long is this supposed to go on? considering this is an international effort, what our allies doing to help over there? 8 as a valid question. there are over 50 nations committed to be either the international community other

effoerts going on here. committing resources and people consistent with their capabilities. some are obviously much better off than others. is helping to sustain the lesser efforts of the nation's who may not have a lot of money contribute but have they can deploy out here. that is the case of some of the forces that we got. but afghans do not as airily have in their business sector the ability to regulate those. significant bodies, like the world bank, were across, non-governmental

that send funds in to address aspects of not focused on by us. the enterprise of the international community here is actually pretty impressive, beyond the scale of what we have seen in other countries. republican line. california. on the republican line. policemen. in iraq -- morocco. there was a different way of thinking over there.

how do you sell but -- separate with the paramilitary? what is the difference between ? you have over there. perhaps you could be helping us. s, pretty unique situation. if he were to ask a policeman in canada are what his job is -- what his job is, he

believes that he is focused on security. that as paramilitary. we refer to it as defensive skills. we also endeavored to give them a ballot tumble enforcement skills, which is a starting we would want to be the starting point for a career. we are limited by the amount of invest, but our commitment is in the hopes that back in a year or two, and provide continuous units, always wanting to improve their knowledge. scratch, with afghan national police, any better than no training.

where they are right now is not where we would want to be. we can work with isaf, mentoring them through successful law and order activities, but ultimately allow the public to be confident in their capability. host: we are showing some footage of afghan police on the ground. i wonder if you could speak to the difference in the equipment that these police officers get, u.s. soldiers versus afghani soldiers, what are they allowed to carry around? guest: the police equipment is pretty basic.

handcuffs, some of the same force protection gear that we see a ballistic best to provide fragmentary protection. they would have a helmet. some sort of identification of the kind of police. whether or not they have ballistic glasses, that is not uniform across the force. but it is sufficient in this environment to protect them from a close combat, close the tax that they find. we are spending more money to provide them armored vehicles, armored humvees. just more protection on their sts. that was one of the biggest

causes of attrition in the past. host: i just want to let everyone know that the pentagon is giving everyone an update on the training of afghan security forces and the state department will be giving an update on the situation in pakistan with regard to the floods. c-span.org for the schedule. athens, ohio. kathleen on the democratic line. honor you. the honor of getting to know a fulbright scholar studying here. father was a retired brigadier general from the afghani army and had fun with the mujahideen against russia. i got to ask them lots of questions. said the u.s. should have dealing with the taliban

early on, bringing more moderate taliban to the table to discuss issues. afghani people taliban? several thousand surrendered taliban early on had been transported in convoys and were left to die. did we ever apologize for that? there are a couple of different ideas here. on the issue of the taliban being transported, i think this was 10 years ago during the northern alliance campaign. is the previous chapter of afghan history. society that has a of veterans, if you will, many of whom have

different experiences. somewhere in the afghan national police and worked alongside the soviets. some were on different sides in war, the taliban side, no. alliance side. if they have been honorable, in terms of supporting the government of afghanistan, putting those differences aside, not really been a process in afghanistan. i have certainly meant a lot of colleagues who worked side-by- side everyday and are focused on forward, getting afghanistan back to a place been since it ago, since the soviets came in to disrupt the balance. they all take tremendous risks to do that. takes a trust and confidence to be adversaries.

people who are to help set up a -- are at risk every day. expressed that afghanistan may fall back. there is always the chance for that. is up to the international to insure that that is not possible. to help to head to the skills to move the forward. that you mentioned, the soul -- the scholar, is probably the hope for the future of afghanistan. if they can bring that education

back to afghanistan, each and every one of them can make a difference. we are optimists here, or we volunteering. the future of afghanistan can be positive. host: we want to thank you for your time, sir. thank you for joining us from afghanistan to talk about training of those police forces. thank you for your time. coming up next, we are going to switch our focus to the amount of oil in the gulf coast. we saw government estimates. last week, several scientists came up with independent studies, one study, saying there is nearly 80% of oil left in the gulf. .e'll be right back >> i am not saying senator

mitchell's record is entirely wrong. his statements about me are wrong. let me be clear. i have never taken steroids or hgh. >> go back and watch all the hearings on steroid use in baseball come online, at a c- span the library. >> is history week on "book tb" prime time. david gramm on percy faucet in his doomed expedition to find a lost city of eldorado. david fisher on the life of the french explorer samuel de champlain, the founder of can back -- quebec.

host: charles hopkinson is a marine sciences professor from the university of georgia. i want to show viewers this editorial in the "new york times." questions about the gulf. the rosy picture that the administration painted a year ago has been shaken by scientists. you were part of this investigation, looking into one of five marine scientists. what did you find? guest: we found there were four forms of oil that are still floating in the gulf of mexico, sung to the bottom. we tried to rebound with some

numbers that noaa released about three weeks ago to determine that much of the oil is still there. host: could you describe these forms of oil? guest: two are dissolved forms, one which is natural, when the oil was released under great pressure, released as much growth droplets. another type is my growth droplets covered with this person, which are deep in the gulf, then to prevent more release of toxic fumes that could harm the workers. another time that was described was potentially the the operating into the atmosphere. the fourth form was described as a residual form, apparently a form that noaa could target for

action, remediation. host: could you describe how you went about doing your study? guest: we did not go to the gulf of mexico in person, but i assembled in committee of scientists from the area to evaluate the report that was released from washington. we used information that had been collected from previous the oil spills, particularly previous oil spills in the gulf of mexico. we also used our understanding of ocean chemistry, organic geo chemistry to come up with our estimates.

host: why should people believe in your study, which was done by calculations, compared to the government study on the ground, and there claiming that the oil is partially done? guest: i think it is a matter of interpretation of the data. to some extent, we're comparing apples and oranges. our group was interested in determining come up of the oil that got into the gulf of mexico, how much has been skimmed, burned, how much remains in the gulf of mexico, and how much has evaporated? we were not interested in the form of oil that never even got into the gulf. once they put the top cap on

and pumped directly into an oil shipped, we did not include that oil, which is substantial. we did not include that into the budget because it never entered the gulf of mexico waters. host: the government did include the oil into the calculations. guest: yes, and to some extent, i can understand why someone would include that into the budget. short of capping the well, collecting it into a ship, it would have gone into the gulf. i guess they were thrilled that they were able to prevent that amount of oil from getting into the gulf. any citizen on the globe would welcome that news.

we did not include that in the budget because it did not have the chance to cause environmental damage. host: what should the government do with your report? guest: our report, in combination with the report that was released in "science magazine" suggests that we need some hard numbers so that we can refine our estimates about how much oil is there, how quickly it is dispersing into larger volumes of water, how much is degrading and weathering. clearly, there will be more rilling and we need

to better educate ourselves about this. the more information we can gender in the future -- gather in the future, the better off we will be. i see some of these recent reports as just adding to the scientific debate about how oil leaks, how the whole oil recovery system works in the natural environment. host: the editorial in the "new york times" says this about those other studies --

professor, what are we talking about, what type of future damage? guest: i do not know how much damage there is, but certainly, the microbial community is shifting, responding to a boil. it is causing changes in the food web. it is yet to be seen how much this is getting into the plankton. hopefully, some of the studies that are being supported now can give us increased information about how those systems are working. i think what is interesting about these recent reports, the rate of degradation, the fact that you can still identify plumes in the subsurface

suggests that things are not working as quickly as we thought. our estimates of how much oil that is remaining, i would bet that more is remaining them less. the rate of evaporation seems to be less than we had considered. host: have you heard from the government about your report? guest: i have not heard personally from noaa about our report. host: anyone from your team, university? guest: i am the director of the program in georgia. i confer with my noaa partners.

we confer with other noaa partners on a regular basis, so there has been an ongoing dialogue with people within the noaa administration for the last several months. host: do they disagree with what you found, what kind of feedback do you get? guest: they see our analysis as part of a scientific debate over the fate of the oil. i think everyone encourages scientific inquiry as to what is going on down here. it is not up one size fits all. there are certainly questions about how oil is moving, what it to environmental impacts are. host: we will go to our first phone call. ernesto, williamsburg. caller: if they do more

drilling, are they not required to build a tower so that we do not run into these toxic situations? guest: the first thing to take into consideration is, although this oil spill is immense in magnitude, it occurs on a daily basis with natural seeps. to some extent, the natural environment has adapted, and can deal with chronic oil leaks. it is when it is so focused and concentrated in spots like this is when there is concern. host: lou on the republican line.

good morning. go ahead. caller: by next spring, it will be forgotten and cleaned up. 70% of the oil is seeped naturally. it does very little harm to the environment. i do not trust any scientists today. i do not believe in the global warming. everybody likes of doom and gloom -- host: dr. hopkinson, is this being overplayed? guest: he is correct that there are natural seats, but when there are hot spots like this, i do not think there is any debate about the question of severe

environmental affect in the local scene. host: kentucky. a bill on the republican line. -- bill on the republican line. caller: i have seen major oil spills, from exxon valdez, spain, the west coast, and this has been the biggest disaster in terms of cleanup, that i have seen in my 30 years of this business. i do not understand why the governors of the states do not get together and just clean it up? we are getting nothing from the government and bp.

guest: i think both are making heroic efforts to try to contain the oil, when there was still a leak, and now, trying to understand and deal with the social problems stemming from the oil spill. i cannot imagine the individual governors from the four most- directly impacted states have the capability or expertise in house to deal with this in a matter anywhere close to how the government and bp can deal with this. host: thad allen rights to date in the "washington post" -- joe on the democratic line. you are next.

caller: i wanted to reference an article that i read, i believe in "the economist" about this crisis. adding athat bp was chemical as close as possible to the source of oil so that the oil would not go to the surface and would stay below. the reason was because they did not want the aerial photographs to show how much oil was coming up. also, to make it kind of invisible. host: can dispersants make the oil invisible? guest: it can keep it in a micro droplet form, so it is somewhat invisible, but it is facetious to assume that the

reason they added it was so that it would not be seen. i think there was a conscious effort to contain as much oil subsurface as possible so that it would not -- so that a minimal amount would washed up on the beaches, affect organisms on the surface. in minimum amount that could volitalize that would be extremely harmful to workers in the area. host: there is an expected big jump in dispersants to clean up the oil. do you know about the impact on marine life from this? guest: i have not been a part of any of these studies to look at the effects of the day this person on a microbial community.

i know that my colleagues at the university of georgia, people that they are collaborating with, they are trying to an underweight its impact. host: what are they finding? guest: those studies are still ongoing as we speak. host: do you know when the results will be known? guest: i do not. host: carol on the republican line. you are next. caller: i have a question. thank you for taking my call. i was watching a special where they went down and tested some of the fish in the gulf. they readily admitted there was no test for dispersant chemicals.

now i am wondering how safe the fish supply is, the danger of being poisoned by the toxic chemicals. guest: i think the government is greatly increasing the rate of toxic screening in fish and shellfish. some of the fish that will be harvested will be some of the most well tested fish that we passed anywhere in the world. host: jim on the republican line. caller: i grew up near the gulf of mexico. i seem to remember, maybe in 1980, there was a released --

people had described it as an unprecedented event. how much of this did we know in the 1980's, is this truly unprecedented, how does this compare to the size of that spill? guest: i do not have those statistics offhand, but certainly, the amount of oil in the bp spill dwarfs the other oil spill. there was quite a bit of statistics released about how much was released to the surface, how many car balls were recovered. the difference between that spill and the current bill is that was a relatively shallow water spill. the dynamics are very different.

i must say, a lot and the information we reviewed when trying to come up with will degradation rate was based on scientific information from that particular catastrophe. host: bill on the democratic line. dover. good morning. caller: i used to work in refining. now i am retired. there are instruments that you can put on the outside of a pipe that can accurately measure the flow of fluid inside. i have installed them. why, at any stage in this disaster, was the flow inside

the pipe never mentioned, measured? guest: i think you are speaking to our total estimate of the oil, hydrocarbons that came out. i cannot answer the question. i have no information that would give any information on why they used the approaches they did. i did speak to several of the scientists involved in the coming up with those estimates. the factor they are trying to tease out now, the total volume of liquid, how much was well, how much was dissolved gas, like methane? i do not know why they did not use the technology that you are describing. host: jesse in west chester,

pennsylvania. caller: my question is about the difference of oil plumes on the surface and will that dropped on the bottom. can you explain to me why the oil separate and goes to the bottom, what are the possible dangers of that will not drops to the bottom? -- oil that drops to the bottom? guest: if you have ever had oil and vinegar salad dressing, you know that those two mixtures completely separate. normally, when oil is released at or near the surface, it naturally rises to the surface because it has a different entity than water, therefore, it

floats on the surface. in this particular case, the oil-gas mixture was released at such a tremendous pressure, it is like spraying aerosol in the air and you have these micro droplets, combined with the dispersants, and you have a micro droplet similar to taking a container of oil and vinegar and you can create an emulsion that can stay combined for some period of time. because of some of the temperatures, other circumstances, they have stayed under the surface. and when you consider some of the residual things happening, that causes these elements of

disperse the oil to move in a plume-like fashion when first released. from the limited circulation in those deep waters, those plumes tend to have coherence for a time after release. eventually, it will be disbursed so you cannot identify individual plumes. host: science journals describing a plume in deepwater the size of manhattan. what sorts of dangers come from that, how long would it take for that size of plume to break up? guest: crews, where they collected those samples -- i am not sure. it was perhaps in the middle of the release period.

so there was not adequate time for that mix to disperse. certainly, the more concentrated the oil and the spurs and mixture is, the more toxic it will be. over time, it will spread out to an ever larger area and the concentration will decrease to the point where it is no longer toxic and microbes will eventually degrade in and convert it into co2. host: next phone call. caller: with the dispersants that they are using, how long will it take for the oil into the spurs or wash onshore? how long -- come much longer do you think this is going to wash onshore? guest: that is a good question. we convened a group of experts

to advise the state of georgia to come up with an oil assembling scheme. for georgia to still be concerned that oil might be in trained in the loop current, implies the danger has not gone away and will remain for some time. then again, we also came to the opinion, that by new year's, 2011, we suspect the oil will be in loop form. in another four, five months, it will not be such an environmental concern because it had been diluted to such an extent. host: since you put up a report, how much do you think that number has lowered?

how much are you getting rid of per day, per week? guest: first of all, there is no more skimming, burning being done. there is no moral being active released. at this point, whether oil is coagulating, forming larger compounds, is being busted with organic material in the water. a fair amount is probably is probably settle into the bottom. host: ok, we're going to minnesota, tom. caller: good morning, professor. i was wondering if you can tell us how much sediment has

occurred. and secondly, as varas and how much oil is still there, however as -- guest: i do not have data. your of your questions. caller: i heard that when they're making records about it, they had not done any tests since june. i was wondering how many -- how come they do not have any people up there to do tests and how they can detect the plumes.

guest: there are ongoing studies as we speak. just last friday, my colleague in the marine department here started a steady. there are tremendous numbers of studies going on at the same time. we are lacking horizontal and vertical space for all forms of oil to that we can actually quantify the rate at which the oil is dispersing. we can use that information to advise us on what the actual rate of degradation on the various forms of oil were. hopefully, some of the price scale sampling and analyses will be forthcoming.

host: bill on the republican line, good morning, bill. caller: doctor, thank you for your work. you are about 75 miles from the golf and i have a very important friend who is a chemist at mississippi state university who told me to go ahead and eat fish and shrimp. he said the toxicity is so low. i have to both questions -- two questions. there were asking questions of an official of no a and to the epa -- of an official at noaa and the epa.

i would like to ask two questions. as to the name of the chemical, all i could get was dioxo-secc inal or something or other, but it is one of the main ingredient in lipstick and is not harmful. guest: i'm not aware of any reports by noaa about this dispersants.

as far as any discussions of our correcsis, i know it is difficult to detect this dispersant in the concentrations found. a number of people are trying to conduct a controlled experiments on correxis to a value its toxicity to the various marine life. host: on to washington d.c., now out on the democratic line. caller: 1 washington dc was wreaking havoc, i heard there was no note stoas big as an jersey. -- there was an oil spill as big

as new jersey. have we heard anything about that? been athat must've tremendous oil spill over there. i do not know about as volume compared to the current release, but it must have been tremendous. but it state and state of weathering would have been far different than this particular situation. but after the fact, we have learned a valuable intimation that we can use to inform ourselves about feature -- future releases. host: happening now on c-span2 is a hearing getting under way in houston. the government panel was looking into this oil spill, investigating it, the hearing continues all week. we are covering it live right now on c-span2 if your

interested in that. will go back to calls. caller: i am an american contractor in the florida keys and a marine contractor in my garden since 1989. the rules and regulations i've had to deal with, i've had to make sure there is no clouds in the water. it is illegal for me to use any kind of soap or anything that would disperse oil in the water. i can get fined big money. i've had it go through regulations. i've had to put signs up to protect wildlife, and the rules and regulations and the cost of having to do that in my business is tremendous, really.

host: can you estimate for the viewers how much these regulations cost you? >> caller: if you were to read the 100-page document that you get through dot that would be groveland to the department of resources, you would have to put a man on the shoreline to watch for activity. and you better shut your operation down until you get officials in there that can verify that animal is gone. host: can you speak to the regulations and you think they are necessary? you think we have enough? guest: one of the challenges is to promote very healthy, sustainable economies, in the coastal zone, and of the same time protect natural resources, which is why we gravitate to the

coastal zone in the first place. of primary importance is the grant -- is to see grant and noaa to protect the coastal regulations that are written to provide environmental protection. at the same time, strengthen local economies. host: we're going to virginia beach, jennifer on the democratic line. good morning. caller: you mentioned the plumed hat the size of manhattan at the bottom of the gulf. the size ofd at the sio manhattan at the bottom of the gulf. will that affect the not -- the

level of co2 in the ocean? guest: that will affect the level of co2 in delocalized area and that will affect the local ph.d -- in the localized area and that will affect ulocal ph -- the local ph. that really should not be of great concern to anybody, that this oil spill is going to contribute to acidification. host: report released by the university of georgia was also released by the georgia sea grant. what is that? >> is an organization that is authorized directly by congress. we are a part of noaa. each of the coastal states,

including the great lakes, has a sea grant program. it engages university scientists to help find solutions to environmental issues, environmental issues that are identified by coastal stakeholders. by engaging university scientist to find answers to the problems, we then work with extension agent, main extension programs here in georgia to translate those scientific results and get those findings are to local communities were people of virtually ask these questions. it is really an extremely effective program to help develop naturals -- natural resources in the coastal zone. host: 1 last phone call. we will have to make it very quick.

gray in the panhandle, florida. caller: n/a occurred in her -- in a hurricane, how is this going to affect the land? host: if you could talk about the general impact on the well- off the remains of a gold and the situation there. guest: the major -- if you could talk about the general impact of the gulf andl and yoin the situation there. guest: it could bring the make oil from below the surface of to the surface. baker also suspended the world that is blanketing the bottom -- it could also suspend the oil that is blanketing the bottom.

hurricanes can have a major impact in redistributing the oil that is one or 2 meters from the surface. if anything, to mix it up and promote service weathering, if you can bring it up to the sunlight to might will degrade and whether much more rapidly. host: thank you so much for your time this morning, sir. coming up next, we will turn our attention to the pentagon and first up in this summer series is going to be the f-35. secretary of defense robert gates says he wants to cut $100 billion from the military budget and the f-35 alternative engine is part of that. we will talk about that, coming up.

>> i'm not saying senator mitchell report is entirely wrong. i am saying brian mcnamee's statements about me are wrong. let me be clear, have never taken steroids or hgh. >> with roger clemens under indictment for falsely testifying to congress, go back and watch all of the testimonies online at c-span.org. all free since 1987, watch what you want, when you want. >> tonight, three books on explores.

david grant and his story, "velocity -- "the above lost city." "washington journal" continues. host: we are continuing our summer series here on your screen as lieutenant general michael hough, who was with the air force from 1999 to 2001. we're looking at the have-35. in the 2011 defense budget, there is about 10 they dollars earmarked for this program, which would buy abroad -- $10

billion earmarked for this program, which would buy about $10.7 billion, or 42 aircraft. in the current budget there is an estimated $323 billion. each of these has a cost ranging from $59 million to $112 million per plane. why do we need this aircraft? guest: the answer is are actually very easy answer. what has happened over the last 30, 40 years, we have had a lot of generation 3, generation for aircraft like the f-16 and a couple of others that preceded them, what is happening is that all of these aircraft, tomorrow, they will probably be untouched in capability.

the problem is that they will be on a sunset posture. meaning, they will be retired. production lines do not make them anymore. they are upgrading the f-15 and the f-16s for some other countries. the problem is, they are not up to the capability that we need to find tomorrow's warps. -- tomorrow's wars. when those are retired, and there's only one plane that will replace all of them and that is the f-35. that is it. probably right now they have eight or nine countries signed up for sure. and because there is a lack of alternative for generation 5, all of our best friend, native countries -- nato countries, they will either have to make a choice to fight a generation for

airplane, which is why we fight with today, or they will have to buy the future in tomorrow's airplane, which is the of 35 -- the f-35. host: critics have said that this fighter jet will not be available until 2014 and we are in the middle of a drawdown in iraq. why should we go forward with this program when is -- it is over budget? guest: it is ken of like your bank account. -- it is kind of like your bank account. this airplane, i want to qualify this. when some of the other released

our people back in the 1990's had this vision, they did not want to just build another airplane was one leaf ahead. they wanted to build a two or three leaves ahead. what they wanted to build was an airplane for the future that with tavis by as for the next 40 or 50 years. -- that would satisfy us for the next 40 or 50 years. it is not just a bomber. it is a battlefield chordata. it is a flying center. -- a battle field coordinator. it is a fine center. if it can make decisions to do what is necessary to make those battlefield decisions quickly and to do what is necessary. that is why it is important. host: this aft-35 is going to be used across several units.

why have this is being used by all branches of the military when that bair itself has caused problems in getting it on time as far as production? guest: when this first chart of i do not think there were 10 people on this planet that started work -- when this first started, i do not think there were 10 people on this planet that thought it would work. you are correct, i used to be three airplanes for two, and now it is two and half. the air force served plain does not have a kila on it. -- have a keel on it.

the point is, you are getting three airplanes for every two, 2.5. the old idea of trying to make one airplane to satisfy every body, and the point is, if it did not work, i would not be here today. but it did work great. there were some setbacks due to wait and other things, absolutely. but it was a tremendous leap. they will get there. they just have to work through their issues. it is more leadership than technical. host: can you explain why there is debate over an alternative engine for the f-35? guest: i have to take credit for some of that.

here is what happened. i turned in a report about a year ago that basically said, why do we need this motor? host: the alternative motor. guest: the alternative motor. the demonstrators back in 2000, 2001, in order to hit the schedule and because that was thrust upon -- and a the cost that was thrust upon the makers, they essentially all took the core motor. bell was because it costs less and was more mature in the company -- then in the competition, the f-22. there were two studies done by the r.t.a., the navy, mr.

douglas and they said, absolutely, competition is critical and vital to do about three or four things. they never talked about the cost of it, but they said, to lower cost, to increase liability -- reliability, and since you are only going to have one airplane, to only have one motor and to put all of your beans in them one basket, we all know that murders have issues and whatever. -- we all know that motors have issues and whatever. had it matured, tested and so forth, which it is in all papers and so forth. there has been discussion in recent weeks about the general .otors schroedemotor

but the thing is, they can go in any frame, the same frame, in the frame with the same capability. once you can change the frame, then you can compete. there is no doubt, as dr. dancer from maryland said, was well known in this business, competition will be demonstrated across the board. industry capability is preserved and it is good for the country. even obama said that in 2009. host: but secretary gates has said, we do not want this alternative njn the president has issued a veto threat over the inclusion of -- we do not want this alternative, and the president has issued a veto

threat or the inclusion of it. guest: it is all about money, that is the deal. since all of their legacy airplanes are going away, you only have one. it is like having one car in your family now. i said, you cannot afford not to do this. take another look at it. general electric motors has only about 20% funding. host: but critics have said that you will need $20 billion to cut -- before it becomes a viable insurance policy. guest: this was not done in a vacuum. when things got tight financially, they said, we probably do not need this.

i understand that. you are talking about up to $3.5 million starting in about 2009. it prole has -- probably has $600 million to go or so. it is not billions. it is very close. host: we are talking to general hough about the f-35. esparta our summer series looking at the defense issue. -- it is part of our summer series looking at the defense issue. let's go to our first phone call here for general hough. connecticut, your first, go ahead.

caller: i have this page written out, so if you will let me read it really fast, i will get the point across and i will tell you when and through. thank you. i feel we do not need to spend a penny on these new planes. the we are the superpower and should not act like bullies for the rest of the world. i saw this piece on tv about how much military might we have already and yet, we're still putting more money into building aircraft and weapons that we do not need. how wasteful and reckless is this? the other countries look upon us in a different light if we would sit down with the leaders of the country we are verbally attacking in ask their opinions as to how to clean up the gulf oil spill and what are their ideas on conquering global warming right now. host: i think we got your point. let's get a response from the general.

how you respond to we already have enough to regard? guest: i understand and in some point i agree with you. however, to preserve and execute our national interest, there is absolutely a need for an error to roundtree team. -- for an air to ground team. as i said, the new airplane is absolutely madden -- mandatory because all of our older airplanes are in a sense that posture, coming to a grinding halt at about 2020. when we started this program we knew it would take about 12 to 15 years to get it up and running according -- up and running and on its way.

without airplanes in our future, whether it be bomber fighters or as into a collector's, sensor based, -- intel collectors, says surveys, and not sure how we would do this. guest: there has been a lot of data about that and the human impact on the battlefield cannot be overlooked. however, i will say that until you can put it bring in these unmanned aircraft -- put a brain in these unmanned aircraft, for one, you have these unmanned aircraft and their stealthy. there is going to be some chaos as to the are and what they are

doing. we do not have the ability to expand our control over that. host: you said earlier that these machines are smarter than the people driving them. are they too smart? guestdo you think unmanned vehis are too smart? guest: if you want to keep up with the intel, starting in decision making process, it must be made on the battlefield, especially when to target some the and when to lose it. that is why these airplanes are flown digitally by computers and so forth. but in this case, we still need someone to make decisions when the computer can on. host: let's go back to phone calls, henry on the republican line. caller: i was in the electronic

technician in the navy and realized how important and how necessary projected air power resources in securing our state's, and our allies as well. one thing i'm interested in is you mentioned the the engine power plant in galveston for modular frame, and wondering what other types of systems can be put into this air structure for this same method to create redundant systems for vendors to spur creativity and ingenuity, and to decrease costs over time and also to decrease the long -- to increase the longevity of this platform. guest: you are right on the money. as a matter of fact, as it turns

out, the lockheed airplane is about 85%, and across the board. common across the board. affordability throughout the three airplanes are preserved coming out through the avionics and the engines. however, because it does not keel, it was a well thought out by a number of people. as you well know, it takes a long time to put together a sophisticated weapons such as this.

host: next phone call on the democratic line, go ahead. caller: it the united states decides not to buy the zero points -- if the united states decides not to buy these airplanes from you, what are you going to do with them? guest: there like anything, if you did not buy them, you would have a few left over. they have not built a lot of them are in now. definitely not more than 100. the 24 that we spoke of the one that was just navy and marine corps. that was not other countries. host: several other countries have indicated they would buy it. guest: coalition partners and there may be more as time goes on.

we're not making f-15s, f-16s or other generation 4. that is what is important that we stay and least equal to or greater than our adversaries. host: you said earlier that you testified before congress that this is all about money. how much of this is all about jobs? guest: from 1998 to 2001, it was always about jobs and that is a big concern for lawmakers. they spread the contractors across the states to ensure its value. also, it is a global economy today and there are a lot of

countries invested. there are $5.5 billion into the coffers tuesday, -- to say, if you're going to play, you've got to pay. but the bottom line, it is it important for the security of this country for the next 40 to 50 years. host: i just want to show the viewers the central wind plant in georgia. and i just want to add to that murieta is represented by phil gramm green of georgia.

guest: that is in georgia. they build all of those parts and ship them down to other parts of the country, they shoot them down to fort worth. and they rely on robots, because they do precise work. and you can rely on robots because they do not get tired, they do not need coffee breaks. host: those robots will be replacing these people? guest: for instance, a drilling a hole in the wind. if you can take a robot and drill a hole in the ravine, for one thing, -- to drill a hole in the wing, for one thing, it is more precise. they would offer a lot more work just to keep these lines going.

across every state there is dozens and dozens, and our hundreds of people that have put them together. -- and now hundreds of people that have put them together. host: let's go to sharon on the republican line in california. caller: this is more confirmation than anything else. i'm also ext. navy e.t. and when i got out of the navy i worked on government contracts, basically. it has all been extremely high

tech, state of the art stuff since the time i was out in the field. my point is, the advantage of having competition among the vendors and having the same maker of and fitting in the same box. that is so important and it gets the competition between the two vendors as far as the quality and performance and capability. it also makes training easier. and the support people get some better -- get better as the companies compete. guest: when we started this program there were two things that were done very much different. one was, we were told to work with the variable of building an

air force plane and cheaper, at $34 billion. that was at $94 escalated up. $64 million for the air force plane and $30 million for the marine corps. affordability is key. it is about best value. across the globe what they did was they had to show they could build that airplane for their vendors for that amount of money. when the cost goes up, or the projected amount there was escalated to take care of inflation, those vendors were going to be read competed -- re-competed to get the best

value. host: would go to larry in san diego. caller: i would like to know how stealthy this aircraft is going to be and how it is going to comply with the new guidelines on stealth. guest: i cannot really comment on that. you probably knew this, but i will say that the of 22 is -- the f-22 is one of the best fighters in the world. all i will say is that this airplane is 10 to 12 years beyond the one. remember i said it was a to generation leap -- two- generation leap? it is a world-class fifth

generation airplane in all respects. host: next call on the democratic line. caller: you may have already answered my question, but any plane made from taxpayer dollars, i want to be not sure that -- i want to know that it is being made here in america. guest: you are right on the money. however -- this plane is being made right here. however, it is important to know that just as we were in iraq and afghanistan, we have coalition partners. and those people are all going to buy airplanes. we're coming down to the point with a fifth generation of fighters, there is no other alternative.

we need the interoperability between stealth and avionics. there are a part of countries that were with us from the start. by doing dollars not to buy the airplane, but to just -- $5 billion not to buy the airplane, but just to get things started. because it is important that they all have the same integrated air pressure. the same knowledge about what is going on in what is not going on. therefore, in order to have an integrated the airplane -- to have an integrated airplane across the board, but the broad, there is a a lot of technology that this country cannot match. we found out and went after the best of breed and that

incentivized a lot of people in this country. your point is well taken and this airplane is being manufactured in this country, but also across the globe. host: san antonio, texas, paul, republican line. caller: are the teams as only did to lace the targets, or will it do it on its own? guest: air capabilities within tomorrow's airplanes, and this airplane here, if it knows where you are, it can heal you. will just leave it at that. -- it can hit you. we will just leave it at that.

the question is, is the targeting information that comes from satellites, skies on the net -- guys on the ground, it can turn into actionable narva -- knowledge. they can turn it into a target. and yes, laser to knowledge is still part of the game. host: are parts of this aircraft top-secret? guest: oh, yes. host: how you keep it secret when you have all the supplies in the manufacture -- all of these different pies in the manufacturing plants looking at it? guest: the source codes are given to nobody. they are done right here. those are the key to what makes everything work. when it comes to a of -- some of

the other capabilities, they are locked up into black boxes. or they are given to the countries in such a way that they cannot exactly unlocked. they know how it works. they will send it back and there is no way for them to take it apart end analyze what happened. -- take it apart and analyze what happened. host: is that what held up the production? guest: no, what they did was like everything, you go through life and you think you have a suitcase, and they found out the real way. that is where you call attention to the sheik -- attention to detail, leadership. i basically went to him and said, stop or you are doing for one year.

you do not know what you do not know. all you know is about 92% in the rest is a leadership challenge. it has gotten some bad press in but with strongudca leadership on both sides, they will get this handled. the marines are starting to train in them. they will get them in 2014. host: pamela, independent line. caller: is f-35 looking to replace the f-16? guest: yes, ma'am. caller: is there any more projections of picking up the f- 22? guest: that is a great machine, and what will happen is that the f-review will replace the

have-15. -- the f-22 will replace the f- 15. tore are a lot of a 15's replace -- a lot of the f-15's to replace and they have a lot of f-16's to replace. many will be bought by the u.s. air force. the others will be bought by the u.s. navy. and the marine corps will replace the f-18 and the 88's with it. caller: i have a question.

i read an article and it said the this plane could cruise at sound and to use less fuel than other planes that we have that are in full dr. bernard in order to reach the speed of sound. -- in full afterburner in order to reach a speed of sam. is that true? guest: no, sir. with the f 18 and others, you put tanks on there. this one has very clean lines. the stealth is our design. all of the bonds are internal, very accurate bombs.

it is a clean airplane with bombs inside and the fuel inside and the weapons inside. the navy airplane goes somewhere between 600 and 700 miles, clean. that is radius. with that said, if you compare apples to apples, with the tanks, is about the same. that is a tremendous capability with range with a clean, sleek airplane. that is necessary to preserve the stealth characteristics of this airplane. host: how fast can it go? guest: it is the largest military motor a roommate. -- ever made.

with that said, can it go supersonic like the f-22? no, i cannot. we do not believe that it is the search for this airplane as a fighter, bomber, and tinto collector -- intel collector to do that, but it will move more than pass enough. and of course, it is supersonic. you go that 1-3, 1-5. host: and what type of military officer will be flying this plane as opposed to the f-22, half-15? the same type? -- f 15? the same type? guest: the same men and women.

we can take sit -- civilians today and use the simulators. you can fly mission under the most realistic conditions. you can fly in a simulator and then get in the airplane. you can have one state, one pocket and you do not need the .xtra perio and we made it so that the airplane will land itself. it is pilot-friendly. caller: i am an ex fighter pilot for 22 years and some of the scratches are equal to the two i

got out of. so far, we have got to go back and start replacing the crack with the public. the cost of three or four of those things is eight or 10 carriers. we have probably tripled the national debt of this country from 10 or 15 years ago. guest: i agree, and where we started this, the purpose of this plan was to make it affordable. there were a few things i did not mention here. there are only two airplanes that have a key performance plan. this one here was 96% to 98%. it has the most capabilities. we want to give affordability through commonality to lower the

price of manufacturing. if this one is faster and better -- this one is faster and better, cleaner. we tried to save money, but to say that we can build the airplanes with the capabilities that they possessed and the cable abuse that they have for the future, -- we are still building the f-846. host: how were they built? guest: they were built all by hand. the romans machines -- the point is, you how to fly your airplanes and because everything is run by steam engines and

wires and so forth -- these airplanes your are flown by computers. -- these airplanes here are flown by computers. the challenges across the globe are or dictate that these airplanes are vital and necessary. host: max, independent line. caller: this generation, f-35, how does it compare to the russians generation of 247 and makes? -- migs? guest: a good question. i will never tell you that the russians can now build airplanes. in fact, they build phenomenal airplanes. however, they did not have the hard crust -- hard cash. back in early 2000 they were

darn near broke an almost 1 out of business, but they came back because -- and they took some of their old airplanes and to some of the modern technology and did it a few other things. but the thing is, these are so generation 3, generation for airplanes. host: atlantic, georgia, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank god for c-span. good morning, general. i have a comment and a question. the question is, what defense contractor do you work for? guest: great question. if you went to the blog you will find out that they did not know

and i did not tell them. i do not work for lockheed and i do not work for sikorsky and i do not work for rolls-royce. host: would you do know? guest: i am on the board for eds north america and ayman -- and i work for mds training in court nation. i did some work on this for about one day and they said they wanted to go it alone and i said i could not because it indicated to the voters. there was some personal interest in them. i work for northrop but i work

and no capacity within a contractor that has any influence over the work of the f-35, the frame, the engines. i simply work with them because i think i can help them all when they need some help. host: i could give a three- minute dissertation on what i feel about the have-35 -- 30- minute dissertation on what i feel about the f-35. why do we need two engines if nobody can tell? and secondly, i know from personal information that the

fighting in the current war has little to do with their craft. it is drones. guest: not entirely. as you know, the war in iraq, a tremendous air support from the f-16, the f-15, after 18. -- f-18. the same thing in afghanistan. the drones are starting to come of age. they do not carry enough ordnance. they do not do a lot of things. i do not believe then -- that if a response is needed, -- host: i will stop you there bee