takeover. washington journal is next. . . runs her gorilla -- guerrilla organization and that's our focus of the first 45 minutes. sarah palin back in the news

with her new book and her documentary on alaska and what role will she play in 2012? again, this is what it looks like front page of the cover story of the "new york times" sunday magazine. the palin network -- some of the people behind the palin network. she's also making news this morning from a couple of other fronts from the outlook section of the "washington post." she's out with her new book and president obama with his new book. her book is call "america by heart: reflections on family, faith, and the flag."

president obama's book is a much shorter version of different biography called "a letter to my daughter." this is what it looks like from the outlook section of "the washington post." steven livingston writing we're a nation of shared hopes and shared heroeses. president obama's is a illustration work for children and sarah palin's book is a fast reading reiteration of the former governor's values. also from "the new york post" on this sunday morning, another reference to sarah palin. sarah out of the wild frontier that is radically changing the conventional wisdom of how to run for president. we'll get to your phone calls and your comments on sarah palin on hurry democrats line from

augusta, georgia. ellis is joining us. caller: good morning. sarah palin, she's a person that to me now, i'm not trying to be negative about her and i'm not a prejudice person but, you know, let's be realistic. and sarah palin's not qualified to become the president of the united states. now, she have more than duked people in believing that she can do this. she cannot be president obama and that's my opinion. ok? shis very smart. very smart. because all she's doing is getting richer. that's it. and the republicans and the people are so afraid to come out and tell the truth. sarah palin is not qualified to become the president of the united states of america. host: ellis, thanks for the call. from "business week," "it's a

food fight." a picture that is photoshopped with sarah palin and michelle obama and from her twitter page, she says the nanny stage as run amuck. caller: good morning. i'm a first-time caller. no, she's not qualified, but on the other hand, neither is president obama qualified. i just -- you seem to me at this country could do better that we have a lot of people who have the experience and the knowledge and one of our problems, i think, is the quality of people that are actually being elected president and i do not wish to see her elected president. it would be really bad. host: ok. from obama and palin, same

heroes, different stories. on the republican line, james is joining us in allentown, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: hi. just tuned from and wanted to say that i'm a republican and i'm not -- i'm not too -- was not too happy about mccain picking her as a running mate but i think it energize the campaign. but i think that, you know, you know, as a republican, i'm not -- i don't think as one guy said i have to admit i don't think she is qualified. i think her face is out there a little too much. she was actually in our -- right near my town, at a christian school giving a speech. that's nice of her to do. she has a right to do that and i haven't read any of her books. i don't really want to. but i would rather see -- i have personally -- i would rather see somebody like mitt romany. he would have been much better,

even a vice president for mccain. but i just don't understand the hate there is for this woman. there is a hatred for this woman. the only thing i can understand is grew up around women kind of like that in a small town, you know, deer hunting country. and it doesn't make any sense. she's an independent woman. she should be a hero to many ladies out there. but the reason the media really hates her is she stands for, you know, people hate to hear this because it's kind of corny but she stands for the kind of woman, especially european women, white woman -- host: jamie, are you here with us? james? we left the call.

a recent headline from political martial and sarah palin. this is before the election a reporting of jonathan martin how the campaigns are rapping with a high maintenance booster. michael shear on his "new york times" caucus block saying sarah palin and former alaska governor will start her second book tour next week as she continues to tease the media about a possible presidential run in 2012. this saturday and sunday, she will be in iowa. it would be held in 2012. jennifer on the democrats line joining us from louisville, kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i love the show. i just want to say sarah's ok. sarah palin. she -- the reason a lot of people don't care for her is because everything -- no matter what other people say, she has always thrown it back like and make it negative everything negative. and i don't think she would be

ever qualified because and to run for president, you would have to be very knowledgeable in so many things and i don't think she has that knowledge. she's good as far as raising money for the, you know, the republicans and everything or whatever, and from what i've heard in sections of her book, i would never buy it. because, i mean, actually, she should even change the name of the book. that's it. have a good day. host: ok. thanks for the call. "newsweek," a look at senator john cornyn. he takes aim at the tea party. the reporting of eric gay from the associated press saying that john gay -- i'm sorry. texas senator john cornyn, the 112 congress hasn't even been sworn in yet but the tea party flexed its muscles with mitch mcconnell supporting an earmark

been a while mcconnell may have lost the day on the issue, another member of the g.o.p. leadership is not backing down. the chair of the national senate campaign committee took what is 15-a-shot at the senator. he expects to calling about the candidacy recruits as a senatorial committee chairman and not mount challenges against them. carl joining us from carlisle, pennsylvania. good morning to you. caller: hi there. i would love to say first off that i love c-span. i love all your shows and i try to see it as much as possible. and on the internet, i do get c-span 2. i love to say thank you very much and i wish i could find another way to support you guys but thank you. host: thank you. caller: really quick here, i

would like to say today, i noticed on the internet that both barbara bush and another commentary mona shawn both have made comments about ms. palin. she is qualified but of course the only qualifications to be president is you're 35 years of age and you got to be born in the united states or a territory of the united states or of course an embassy like other people have been in the past that have ran for the united states presidency. but as far as her education and the knowledge and her past experience in her life, eh, not so much. but when barbara bush actually -- i mean, barbara bush, the former president's mother and another former president's wife actually says that she hope that ms. palin would stay in alaska and not run in 2012. well, that says a whole lot right there whenever you actually have republicans saying

that they're not really interested in having republicans run in 2012. host: thank you. from the "new york times" sunday magazine cover story, it's called "the rogue room." who's who. and what's what of sarah palin's inner circle. the reporting of robert draper." sasha says steve, what real reporters has had an interview with her? she where is. she can join the conversation online. tamara is joining us from salt lake city, utah, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i had to ring in and say i find sarah palin's values very misplaced. as a mother who was watching her kids -- why isn't her kids watching her kid? it's very frustrating that they have small children and they're just so busy doing other things.

that's why i wouldn't put my faith in her. family first. then country. thanks. have a good day. host: sad, we can only vote for the candidates given to us by the basis of both radical party. we need a third party fast. mary joining us on the democratic line. welcome to the conversation, mary. good morning. caller: good morning. my fear is that if sarah palin makes president, she's not educated enough and i feel some of the people will vote for her because we have a not we, per se, but a lot of us have a tendency to follow and pick up on the media and what the other people is doing. so she does have a possibility that she could win out of ignorance but she does not have the education to go up against other world leaders. if you don't know your history, how can you plan for the future?

so i just feel sorry for the entire country if she was to make president. host: thanks for the call. one point from robert draper's piece in the magazine. he says sarah palin's withering regard to the media co-exists with the fact that sarah palin is a media sensation. she will be featured on an "abc news" program by barbara walters on december 9 in which she is listed as one of the 10 most fascinated people of 2010 in an excerpt released by "abc news" earlier this week, barbara walters asked her about 2012. >> i'm looking at the lay of the land now and trying to figure that out if it's a good thing for the country, for the dis course for my family, if it's a good thing sfrrment you ran for president, could you beat barack obama? >> i believe so. host: that from the "abc news" interview that will air next month on the network. draper said she enlisted the

services of barnett for both clinton and george bush. -- host: back to your calls. the "new york times" sunday magazine calling sarah palin the republican's leading shadow candidate. thomas is joining us from here in washington. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: we sure can. caller: excellent. i think sarah palin is kind of like a distraction. i think the real fact of the matter is that this money interest in our country, food, certain things like tax, no taxes, freedom for the

corporations, that really can't get it through even the republicans won't go to the extremes of what these people want. what's happened is they have put money in this tea party thing because they've got the crazies that do stuff that even the republican party won't do. another thing. you should have a category of other parties instead of just saying independent. i am in the green party number in the washington, d.c. and we shouldn't be all looked together as independence because you only presume the two parties that are legitimate are the corporate parties. thank you. host: thank you. we try to limit the phone numbers which is why we do that to have three numbers. there's a lot of information getting on the screen but we appreciate it. thanks for calling and thanks for listening on c-span radio. don is joining us from second degree. sarah palin, is she the leading candidate? the shadow candidate for the g.o.p.? caller: a lot of information -- host: go ahead, don.

i'm going to put you on hold because we have a twitter comment from jan saying fascinating. i think barbara with a with a has lost it. -- wawa has lost it. are you still with us, bran? caller: yes. host: good morning. guest: -- caller: i think sarah palin is basically a protege of what she calls the mainstream media. she's being brought up all the time. as far as to be a leader, she quit the governorship and, you know, lisa murkowski would be by far even a better candidate than her. after being beaten down by miller goes in as a write in, she shows she's got the stamina and what it takes to go beyond just the popularity contest or

what the media needs. i mean, she went there to the alaskan people and took on basically the mainstream media and the people sarah palin herself. these people just propping sarah palin up. all she basically is to most people is a mouthpiece and a pretty face. host: ok. caller: i mean, she's not, you know, presidential material as far as i'm concerned. host: republican from second degree, don, thanks for our call. one of our viewers, what i would like to see newt as president and palin as v.p. newt gingrich out with a few book titled "valley forge: a novel." he will join us a little later on in the ogram. ross joining us from eldenton, north carolina, good morning. welcome to "washington journal." caller: good morning. how are you doing this morning?

>> fine, ross. how are you if caller: well, i'm here. nice talking to you this morning. i don't think sarah palin is really qualified to be president. i think she's got children, stuff to -- autistic child, grandchild. a grown man's faith and daughter and family. she should be home with her family. what do you think? host: all right. we'll leave it there. pat joining us in new hampshire. pan chester. good morning, pat. caller: good morning. i would just like to say that yes, she's a very attractive and down to earth girl, but she's also a big deceiver and a liar. when she walked up on that convention stand, when she ran with mccain, she stood there and had the nerve to compare a job

that obama had before he entered politics with her job as a politician. if you're going to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges, i think that she's a hypocrite christian too. host: robert dictatorship has the story the palin network the sunday "new york times" magazine, how the g.p.'s leading shoo candidate -- shadow candidate runs her guerrilla organize organization. one of our viewers saying palin represents -- they would vote her in just to educate voters. next is dave joining us from westfield, indiana, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think sarah palin first off, you can't beat somebody with nobody. and who work is the alternative

from sarah palin. and secondly, she actually beat a corrupt republican governor in rakowski. you don't hear anybody saying rakowski. his father was a great governor. he was crooked and she beat him and for mayor of a small town in alaska. the best presidents we've had in this century have been ronald reagan for the republicans and george bush for the republicans and f.d.r. for the democrats. they've all been governors before they became presidents. these senator, they never had to make any decisions. who else do the republicans have and she's one big campaign -- won big campaigns for herself. she didn't win the presidency, but mccain should have never been the republican's choice

four years ago. he was just the guy that ran against george bush and, you know, the conservative side of the republicans or the ones that who won most of the last election are the ones that the american people want. host: thanks for the call. i'll leave it there. from the "new york times" this morning, looking ahead of 2012 and mitt romney. the essence of the story, looking at campaign finance laws around the country. let me read to you the first paragraph. the fact of mitt romney who is weighing to run for president in 2012 has --

host: it allows him to tiptoe around federal campaigns, finance, limits. you can read more this morning from inside the "new york times." congressman jim clyburn who will maintain his leadership position from the democrat's move from the majority to the minority. he's on guest on c-span newsmakers program. he was challenging at least for a couple of days steny hoyer to be the house democratic whip. the leadership team includes nancy pelosi, steny hoyer as the democratic whip and assistant minority leader to nancy pelosi is the third position. clyburn was asked about that on newsmakers. >> it would have been very simple as everybody says. everybody just step back one

step. you've been shared. let's go back to being whip. and lowsa would go back to being leader. that was not attractive to me. i thought things i learned could be put to great use if we were to bring another chair to the table. because i do believe that we are in a different political environment and we have a caucus that's a little bit different. we got 10 asian pacific islanders, we have blue dogs that are not all that much for trade. all of this diversity i thought i learned a lot about. and i really could bring discussions to that table and

could take them away from the table into our constituency in a way that would limit me if i were chair of the caucus. host: our conversation with current majority whip jim clyburn in the next congress is democrat from south carolina. he's our guest on "newsmakers." next up from louisville, kentucky, is keith on our democratics line -- democrats line. the issue, sarah palin republicans calling her the leading republican shadow candidate. good morning. caller: good morning. i think ms. sarah palin, she could be president. but i don't really think this was what the american people want. you know, senator john mccain created ms. sarah palin. and he kind of created a monster, really. now i'm not talking about -- i

respect ms. sarah palin and her family. she's an american, just like i am and everybody that call in. but when you have to make up things for your lies and talk about people and knowing it's not true to get your agenda across, you telling me one thing but you're not really serious about the american people. you're trying to make -- you're trying to get to a point in your life in politics where you're trying to make some money. you got books. you got the tv. her daughter's on tv. so to me, it's about money from the american people. but i would love to make some money. i wish her luck. host: all right. a piece by david sanger, the dateline is washington. the focus is on north korea. the headline, north koreans unveil new plans for nuclear

use. north korea showed a scientist a vast new facility it's secretly and rapidly built to inrich -- enrich uranium. -- host: more details from david sanger this morning in the "new york times." karen is joining us, independent line from new york city. good morning. caller: good morning, steve, how are you? >> fine. how are you today? caller: fine, thank you. i think the truth of the matter is that sarah palin is the leading thorn on the side of the republican establishment.

i think that the republican establishment does not like her, does not want her and is going to do whatever it can to get rid of her. i found her -- i'm extremely left wing. that's how i roll. host: uh-uh. caller: but you have to go to the anchorage daily news to the alaska blogs as i did from the campaign up until the present, not as much recently but i spent a lot of time doing research. she has a very long, very bad record. she's widely regarded by the regular republican party in alaska as having destroyed republican party in alaska and she's pretty much doing the same now to republican party nationally. and that's my comment. host: thank you, karen. here's a look at the timeline from the "new york times" sunday magazine from sarah palin's entry into the national stage as a vice president candidate to

her role in midterm election from anaheim, cassel, phoenix, and joining her husband from the fox studios in new york where she is under contract on election night. joan is joining us. caller: i'm going to list the qualifications as everybody's totally bent on destroying her. let's see. she's a wife and mother and doing a good job at that. she owns her own business with her husband and works at it and makes some of the things that men in congress has never done. she was a mayor of a small town. but a lot of towns are small. she's also a governor at one of the largest states, negotiated oil deal for those people that they'll have money forever out of their oil up there.

and as governor, she reduced their deficit and did a great job getting rid of the jets and stuff like that and then she got to run for vice president. the only thing she doesn't have. she isn't a man for one thing. and she is not a harvard of yale or one of those eastern college graduates. and i think that she represents what every woman in this country is, a loving mother that works for her family. so i think she is just as qualified as any man in this country to be president. host: joan, thanks for the call and the comment. mike would agree with you, saying that sarah palin can get the nomination, but legitimate news has accumulated all of the stupid quotes and ideas of hers and she will show them if she decides to run. president obama back from lisbon, portugal as he was attending the nato summit.

the afghan leader saying she was upset with u.s. and nato nighttime bombing and some of the raids going on in afghanistan. one of the issues as the president talked in lisbon about what afghanistan will look like in 2010 and beyond. here's a portion. >> when i communicated with president karzai is two things. number one, we have to make sure that we understand our objectives are aligned, and end point we want to reach is the same. and number two, we have to be in good enough communication with each other that when issues come up that raise sensitivities about afghan sovereignty that may alienate afghan population, then we should be sensitive and listening to him. at the same time, he's got to be listening to our concerns.

host: natea sees a long-term to combat operations in afghanistan. they write from lisbon and listing the transfer of security responsibility to the afghan government by the end of 2014. but nato officials acknowledged that allied forces will remain in afghanistan in a supporting role well beyond that date. more news that came from the summit in lisbon over the weekend. russia to aid nato and anti-missile network. this is a story from ed cody. he writes russia agreed to work with nato --

host: back to your calls. we're focusing on sarah palin in part because she is back in the news with her new book out this week. she will be traveling to iowa this weekend to sign books at a wal-mart and a borders bookstore in the des moines area. the cover story should say the "new york times" sunday magazine. beverly is joining us in utica, new york. our line for democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i just don't understand why she feels she has to be in front of everyone making a mockery of the president and doing things like have her daughter doing whatever, you know? it's fine have all that thing going, but do what you're supposed to do as a mother. make sure everything your family -- you get your house in order first before you start feeling

like you can run the presidency and you're picking at the president about every little thing and this is important situation, you can't just put yourself out there thinking that you would make a president -- i mean, try running for a senator or something like that first. don't just think people are going to vote for you and there's a lot of other people who might be even more qualified. and ready to support all of us americans. i can understand why president obama is where he is. he is for the people. he comes from two types, not just one group. he represents all of us americans and we have a love for , you know, this whole thing, the taxes and all that stuff. you have to show yourself where you can be some help to all of us before you can just expect us to vote for you.

host: ok. thanks very much for your call and your comment. going back to robert dictatorship who has a piece in the "new york times" sunday magazine. sarah palin has rewarded allies, -- host: former governor mike huckabee this iowa today speaking in a family religious conference in des moines, iowa. we have covered that and will show it to you later in the week. eugene is with us on sarah palin. good morning. caller: good morning.

how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i worry about the celebrity status, the bonding word between celebrity and politician and, you know, we saw that even with the running of our current president, i think. but sarah palin has kind of become the public face of the tea party. i am a tea party supporter. but i don't think she can do this alone. i'd like see more talk within the republican party about running lieutenant kernel allen west, recently run congress in florida. i'm afraid that people will try to make this a racial issue. the president has frightened me. our current president, president obama but not because of the heritage or anything like that but just because i've heard the man speak enough on his own belief. but i really love to see allen west be pushed to run. host: thank you for the call.

donna has this point from our twitter page. what is she talking about? referring to one of her early viewers. she ran for governor she quit the job for a reality show. "new york post" has this look at the democrats. the economy and the next congress. he says the whole world wants a new economic approach from washington but democratic leaders see another chance to impose their wrong-headed will. the voters sexoke they roared and the dems response by becoming the party of no. dr -- host: finally, they worked with majority of americans instead of against them.

otherwise, history will repeat itself in 2012. earl is joining us from forth dodge, iowa. good morning, republican line. go ahead, please. caller: good morning. i just like to add to comment that was made earlier. if she is so lousy, why are the media and the democrats so afraid of her? host: uh-uh. caller: dumb is the reason. she's dumb. well, so was reagan. ike was dumb. maybe dumb is good. finally, there's so much negative about her, even the callers this morning. i think she is one of several good g.o.p. potential candidates. i think the next president of the united states is going to be a governor. a governor who has a real resume and i think -- gave that earlier. host: earl, thanks for the call.

jim hines saying she, sarah palin, brings it on herself. she is a bomb thrower. you know it. i know it. we all know it. again, they conversation going on in earnest on our twitter page at twitter.com/c-span wj. vice president has piece on iraq of the "new york times." what we must do for virginia tech now. -- iraq now. a couple of points. he said after more than seven years of war and decades of dealership -- dealershipship -- -- -- dictatorship --

host: one other point. the weekly tally of violent zbikowskis throughout iraq has dropped from 160 to -- security forces are not fully ready to operate on their own. pat is joining us from houston, texas. good morning, democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: certainly. caller: sarah palin has two things going for her. she is a hustler, number one, because she hustles her family. she knows they don't deserve to be in the spotlight. but by accident, they're there. because she has placated to trailer trash and this is what the republican women think of her. that's why they don't like her.

to her, they --o them, she is trash. and they would not invite her or sit to a table with the liking of her because she is not on their level. she's not on their level of thinking. she's not educated. but she b.s.'s. and in school, we call a b.s.er is a person that doesn't do their homework. but piggy backs on the back of other students to see and keep on their paper to see what they have gotten for the answer. what she does is she looks into the media. she gets her stint from fox. she twists it around and makes her her own. which makes her a hustler. she has hustled america. she takes the money and she runs. no, she's not qualified to be president. she couldn't stand to the like of president obama. but because she is the opposite of him, he's educated.

she's not. so she placates to these people that are on her level. which are the tea party. most of them are not educated. host: pat, thanks for the call and your point of view from our twitter page, one of our viewers say when did the time come for us to actually praise somebody who is "dumb?" referring to an earlier caller. is there something wrong with an intellect cal poet tus? -- potus? before that, a confirmation, speculation had been brewing that former senator was going to run for the mayor of chicago in a confirmation of that, she will challenge rahm emanuel, the piece points out that he entered the race saturday by reintroducing herself to voters. some of them were not born back in 1992. she was not re-elected at it is illinois senator. melanie is joining us in decatur, alabama.

good morning. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. look, i have no problem with sarah palin. i'm in full support of females in office, females doing whatever they need to do for the government. but as donald trump once said in an interview, probably a few weeks ago, every single foreign country has lost respect for america. and by putting a female in office, we will lose what little respect we have left. i mean, i'm all for female advancement. i have no problem. if a female wants to run for office but in the end, having a female in office, will wind us pushing further and further down the path that we are going on down and in order for us to pull ourselves up by our boot straps, we need a strong man that can take everything by the reins and turn us around. host: chris has this comment. 2012 began for sarah palin when she went rogue on john mccain. chris saying it's all about her, all the time. people don't trust her.

she cannot win. on the republican line from santa barbara, california, connie is joining us. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. i used to watch and contribute to c-span years ago in connecticut. so you must recognize my voice. host: oh, you are up early. caller: yes, when you get to be 73, you have to wake up earlier than the normal people. host: you sound a lot younger than 73, but go ahead. caller: thank you so much. steve, i'm so appauled. several years, there was a wise conservative guy who call in occasionally and i love hearing his opinion. now i noticed because i seldom watch anymore. he said i'm not going to watch or listen or contribute anymore because c-span is so liberal, et cetera. and i said why am i exercised watching c-span? i'm a conservative and obviously it's like watching msnbc. but yesterday, you had the moderator had a false premise

here and i want to you go back and listen to his whole entire 45 minutes. he had the idea of talking about whether we should have unemployment benefits from congress or lower the deficit. that was a false egregious premise. what the republicans want to do is take the $12 billion out of the unspent stimulus. the $814 billion stimulus. there's $258 billion left. he was the most worst moderator. finally one conservative said you're wrong. this is not right. but didn't make any difference. he would not take the right premise. and what's happening today, sarah palin, i remember years ago when they tried to trash reagan. he was principled and he was happy and optimistic. and that's what killed you liberals. he is principled can and happy and she knows what her principle are.

will you be able to trash sarah palin like you did reagan? reagan survived and he became one of the great presidents of the 20th century. i'm going to be very curious to see whether this happens on this next cycle but i have to tell you, steve. do watch yesterday morning and i'd love to have your -- because you're the only one who had some kind of on sanity -- host: i don't know about that. >> 42% of americans self-identifies as conservatives. 19% self-identifies liberals and we pay c-span for -- and yet, you don't represent the majority of americans, which is a center right country. well, i hope -- host: i hope what we do is represent a variety points of view. you may not agree with every question and any morning is an open dialogue of what we choose but part of this program is all

about is to reneck what is being written about in the "new york times" or sarah palin's which is coming out this week. we try to select an open ended question on sarah palin. what about sarah palin as a republican? should she run shwill she run? and can she win? caller: you talk about the "washington journal". but you're totally liberal. host: it's a weekly standard. but the question is open ended. they're saying she is a leading shadow candidate for the republicans. caller: and what's happened? a conservative is watching c-span and i noticed this just the last little bit. is that conservatives don't call anymore. because they're discouraged because of the way that we're treated by c-span. that's my only comment. and thank you so much for letting me talk so long. i really appreciate it. host: thank you. don't be a stranger. call back again. mime shear will be joining with -- michael shear wl be joining us.

posted right now is sarah palin having gawker putting down or taking down excerpts from the harper collins book, "america by heart." saying the contents done come out until tuesday so gawker is ordered to remove the book excerpts from its website. next is santos joining us from east point, michigan. our line for democratic. caller: good morning. you know, i don't want to embarrass sarah anymore. everyone's talking about how she's a great governor. has about as many people as we do in -- in alaska as we do in michigan. they were trying to effect -- she's the one who invented the panel for the elderly. the senior home on her watch, --

two seniors lost their life. that is fact. that is not fiction. and, you know, he reality show is a little ridiculous. it's more like a commercial if you're wanting to go to a trip to alaska. everybody talking about how she's such a great parent. i know my parents were great parents. my sister got pregnant at 15. but what else is going on in alaska? host: well, you're going on too far. i have to stop you there. steve, we would love to see a few more liberal guests responding to connie's comments. coming up, michael shear of the "new york times." and then gen wesley clark. and newt gingrich will be here as well. valley forge, his latest novel. first, a news update from c-span radio and nancy callow.

>> here's a lineup of the sunday network tv perhaps that we are reairing at noon eastern time and on the sunday show, the topics include afghanistan, nato, the new start treaty and airport security screening. first at noon on nbc's "meet the press" reaired, host david gregory hosts clinton, and representative elect republican allen west of florida. at 1:00 here abc's "this week" with mike mullen, the chairman of the joint chief of staff. fox news sunday with chris wallace reairs at 2:00 eastern time and guests, secretary of state clinton and rick perry. and then at 3:00 p.m., hear cnn's state of the state of the union. and the ranking member of the house transportation committee, republican john micah on airport security measures.

finally at 4:00, hear "face the nation" on cbs. secretary hillary clinton and house majority leader steny hoyer. that's the five network tv talk shows brought to you by the networks and c-span. the reairs begin at noon with "meet the press," and "this week," state of the union, and face the nation from cbs. listen thome all on c-span radio in the washington, d.c. area, on your iphone, on xm satellite radio 132 or online at www.hbo.com/boxing. -- c-span radio.org. >> when they give up power, even though they may give it up for principled reasons, it will be hankered for a moment. >> the final installment, edmund morris examines the final year

of t.r.'s life. tonight at 8:00 on q&a. >> along with our coverage of the miami book fair this weekend on book tv, watch "afterwards" with john dour. -- dower. get the entire weekend schedule at book tv.org. from barack to george washington, learn more about the nation's presidents online at the c-span video library. biographies, interviews, historical perspectives and more. searchable and all free. it's washington. your way. "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome back to c-span michael shear now with the "new york times." he's the lead writer for the caucus. this is what the website looks like. relatively new venture for an

old newspaper. guest: right. we're trying to amp things up. politics is playing more online more than ever these days. we want to take it to the next level, especially now that we're in the beginning of the 2012 cycle and it's going to be pretty interesting over the next 24 months. host: let's talk about some of the news this past week. first of all, the line that so many people have been using it's almost become a cliche. meet the new boss, it's the old boss. we have an election, 62 seats in the seats. but no change in the leadership. none whatsoever. guest: right. pretty remarkable when you think about it. there was a brief and sort of a abort i.v. -- bortive movement to see whether or not nancy pelosi might be sort of quietly pushed aside for somebody else but that didn't happen. by and large, the majority of the caucus rallied around her

and everybody, you know, sort of fell into line pretty quickly in this first week back. host: the freshman team, class photo taken on the step offense the photo and delay because of the weather. one to the issues in the "new york times" and "the washington post" is the makeup of these congressional districts that truly are very swing districts tend to be much more industrial northeast, and tend to be white voters going for republicans when two or four years ago, they went for democrats. >> right. that's both an issue for the democratic party overall when you look at the map of the united states, a place where they really got routed was this industrial heartland of the country. it's an issue for president obama. because remember, the states that we all sort of hung on the edge of our seat during the 2008 campaign were those states in the middle. you know? where president obama had managed to, you know, to win to

eke out some small victories and ultimately provided him the more comfortable margin of victories. he doesn't get those heart land states. next time around, he's going to have a big-time problem. host: there was a schedule meeting. the white house issuing a statement due to scheduling conflicts at the request of boehner and it was postponed and then it became something of a cable network chatter. is there a story behind that or was this a legitimate scheduling issue? guest: from everything we can tell, a little bit of both. you had -- you know, to some extent, a -- the republican say that the white house really didn't sort of get -- tell them ahead of time when they first announced that there was going to be a meeting. on the other hand, that kind of

announcement is pretty standard and the democrats are quick to point out when president bush would make public invitations, they would say -- not say no. the republicans are trying to figure out what their strategy is. they're trying to figure out what the message is going to. they've got the momentum come out of election but they need to figure out how to unify their caucus. they don't want to go into a meeting with the president until they figure it out. host: your colleague has this in the outlook session. the g.o.p. lame duck hardball. he made a couple of points. first of all, whether it's the tax rates or nuclear arms, republicans are being assertive about their views and challenging democrats to challenge the fight. --

guest: you know, the fight over the tax cuts is probably the one looming fight that is really going to play out over the next several, you know, several weeks before the christmas holidays. and here's why. it's the only fight that really has to be done tow. those tax cuts which were implemented at the first part of the decade are going to expire. those tax -- which means then that the tax rates for all these folks go up. both parties don't want this to happen. the rest of the parties that mr. obama has been negotiating with the russians, other issues having to to with the debt can be pushed off and the republicans are eager to push them off because they have a stronger position come january.

the bush tax cuts are really what's going to focus the, you know, this question of, you know, how the two parties manage to negotiate that issue that david was talking about in this column. >> then there's sarah palin which is the lead topic on the "new york times" site. gawker was asked to remove excerpts. she's in iowa this weekend. guest: right. so, you know, what is happening about the sarah palin story about all else to me because i'll be following this for the next two years is the question of her presidential ambition and what she's been remarkably able to do and, you know, there have been politicians. remember, mario cuomo in new york, a generation ago, trying to sort of teasing all of us about whether or not she was going to run for president. but she follow that motto, letting little snippets either an interview here or there, she had an interview with one of my completion at the "new york

times." she did an interview on television. each time kind of giving some sense that well, maybe i will run. maybe i can be obama -- beat president obama. and that's what keeps the interest alive. host: a couple of other political notes from your newspaper. a profile of sorts on senator charles schumer who was looking at the senate democratic leadership position. if reid lost, he would win. reid survived the re-election scare, essentially puts schumer at mr. reid's right hand. guest: right. this is a fascinating column. my cloge wrote this story. you know, i think the feeling among some of the folks, the democrats and the senate was that there wasn't enough sort of partizan fire. you had a lot of policy over the last two years but didn't position the democrats and the senators as well against the

republicans and senator schumer is known to be a pit bull. he's known to be a strategist ax political strategist and a fierce partisan and he will be bringing that sentiment to the caucus. host: our guest is michael shear. he where is for the "new york times." coming up on c-span newsmakers is congressman jim clyburn. he is our guest at 10:00 eastern time. we talked to him about the elections in 2010 and also the margins in the elections this month for the house leadership. 43 democrats voting against nancy pelosi. here's an excerpt from the interview. >> i've been in the campaign with him and when i saw that attitude, i was extremely hardened by -- now, remember, some of them -- a lot of -- dearly won. a lot of them dearly lost.

255 in total. somebody lose about 300 votes here. 1,200 votes here. 1,400 vote there is. . .

>> the thing that swung so heavily in this direction was part of the country where the democrats had barely picked up speed in 2006 and 2008, they picked up in districts that were either republican-leaning or

swing districts in many of them lost by just a hair. two years from now, it would defy historical precedents. they don't -- the democrats don't actually need that many feet to regain --seats to regain the majority. caller: good morning to you. i have several comments, if i may, please regarding mr. obama being in the white house. to begin with, with his 10-day excursion over in the east in korea and japan coming back with no signing of the trade and also he and the democrats leaving washington, d.c. for another vacation, holiday vacation, leaving all

kinds of business under their command undone, i would say that he was less than [inaudible] being responsible for taking care of business at hand them a guest: is something that has dogged a lot of presidents. it certainly has affected mr. obama and that is the image and the message when you leave washington whether it is for a vacation or whether it is for one of these foreign trips which many americans think is not as important as what is going on here especially in a time when the economy is so poor. that kind of criticism will only intensify in the next few weeks because the president will take a two-week vacation, and of the year vacation in hawaii. that is where he was from.

if you talk to the folks at the white house, their standard response is that he is not doing anything different from what president bush did. he is not doing anything different from what president carter did or the first president bush. it is understandable i think from her perspective than the perspective of americans that they say the president off on other issues and that is one thing that the white house is concerned about is how to convince people that they are focused on the economy. host: the current congress may be in session until december 13. guest: they almost have to. they are coming back on november 29 and they have an enormous amount of stuff on their plight and senator reid has suggested that he will try to pursue the dream act which deals with illegal immigration. he will pursue "don't ask, don't tell" and the repeal of that. they have the bush tax cuts as you talk about. they have a whole host of

issues that they can try to deal with in a very short period of time. host: olympia, washington, independent line. caller: good morning. as far as the bush tax cut to go, i believe the republicans and democrats will come together on this one. they will come with some type of deal will be made or whatever. i think it will be for the benefit of all us. i do believe they will come together and do it. i am independence and i do like my president. he seems like he is trying, at least and there is a lot on his plate since he got into office on sure there'll be plenty more down the road. we need to come together in america and buckle in and go to work and you might have to take a job you don't like and do what you got to do. as far as sarah palin, possibly

running for president in the future, all i can say is that i lived in anchorage, alaska before and i got to meet the lady and she seems like a nice lady and everything but the comment she made that she can see russia from her house kind of killed it. thank you for your time and thank you cspan. host: this is a photograph from the latest edition of the weekly standard. this is the initial and viewing of her cable tv show on tlc, 5 million viewers which is significant for cable. guest: the caller mentioned the comment that she made about seeing russia from her house. she never said that. she said something similar to that but that line in particular was immortalized by tina fey when she was doing sarah palin which always makes me laugh that politics and comedy and everything kind of blend together in america.

host: one issue that you addressed is that we have liberals and conservatives but where are people in the center of the country? you read about senator warner trying to find that role. guest: i covered senator warner for four years when i covered politics in virginia. he is typical of a kind of democrat but also there are republicans like him as well who sort of arrived in washington a couple of years ago at a time when there wasn't all lot of compromise in either party. the democrats had 60 seats in the senate and the were not compromising and republicans had adopted a strategy of no and they are going to stop everything the democrats wanted to do. folks like senator warner were pushed to the side. what their hope now is that with the senate a little bit closer, both sides will have an interest to turn to some of

those folks. senator warner is one and there are others that he has been working with and it will come to some compromise. on the tax cuts. host: the former governor of virginia can only serve one term in the commonwealth. he arrived at exactly the wrong moment? guest: he was all so one of those folks following his gubernatorial term who toyed with the idea of running for president himself. he ultimately did not do that after almost one year of traveling around the country after going to new hampshire and iowa because he had this sense of because his brand of centrist politics was not what the democratic party was looking at. they want more of a firebrand. they wanted somebody to carry the torch for them. people like senator warner are open on an issue like the tax cuts that he has a proposal out to work out a compromise it is

yet to be seen whether things like that will fly or whether he gets the influence he seeks. host: you are now at the new york times began your career coveng politics in fairfax county, va. and your graduate of the john f. kennedy school of government. tom, joining us from scranton, pa., a democrat line, caller: good morning thank you for having me on. i think obama is to get -- getting blackmailed. he has to be getting blackmailed. the ninth the rich a tax cut is a no-brainer buried years ago my father told me that a starving dog will eat so much and then stop because the dog even knows that if he keeps eating he will vomit everything up. the rich never get enough. there is never enough for the rich. i will tell you -- i can see class warfare down the road. it will happen and it will explode in this country.

people just can't take it no more. a starving dog is better than the greedy rich per they never get enough. en are the american people going to wake up? when are the and ronald reagan democrats going to wake up and show that republicans are exploiting you? maybe you have a john edwards problem or something but obama is getting blackmailed or he is a blue dog democrat. he shocked me. he made my head spin. don't give them the tax break. they have enough. this gives stupid a bad name. host: an editorial in the new york times about this issue. guest: there are two issues which is the substantive issue about whether or not the wealthy deserve to have the tax rate

continue to be low as it is or expire and go up. the broader issue is that this caller represents a bigger problem that president obama has on a left among his most liberal supporters which is that they don't feel he has fought the battle that they expected him to fight. obviously, most folks don't think he is being blackmailed but that is an extreme version of the sentiment that many people feel on the left. host: let me go to the peace in the new york times -- nuking the white house -- you know you are in trouble when you need henry kissinger to vouch for you. there were sitting at the table with a bunch of old, white american dudes choosing the agenda for the issue and man up with them treating the president

like a man sandwich and daring him to throw a knuckle sandwich. obama drew his line in the sand. the start arms treaties to be a chance for americans to step down the russians and now is a chance for a democratic president to stare down the republicans. this is a meeting that took place last week with the former secretaries of state and the president is having a hard time with the start treaty because he is being blocked in this congress. guest: this took the white house by surprise. they thought they had assembled -- russian arms treaties have been a pretty bipartisan affair historically and they thought that along with senator lugar and others who already backed the idea of this new treaty, they thought they had it in the bag. senator kyle's opposition and saying that we will not do this in this congress and we will plunge into the next one took

them by surprise. there were a couple of days where folks assume that the president assumed assumed -- he pulled out all the stops for a few days. on this trip to lisbon, he made a point of getting the support of the nato ministers and meeting with president medvedev from russia to try to put more pressure on the republicans. host: peter baker in the new york times writes," a nation torn from the beginning about what thomas jefferson called entangling alliances is struggling again with the question of how much to entangle itself with another country and a president with an expansive vision for changing the world, he is struggling with how to -- out his vision will change at home. it is testing his political capacity." guest: it was fascinating to

see. i was with the present on one of his first trip abroad in early 2009. he was treated like a rock star. officials and regular folks of very much treated him with the center of fervor you saw at the end of the 2008 presidential campaign here. it is a very different tone in these trips abroad. host: the picture here is former president carter with former russian leader leonid brezhnev. the headline from the peace -- democrats treaty slump. on the republican line, cincinnati, good morning. caller: i host a radio show here on wdbz. i think we should keep the tax rates of the same. i think we have democrats and

that it did -- get demagoguing the issue. you have people who pass this out as tax cuts for the rich. however, they are saying that you make $250,000 per year or more, you are in the category of a millionaire and a billionaire. i just don't buy it. i think the democrats are doing it for political purposes. do you think we should keep the tax rates the same? host: it sounds like you do. caller: yes, i do. i think we are one america and we need to get this country back on track. we have been pushing 3 percent signed loans across the board to americans who legitimately qualify. i think that will help the economy. i really think we need to quit the demagoguery and go for what is best for all americans. host: let me put two issues on the table. and the editorial this morning in the weekly standard, the democratic tax, he says the

president's handling of this issue is particularly disappointing. shortly after the election, the white house signaled it would be open to cooperate with republicans to keep taxes low but the administration's conciliatory language was drowned out by hell's from the left that once again president obama has deferred to the vote left. has he learned nothing? this is a budget that is likely to take place as early as next week that would provide tax relief for middle-class families but not to those making in excess of maybe $250,000 or higher. guest: it is true that there has been a clamor on the left, particularly on this issue, to have the congress force a vote on just the middle class part of the tax cut, to get the republicanon record either opposing it or not. clearly, the republicans want it but the republicans don't want to see that issue severed from the overall vote.

that would rather have a vote on everything. despite the fact of this vo coming up this prop -- coming week probably, there is a sense that ultimately this is likely to be resolved in some sort of compromise, maybe even just punting down the road for a couple of years where you give temporary extensions and deal with the issue in a couple of years. host: can you answer one question with regard to the bush tax cuts? how will the gop pay for the tax cuts? they are using social security. the debate continues. guest: it does. host: saint louis, independent line, good morning para caller: good morning. i want to discuss something about the bush tax cuts, the extension of that. i am trying to figure out if we have the tax cuts in progress

now and there is the earned -- and there is no jobs being created because we are still in recession, basically, yes, the republicans want to extend this tax cut. they say for two more years but it will probably be extended for the next 10 or 12 years -- i am trying to find out, what do they think the benefit -- the economy will benefit from that? if we have had these for the past eight or 10 years now and there has been no job creation, as a matter of fact we have lost jobs, how do they think we will benefit from that? i don't understand why obama is making this his battle. he should stick with what he plans to do and moved i think in 2012, keble you lose a lot of votes of the bows down to the republicans. i think he has a better chance of building the economy if he sticks with the tax cuts.

if the republicans don't want to vote for the extension of unemployment but yet they want to extend tax cuts for the rich, i think that is just terrible. i think we really, really need to address this. guest: the republicans i think would argue that not withstanding the problem with job creation over the past several years and certainly the last couple of years that if you allow the tax cuts to expire on everybody that there are a bunch of small businesses that would be caught up in the increased rates they would have to pay and that would put an even further damper on job creation. that is their argument. host: the caller is totally wrong, the lower current rate remains for everyone for the first 200-$250,000 before returning to the old rates. guest: that is correct.

that is the point that the democrats like to make. even a wealthy person that makes $5 million or $10 million, the rate would still be cut for the first $250 million. -- $250,000. host: why were republicans opposed to a three-month extension? guest: this has been tough for the republicans was -- because the argument that they are trying to make is not that we should not extend unemployment benefits for these folks who are about to be dropped off the rolls and have been on for a while. they try to make the argument that we should extend them but we should pay for them. we should find money somewhere else in the budget. we should pay for them so that it does not add to the deficit. the democrats argue that while they are not interested in making a permanent new entitlement and these are extraordinary times and we're

coming out of an extraordinary recession and job creation is low, we simply can't abandon pokes on the principle of budget and deficit reduction. host: do we live in a nation where we pay taxes or do we demand not raising the taxes and the other guy should pay? philadelphia, democratic line, good morning. caller: i have two comments. the $250,000 markets only the low point. the reporter there and most of the press are ignoring the fact that the hedge fund managers who pay only 15% tax which is less than 99% of the public are paid a 50% tax on maybe hundreds of millions of dollars per year. they will have their taxes increased to but the media is not zeroing in on that for the media keeps paddling the republican part about the $250,000.

the second, i have is the mentality that gave us the bush- chain gang for eight years is the same mentality that kicked out of congress one of the cleanest guys down there and that is russ feingold. it is the same mentality that overwhelmingly reelected michelle bachmann. is the same mentality that selected right wing free-market capitalist twomey in pennsylvania and they are the same mentality that are trying to get us sarah palin. thank you much. guest: obviously, the public in various elections across the country voted. the vote that he sites having come into likepat twomey in pennsylvania will push a particular agenda and that is

obviously not sitting well with many people. host: the george bush book is rapidly approaching the best- seller list. have you read excerpts? guest: i have not read the whole thing it surprised me a little bit. folks were not necessarily expectant a whole lot of news out of it. there has been a lot written on this president. in the press and in books. as it was rolled out of the last two weeks, there has been a fair bit of news lot not the least of which has to do with the vice- president. host: michael sherer writes for the new york times. caller: there are a lot of misnomers going on here. if the tax cut continued, that would allow investment to know

where they are going for you cannot run a business without knowing where you're going especially on taxes. you would think after all these years that people woul realize that businesses don't pay taxes. they passed along to you in the price of the item. i don't know why this is not taught in school. when you ask for businesses to raise taxes on business, you are asking for a raise for you paying them pare. we also know from charlie rangel and other republicans that these -- and that these people hide their money and don't pay taxes. i don't understand the public's. the truth of the $700 billion is over 10 years, supposedly these tax cuts will cause but they don't cost the government anything. they are not supposed to get that money anyway. instead of us having to borrow money, this means that we should

cut spending instead. both sides did not give in on desperate it would only be $70 per year is what it will cost the revenue but it is not really causing as anything. it is those people's money and they should keep it so they can create jobs. these people invest money in our economy. host: can you stay on the line for a minute. let me read this editorial it is an editorial on taxes and deficits saying that if congress fails to rein in the deficit, it will be because of lack of political courage not any shortage of ideas on how to get the job done. there referred to a "bipartisan studies coming out. this includes the obama fiscal commission now reworking its draft. 14 of 18 commissioners vote for the final version, the package will be sent to congress in

december we don't know if they will reach a consensus or the final version will be improved to warrant congressional approval. congress is moving in exactly the wrong direction when it comes to lowering the deficit. caller: i don't believe they are looking at enough stuff. i think the program should go even further than what they mentioned. defense needs to be cut. we should warn the world that we will not protect their countries and more. democrats always say that we pay more in defense than all the world at about. that is right because we protect rest of the world. we should give them fair warning to start retreating in our bases and bringing them back, except for very strategic base is likera ramstein. host: general wesley clark will dress and a few minutes about that and other issues. guest: i encourage people to go on to "the new york times web site. there is a game you can play on

line where you basically click different ideas floating out there, some of them from the deficit commission and other legislation that could either raise or lower the deficit. you can see how far you can get in eliminating deficit. it is a very complicated issue but it is what is putting pressure on many of these decisions which is questions about the debt and deficit and how much we should spend. host: that was in last week's new york times. next is jim from winston-salem, n.c., independent caller: harry and good morning. i have a couple of corrections to make. i have a statement s theh mr.erer might want to comment about. first of all, the last caller referred to charles rangel within a republican comment. he said and other republicans.

he is the capitald with liberals, not even close to republicans. host: hold on a moment. charlie rangel face the ethics panel and center is likely? guest: i think so. you never know at the end of the space. clearly, nothing more than that is likely to happen given the history of where these things go. it really will come down to a question of whether or not his colleagues think that the activities that were documented in the ethics trial were bork inadvertence sloppy bookkeeping or whether they feel it was an intentional think host:. thank you for waiting. caller: no problem. i have been keeping an eye on that concerning mr. rangel. going back to mr. cliburn, which brings up another issue -- the democrats choosing to create

positions for their people, for some odd reason. i am sure he does not get paid any additional money for that position but that even relies on to c obamazars and all the committees and all the people working for the president. i would wonder if they tallied up all of their incomes working for the government, how much money that would save the. us us. for my last comment, i wish everyone had the opportunity to watch charlie rose. host: are you talking about the interview with alan simpson and

erskine bowles to caller:? yes. host: 90 for calling. guest: this question that he rates about a czars and president obama. i did a little bit of writing about that last year. i assume he is talking about the car czar and folks who were brought in to handle specific issues. this kind of thing happen under previous presidents, too. there is very little evidence to suggest that there is anything very different going on there or that it signaled the in adds to the deficit. host: last call from tom barton, scotland, joining us on the bbc channel. caller: i would watch nothing else but cspan in america. i am break -- i'm very worried about the republicans being back

in power. is there any chance that obama will lift the ban on gays in the military? this is the 21st century. argentina which is steeped in dictatorship lifted the ban two years ago and they have been trying to get the band led to four theycorps. i don't see how obama will get that -- will manage to get that lifted. it will be another failed president. many people in america will which he never they never voted for host: him. thank you for joining us on a sunday afternoon in scotland. guest: he is right, it will be very tough. his president and his allies on capitol hill seem to feel they want to push for this in the next couple of weeks because as the caller says, you get to

january, it will be much tougher. host: the outrage grows on nu8 scans and groping. this was on "saturday night live." >> looking for a little human interaction? the want to feel contact in certain special places? >> when i go through security at airports. t >>sa agents are standing by to give you something extra this holiday season. t >>sa. >> what are you waiting for? i want to check under your testicles. >> spending time with tsa agent could not be easier. depart a flight departed from an american airport. once selected by a full body

scanner, you will note that you will be pulled aside by atsa agent and that is where the fun begins and you never know who your age and will be. it could be made. >> or a >> me. for even me >>. but it will probably be [laughter] ] >> tsa it is our business to touch yours. >> that is a parody on an issue that has touched many people. it has been a big political issue this week. guest: that is probably the steamiest segment you ever run on c-span. it is a serious issue sparked by a fellow who went through a checkpoint and got very upset and decided to leave. it got many people talking. the administration so far is sticking to its guns saying that the pat downs are necessary. you sense in washington that there is a building momentum of

anger and frustration about all of this. it will be interesting how it ends a host: up. the president talked about yesterday at his press conference in lisbon, portugal. thank you for being with us and please come back again. the president is back from a two-day nato summit coming up in a moment, the perspective of retired general wesley clark. he will talk about the military and a push to cut defense spending as a way to reduce the deficit. all issues we will talk about with general clark but first a look at the week's events as viewed by some of the leading editorial cartoonists from around the country. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from los angeles is retired general wesley clark. thank you for being wh us on c-span. guest: thank-you host:. one had line is that the u.s. and nato forces will be in afghanistan well beyond 2014. what is your reaction? guest: i think that is inevitable and that is common sense and i was glad to see the summit confirm the host: that. the president responded to criticism from general -- from president carter's i of afghanistan -- a k presidentarzai who said that the u.s. and nato need to hold back on a nighttime bombing spurted the present address that issue over the weekend with president hamid karzai. guest: i think that hamid karzai

has its own domestic opinion. he has the people around him. they expect him to stand up and represent afghanistan. our side does not have much choice. you can succeed in this conflict unless you take actions against the leadership and that is what the nato forces are doing with some success host: how to use to define success in afghanistan? guest: in the largest sense of the word, success is a stabilization of the situation and the submergence of the taliban resistance. these people fade back in and continue their normal lives and network of illegal activities and the assassinations and bombings and so forth will stop. the organization will basically dissolve. that would be success. host: the secretary-general of nato says that the role of nato

short and long term as the lisbon summit wrapped up. here is a portion of what the former danish prime minister had to said. >> over the past few years, there have been many international meetings on afghanistan. all of them have been important and valuable but this one is different because here in lisbon, we have launched a process by which the afghan people will once again become masters of their own house. host: it is a nato effort but if you look at the% of the of u.s. troops in afghanistan, 100,000 u.s. troops and it goes down significant with our allies including great britain, what will the makeup look like in 2014 and beyond? guest: it is likely to be still very heavily reliant on american

forces, maybe even more so that was the way the decision came out. i think it reflects the prevailing public opinion on countries -- in countries on both sides of the atlantic. this is what nato does. nato is a consensus building machine in which different nations and political concerns and strategic concerns and financial capabilities are blended together and alliance result emerges. in this case, i think it is a productive results. nato adopt the new strategic conference and included in that was the responsibility of nato to deal with situations like a. afghanistan nato intends to do it and i think it is a productive outcome of the summit. host: the front page of ""the new york times" - a new plan for nuclear use. let me read you what they are saying. north koreans are showing a visiting nuclear scientist last

week a vast new facility that they are rapidly building to enrich uranium and whether a calculated idea of negotiating or whether they will accelerate their weapons program for it poses a new problem to president obama. host: i think it is both. it certainly was calculated to guest: it poses a new challenge. it is typical of the way north koreans negotiate. we have been negotiating with them since 1951 when armistice negotiations began. nothing has really changed during that time in terms of their negotiating style. they are tough. they are sneaky. they come in from left field with a new problems and they continue to generate the grist that keeps the problem growing. you think you are making progress and they produce another problem for you to resolve. this is the white north korea

handles itself. it is a very tough situation but on the other hand, thus far, we have managed to avoid war on the korean peninsula. i think it is an increasingly severe situation when the president has other administrations have said that one of their top goals is nuclear nonproliferation to counter north korean preparation of nuclear technology. we know the north koreans are part of the corporation network and they are causing mischief. >>you will see a further toughening of u.s. attitudes after this revelation. host: let me ask you about iraq. vice president joe biden rose about iraq and he is taking a lead for the administration. he makes a couple of points. he says the new political order in baghdad is not yet ready to stand alone. the day will come while iraq's vast wealth will find security,

it is not there yet. when will iraq get there? guest: i think it will take a long time to do that. we have seen more than six months of negotiations since the election. they have hammered out the shape of a new government. i think there is progress being made. these are expo's of forces that were released when we invaded in the wake of -- in 2003 to overthrow saddam hussein. in the wake of that invasion, iran entered to create greater mischief of our efforts through funding and political advice and weapons provision. we are dealing with a difficult situation. i think there has been political progress there. i think that iraq's great natural wealth will make a difference in ultimately providing stability perry h. host: we are joined by retired

general wesley clark we will talk about military issues and defense spending in a few minutes. your phone numbers are on the bottom of your screen. you cannot joinedtw as atitter. william is joining us from wilmington, north carolina. good morning. caller: i have a question about north korea appeared my father was a part of that conflict. he was sent to europe during that time. what were we doing in north korea and is it true that we were really just they're motivated by one particular substance that we had found and were going to use for our weapons? host: what is the threat by north guest: korea guest: there is the threat of inadvertence conflict.

north korea has a million men are made and it is an isolated regime and they are very insecure. it is potential a trigger happy bridging quick to respond to any perceived provocation and war could begin on the north -- on the korean peninsula by miscalculation or by accident. that has been a concern of the united states for a long time. that is why we continue to have forces stationed there. the second threat is the threat of nuclear proliferation. north koreans are isolated economically and they have very little to offer the international community except for weapons technology for people opposed to the united states. they have built quite an arsenal of long-range ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads. we believe they probably have poison gas and probably some biological weapons. we have never seen the evidence for the biological weapons but we have to assume they are working on a program like that.

you're dealing with a regime that is actively working with the america's adversaries elsewhere in the world to proliferate technology that is destabilizing around the world. host: general clark is a graduate of west point and served in vietnam and is a former european allied commander and spent how many years in the u.s. arm guest:? i was 34 years when i retired in the summer of 2000. it was a great experience and i love the united states army. the people who served there are great and i served in vietnam with great soldiers. and officers and i am proud of the work i did with the allies in europe in the late 1990's. host: vietnam is one of our leading trading partners when it comes to textile products. have you been back in recent years to guest:? i have not i go to china very often.

i have business in eastern europe and in the middle east. i am sure i will make it to vietnam. like most americans, i am cheered to see the economic progress they have made host: if you go back, is there an area of the country that you want to visit? guest: i am sure i will end up back around saigon i will probably end up near the town of long phong which is near where i was shot in 1970. , i remember had♪ a great climate. i would like to see the whole country, especially the coastline. it is a very beautiful place. from we're joined cantwell, pennsylvania. good morning on republic and caller: line. caller: the general has had 15

years to give his side of the star and now it is my turn. i would like to take him back to the war in the balkans a s againserbs. the without approval of the u.s. congress, nato bombed a country that did not have weapons of mass destruction. there were never a threat to west for the war was a based onpro-bosnian/xhosa though media. in 1995, we bombed a bosnian serbs in a marketplace massacre. the bonds or used were designed

by hezbollah. they were intended to shock the west, particularly gullible washington to fight on the side of the bosnian muslims. guest: well, there has been a consistent line of thought like this. i was ithe u.s. government and army and serving on the step of the joint chiefs of staff when the marketplace bombing occurred. i heard the theory at the time. that barry has never been established for it was typical -- that theory has never been established. it is typical. i spent countless hours with the serbian president. i met all the bosnian-serb leaders including the generals and there is no dispute about what happed on the ground in

bosnia. that included the massacre in which some 7000 bosnian men were murdered after they had surrendered from a u.n.- protected enclave. that was a war crime of monumental proportions. there was connivance by that all the way up into the serb government. i filed a long-term program of ethnic cleansing. and for stopping a war and providing regional stability for preventing further work crimes for humanitarian reasons, yes, nato took action and i am proud of that. host: this is the headline from ""the washington post." an agreement reached between nato and russia, russia's insistence for some of these missile defenses that will be installed throughout europe, in particular to keep an eye on iran or resignations like north korea. what is your reaction? guest: we have been angling for

this for a long time. that this goes back to the 1990's when we first looked at the idea of nato enlargement. we always hoped that there would be a place for russia. we created in 1997, the nato- russia council. it has had its ups and downs but it is still in place. it has been changed once but it still works. president medvedev of russia was at the summit meeting. that was very positive. it was a constructive meeting with president obama. from the time we began looking and missile defense and you're back in the 1990's, we always hoped there would be a role for russia to participate it seems with the phased approach with the department of defense, our european allies, nato has agreed to consider this at the summit. russia has agreed to consider participating. i think those are all signs of progress britain host: gerald is joining us from north carolina

with general wesley clark, got caller: had been good morning, general, cspan, how are you this wonderful morning? guest: good. caller: you serve at fort bragg and i've lived in a bedroom community right outside. we are some of the most patriotic people in the country and we are mostly democrats. most of the republicans call as unpatriotic which ivacant allies if they want to. i am made vietnam-era veteran also i don't require or even request an appreciation for my service because i did it because i love our country. if i was physically able, i would be in there again now. one of the lessons we learned in vietnam was that if you do not win the hearts and minds of the people, the bodies will not follow. i believe there are two things

that cannot be delivered from the barrel of -- from the point of a barrel of a gun and that his marriage and democracy. both of those require work. could you comment on that? keep up the great work and it is a pleasure to speak to you, sir. have a great day in guest: thank you very much i will not comment on maris. as far as democracy is concerned, yes, that is a matter of culture and tolerance and education. it has been a challenge for 2000 years of human cells -- history. people have sought democracy and we got them and then we lost a man when we try to put in place, sometimes it works better and it evolves into its own form. it is challenging. with respect to vietnam, we always said you had to win the hearts and minds. when we were succeeding in vietnam before the funding was cut off and before the troops were pulled out, we actually succeeded by military means.

we had a program called the phoenix program which did very much with general petraeus is doing in afghanistan today. we took out a high level leaders of the viet cong infrastructure. we did not win their hearts and minds perry we confronted them in the middle of the night and gave them the choice to surrender and fight and some of them surrendered and some of them were put out of action are . that is the way it was done in vietnam. through military action in cambodia and per bombings against the north, we used military force. in vietnam, most of the people wanted to be left alone. it was unfortunate. we came out when we did. that was the will of the american people. if you went to afghanistan, you would find people are pretty much the same. they're caught up in massive forces of history. we are they're trying to protect their security. winning the hearts and minds is

a phrase to use an hour truce because you have to respect the population you're working with. on the other hand, we just don't want to have trouble and they are looking for the least -- the path of least resistance to get out of bed. i hope we can find that in afghanistan. i am encouraged by the strategy of general press -- general petraeus and his predecessors have pursued. and just like in vietnam, i think we have to work the neighborhood. one of our principal figures in vietnam as we did not appreciate the full significance of going after north vietnamese support for the south. we did not appreciate it in public. i am concerned there is tremendous support coming into afghanistan from the taliban, from pakistan, and we have to work against of that support as president obama is doing with the drawn attacks and many other things that we don't see in

public. host: you have the convergence of what the u.s. and nato troops are trying to do in afghanistan and the concerns being put forth by president hamid karzai that said stop the nighttime bombings and don't move into the neighborhoods. had you deal with these issues? guest: it is a continuing problem. our trips are fully briefed and take every possible precaution to avoid hurting innocent people and avoid disrupting innocent families, to reduce the footprint of noise and fear and a shock on neighborhood and villages. they have to do what they have to do because if we don't go after the taliban leadership, we cannot win the hearts and minds of the people in afghanistan. they are being intimidated and threatened. there are countless vignettes that come out of every conflict.

people will cooperate but they will come in at night and kill you and that is how insurgency works. the only way to stop that is to go after the leadership. host: our conversation is with retired general wesley clark. he has received many metals and is joining us from los angeles. one of our viewers says nato agrees on the missile defense system for europe and the u.s. he calls it insanity. who is paying for it? guest: it will come out of the defense budget. we have lived for a long time with the idea of deterrence. you will not strike us because if you did, we would strike you. we also had technical problems because ballistic missiles move very fast and very high and come down at hypersonic speeds. it is difficult to intercept them so we did not really have a defense. we made a virtue out of necessity with a doctrine that

some called mutually assured destruction. when we deal with rogue nations like iran which are unpredictable and whose capabilities threaten the united states and especially our. allies through those threats, they could impact our ability to take the kind of diplomatic measures that are needed to prevent conflict. we have to take another look at missile defense. that is what we have done of the last decade. we built the technology. we have or to the diplomacy of these deployments. i think we are seeing further steps for it is expensive? certainly, but not nearly as expensive as allowing a conflict to emerge and suffering the consequences of bombardment by nuclear armed missiles host: indian head, maryland, good morning. independent loss caller: good morning.

i am thankful to cspan for the news that you provide us. i have a couple of questions that i want to share with you. the first one is about our mission in afghanistan. how is it that almost 10 years after the beginning of the war, we have not yet captured osama bin laden. ? we have captured many of leaders but i don't think anyone can overstate the importance that obama been laid in represents for the movement and capturing him as one of the missions that we have to achieve there. the second question is -- the defense department budget is so overwhelming. his photographs earlier showing how much contribution to the united states -- you showed a graph earlier showing how much

of a contribution to the budget we have. [inaudible] if terrorism is as much a threat for great britain as us, how is it that the united states is leading by 10 times the amount of other nations? in 1960, general dwight eisenhower gave a speech when he spoke about the military industrial complex in this nation. in 2010, it is legal for defense contractors to lobby congress and get legislation that allows them contracts. we have grown our military to a size that is simply not sustainable host: those are three issues on the table. back first too osama bin laden?

. i agree with the viewer. he is critical. i think he should have been taken out in the first set of u.s. actions in 2001. apparently, there was no plan to do so. the was some confusion about what the requirements were. was he actually there? i think the cold hard facts are that he was there but we did not have a plan. we put the resources in and did not get him. the previous administration and the military leadership at that time have to answer for that. there is a dilemma in going after a single individual in any conflict. it is hard to get a single individual. osama bin laden is a tremendous symbolic leader. how much actual day-to-day control he has people dispute that. i would like to see him taking down. for the government to not put too much pressure on him

elevates his status and makes it more difficult to get a. m. perry and. him. . . country. >> i see these same figures about how large our defense

spending is and i'm sure they are accurate and our allies in germany and britain. when you look at other countries, china, russia, just as we protect the size of our intelligence budget through secrecy and you can't actually know where that he -- money is going. they protect certain aspects their defense. maybe it's not so lopsided. russia has a major armament problem. people around the world have a high expectation around the united states. of course, it's not just about wanting to meet their expectations. we want to do things in the interest of americans. it's in our interest to live in a world of stable democracies, open and friendly to us.

where we can have trade with these countries. that's the structure -- that's the nature of the structure we would like to maintain and evolve. >> china the topic. posing problem for washington in an era of tight budgets. part of debate we're see suggest how to reduce the deficit. defense secretary gates put in a billion dollars in spending. you can't balance the budget on the backs of the pentagon. where does this debate go on military spending? guest: i think the pentagon will have to make cuts.

it's not quite as easy to say whack the defense budget. the defense departmen is a high technology organization. its technology efforts have had beneficial impacts into the american economy. a lot of progress we made in the later half of the 20 century was defense research investments that had commercial benefits. there's ancillary benefits. i don't think the defense department is going to be a major part of cutting until the war on terror changes. we have to at least keep up. we maybe ahead right now. there has to be a balance and mutual respect. i think if you have the balance of forces and the kind of respect between the armed

forces, you have situations in which diplomatic problems don't escalate. it's to provide the foundation on which diplomacy and problem solves can take place host general wesley, john joining us from >> caller: good morning. general, how are you i served in vietnam as well. i wonder what our response will be if they move down the peninsula? i would like to know what we can do other than tactical nukes or something they really move down the peninsula.

host: let's take that point and then we'll follow up. general. guest: we fought this for many years. 57 years ago, we had an agreement with them. their armed force have become increasingly strong. they are very fit, capable. the simple answer is what happened if they tried to move south, we would have a major war in the region. certainly china doesn't want that. and the united states doesn't want it. and so there are a lot of eyes and a lot of pressures focused on north korea to retard any spirit they have of had desperation, there's nothing to do. host: john, we will follow up

with you. caller: i would say the same for iran. people didn't think they would nuke centers in europe. i have no idea why they would do it in the first place. one more question about iraq we did not sure the ramps. either we are not very smart or there's something else afoot, which i'm not sure of. one more quick one, please. i believe the day of 9/11. the game was over. it was like what john mccain said. we are chasing our tail. i don't mean to sound defeatist. thanks very much. >> thank you. you want me to answer the question on the ammo dumps? you bring up the point, you were

a vietnam vet. we had 550,000 troops at the height. we had a million south vietnamese trained in the regional and popular forces. we had a huge military commitment in south vietnam. much greater than what we put in iraq or afghanistan. >> some of us at the time expressed concerned and we paid a price host: kigha is joining us. good morning. caller: yes. general. general clark, i would like to say wonderful listening to you about south vietnam.

this was a grave mistake. we keep dumping money into this military. it's getting us nothing. host: general clark, do you want to respond? guest: i would like to respond. to go back to vietnam, the decision was made to try to oppose the expansion of communism. we could have done a better job with the military leadership. we could have struck harder and sooner. maybe south vietnam would have come up like south korea and the entire region would be different. i don't know. as far as afghanistan is concerned, what we need is great diplomacy. we have to tackle the issues

between india and pakistan and if we want to take the steam out of conflict in afghanistan, because in a very real sense. u.s. forces are caught in a grip of a proxy war struggling for the vital strategic rear as afghanistan is called by the pakistanis. it's not just a military operation. but a diplomatic one. i testified before congress last year. i was looking for a way to get out. it's hard to get out unless you take down osama bin laden and have success in dismantling al-qaeda. to revitalize nation terrorist networks around the worst and create a greater threat for the

united states. i know that sounds like rhetoric. i can only say that a lot of us have looked at it from the inside. the outside and it's the way that the machinery works. so i don't like being there. i don't like seeing our young men and women die there. it's a terrible situation. i would like to see those resources used at home in the united states. but it's the situation we're faced with. until someone has a better way of going after the terrorists, we're stuck with what we have right now. host: like the commander in chief. general clark is a road scholar studying at oxford guest: >> actually, i left oxford the su suck -- summer he aarrived.

caller: i said rich people don't live in caves. lennon wrote america would fall like an over-ripe fruit from the tree. wasn't he perfect on >> our companies have morphed into the military. the people have no say. we elected all these people, the tea bags got out. we were putting the people in wall street in jail. now the election is over, what is it doing? we want to [inaudible] and we want to get rid of all the money. host: thanks for the call, david. guest: there's a lot of anger in the country.

i hope we get back to the path of job creation. the easiest way to do is mean it when we say we're going after energy independence. we import foreign oil. it's a real threat to our national security and america's economic future. the technology is there to fix it. all we need is the political will to move out and do it. i think a lot of anger in america could go away. i would like to see us fix our mortgage mess and those responsible held accountable host: general clark. one more. "don't ask, don't tell," how will this be resolved? guest: i do believe congress will vote to end "don't ask,

don't tell". the survey of the armed forces show the vast majority of our men and women in uniform don't have a problem with it. there are a few people that do, obviously. this is like a political football up on the hit right now. going to be used for partisan purposes. we think we should take the partisanship out of this. get the issue off the table and move on, our men and women deserve the respect of all americans. if you choose to serve, that you ought to be able to do so. the americans have moved away from the 1990's "don't ask, don't tell" host: general wesley clark. thank you very much for being with us on c-span. come back any time >> come up.

newt coming up. what advice would he give the new leadership and the out going speaker, nancy pelosi. out with his latest book, a novel valley forge. first a look at some of the guests and topics maybes news all heard later today on c-span radio. >> the sunday network begin earring new. afghanistan. nato and airport security screening. first your nbc meet the press. david gregory welcomes second of state clinton and alan west of florida. at 1 o'clock, it's abc's this week with christian amanpour.

then at three, here cnn's state of union. and the ranking member of house transportation committee, john micah. at four. face the nation cbs. the five network tv talk shows brought to you as a public service by the networks and c-span. beginning at noon with meet the press. 1:00 p.m. meet the press and four, face the nation from cbs. 11 to them all at c-span radio. x m satellite radio 132 or online at c-span.org.

>> like all men of great gifts. even though they give up for principled reasons, they begin to hanker for it. >> tonight at eight at c-span's question and a >> along with our coverage of miami book fair on book television. comparing america's decision to attack iraq after 9/11. get the entire weekend schedule at book tv.org. from barack obama to george washington. learn more online at the c-span library. searchable and all free. it's washington your way.

"washington journal" continues. >> we want to welcome back newt >>. thank you. host: we saw the leadership votes in the house and senate. nothing has changed guest: nothing much. the republicans have a winning team with new faces added. the democrats have a losing team and decided to keep the losing time. a very interesting phenomena. host: what do you think nancy pelosi decided to stay? guest: it's her right to stay. obviously the democratic caucus agrees.

i think part of the difference is that she believes, this is my only guess, that she believes obama will get re-elected by a big margin. the rayburn martin model doesn't work. the second time martin lost in 1954, he bounced back and fourth and the large democratic cause us stand. matthew dowd, it's not 1994. barack obama may not be so lucky. his political future as well as his party hinges on whether the economy rises.

guest: i think that's partly true. the center has moved to the right. you have a country which is more anti-spending and anti-washington and determined to go back to a constitutional approach. at the same time, the economy is ch worse. the problems are much more profound. as a danger. if the federal reserve continues to print money, there's a real danger, you will end up in the late 1970's, they have to raise interest rates to get money back to avoid massive flation. there's one other huge difference. bill clinton inherited the victory over the soviet union. we were the most power military in the world.

obama is operating, and i think in a dramatically more dangerous world. this is 50-100 rocketed surrounding israel. the north koreans continue to build nuclear weapons. you have the worst national security and worst economy and the bigger gap between the president and the country than bill clinton had. that's why i think -- the president can recover. nobody should underestimate him. as a partner and an institution of enormous party. he has a harder job than president clinton. host: as a way to kind of show case its technology or a ploy to try to put in negotiating issue on the table?

guest: the north korean dictatorship is a strange regime. their nuclear weapons and rockets. it's a terrible disaster at the human level and economically. it's a pathetically weak country. except for the nuclear weapons. i think they would like to get more money out of west. that's their way of saying, you better pay attention to us. host: karl rove said it's been a rocky month. republicans should sober up. always difficult to beat a president. guest: when i spoke to the senators.

we have to move to complacent conservative. in 1980's, with rter, 1994 with mondale. and in the election of 2010. rejection doesn't solve in the long run. the left gets stronger in the universities, news media, bureaucracy and we need to think of a much more fundamental approach to go to the left. i would say something that chris christi is doing a remarkable job in new jersey how to solve problems. host: valley forge. you said no episode is more difficult. thousands of the 12,000 men

died. they all plagued the army and threatened to dissolve it. guest: the british occupied our biggest city, philadelphia and the continental congress fled. washington had been promised the continental congress would send food, supplies and money. they sent none. for the 12 or 14,000 people. there was two axis. they had rampant disease which was the real killer that winter. it's a very difficult time. you have in washington somebody who has such huge integrity, enormous self discipline to solve the problems.

by the spring of 1778, created an army to defeat the british. it's a remarkable story by patriots. host: you say have him -- he does indeed move to have his being replaced by certainly gates. guest: part of the lesson of valley forge. there's nothing new. here's washington who was clearly the dominant figure in the colonies, the man whom around the revolution as evolved. you have a continental congress, a large part is frightened of

wash. cromwell became a dictator. you have with washington, the requirements to run the army. sustain the morale out maneuver a faction of the continental congress. they wanted him to fail to replace him. all of this is going on simultaneously. george washington is one of the most remarkable men in history. host: you keep bringing back how hard it is today. the problems we have today pail in comparison. host: to true men's souls about

acrossing the delaware on christmas day to surprise the germans and valley forge. we would people to realize. being an american is a strenuous difficult thing. we give certificated who haven't done homework. we think we're going to be able to be slop and he have an entitlementment society and compete with china and germany. the world is real, challenging and have complexity. free people have to be more energetic than slaves. free people have to be able to take on their own shoulders, helping to save their own country. the lesson of the american revolution. we were fortunate that we have

americans and foreignens. we have two important foreigners with whom we might not have won the revolution. host: our role in afghanistan. here's what the president said yesterday in lisbon. >> the whole point of ramping up our troop presence was not because we wanted to maintain a large presence in afghanistan. but to immediately blunt the momentum we were seeing from the taliban and create the space for training of afghan security forces. both those fronts, we have made progress. you have fewer areas of

afghanistan under taliban control. you have the taliban on the defense in number of areas that were their strongholds. we have met or exceeded our targets in recruitment of security forces. the performance has improved significantly. so, thanks to the hard work of people like dave petraeus and others, and obviously, the incredible sacrifices of the troops on the ground, were in a better place now than a year ago. i am confident we are going to bea -- able to begin our transformance. guest: i don't understand what his message is.

we're going to be there after 2014. but we're going to start leaving next year. what does that mean? i mean, they are all wrapped up in these political gains. we are still iraq. we will be there for a long time. i can guarantee you democracy in iraq and afghanistan, the president is in a balancing act. he wants our allies to come in. here's a very difficult balancing act. i find myself confused by performances by that. what's the real message?

is the draw down substantial ground forces there? we're leaving? from everything i have heard, we're going to have substantial ground forces. host: last weeks news week. the president is doing the balancing act. why the modern presidency maybe too much for one person. guest: i broken down laughing with this. we did a movie with six minutes of jimmy carter in there. the question was, can anyone get the presidency to work? the fact was, eight years ladder. it would have been an absurdity. ronald reagan got it to work. here's the key. reagan only had three goals. they remember enormous. but only three. beat the soviet empire, cut

taxes and rebuild the spirit of american civic culture so people were proud to be americans. they were 6000 things we doesn't worry about. he wasn't the god of all people. he address worth reading, from the oval office in january of 1989. people said i made good speeches. reagan fell that and understood that. if obama i suggest he take six months to rest. if we could slow down. to come back to asia and lisbon. leadership isn't proving that you can run a marathon 365 days a year. but proving what really matters and focus on getting done what

really matters. host: ann marie joining from maryland. caller: yes, good morning and thank you, c-span. mr. gingrich. i have had the benefit to visit the library of congress and the virginia historical society, the thing i came away with which i hope you'll bring in regards to your book is how george washington complained about the articles of confederation and how strong he was on correcting some of the problems that we had during our revolution, which then of course, was replaced with the united states

constitution. were referring to how much trouble he had a valley forge. guest: thank you. that's actually a very wise call. since you're on the line, i hope you have visited mt. vernon it has a new education it facility. if you can spare an extra day, it will teach you more about george and martha washington. it's a remarkable facility. but your point is right. one of the places i got a comp placement reser placement. it doesn't replace it. there are two stages. the first is at valley forge

where washington creates the modern american army capable of replacing british power with american power. the second is the constitutional convention where a group of very wise people reach a conclusion they have to write a new constitution because ofrticles of confederation are hopeless. they really define modern america. it's a comment. here we are some 223 years later with the constitution still the governing document of the us. host: dianne joining us from arkansas. caller: hi newt. i think that you are one of the highest -- have one of the highest intellecting of any politicia

politicians. i would love to take one of our history classes. please don't consider running for the presidency. the dems are not going to ease up. you got too much bagge and they don't like intellect. they will probably do you like they did mccain. they-- during the primary, the dems crossed over. i don't know who i want to run. please don't. all right. guest: that's a very wise observation on your part. i think you noted whoever we nominate. we should be aware the left will assault them. nobody had rather get in the race who's not prepared to have

left being remarkable hostile. i think our nominee is going to be the next president. host: you have talked about your personal life. where should the media draw the line in what's their game? guest: the media won't draw lines. there are hundreds of outlets. you have to assume your life is an open book and people have to render judgment. when i said clearly. there are parts of my life that i am not proud of. if you look at the totality of my life and my relationship with my two grandchildren, with my two daughters and son-in-law, if you look at the life calista have, is getting this country on

the right track. a person that has been around a lot or do you want to it try somebody else? only people have to have a summary judgment. i think he can help us or on balance, he can't. i don't particularly want the media to decide. but i'm happy for the american people to render judgment. host: they begin in 12 years, he has been carefully plotting his return for power and goes through your entire life, political and personal. guest: harry true man said.

if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen. they were attacking martha washington for having high tea. it wasn't appropriate for the president's wife to have high tea. washington was so angry he told jefferson and hamilton he was going to serve one term and give up. they both believed the country needed four more years of washington for stability. they went jointly to him and said. we know you're unhappy. but we're begging you to serve your country for four more years. this is a long american history. people who read "valley forge", actively undermining him in our

war of independence. the political system has always had this. if you want to lead the most power military and economy in the world, you have to be willing to go through this and have people decide who are you? i'm 67 years old. i have done a lot of thing if my life. i think people have to render in the end a summary of judgment who i am. host: one more, will the 2012 race be about religion or the big issueses in the country? host: i think anyone who ends up as a candidate will hav momts that are uncomfortable. you didn't see it from their angle. i will give you an example. when i first became speaker.

i accepted a $4 million agreement to write a book, then i turn today down. i saw ms. clinton get a bigger contract after leaving washington and becomg a senator. if a conservative did it, you have to worry what is the deal? if you're going to it stay in in process of public life, you have to develop a sense of humor and lax. host: >> good morning. steve and mr. speaker. steve, if you could forebear. i have a 2-part question. host: okay.

caller: i would like to compare and contrast the people of valley forge and the american people today. the idea of self sacrifice and liberty in those days is without question. i wonder if we have the fortitude today. one recent poll created 72% of american people and 62% of tea partiers support social security and medicare and like those problems. the other antidote, alaska, the home of the most independent and tough people, you know, re-elected murkowski, a republican back to the senate in order to maintain hopefully their need for additional federal government. i just don't see how, you know,

today you can compare the two. i don't think we're prepared to make sacrifices today to fight the british. that's our burgeoning debt. host: you brought up the book, "valley forge". gentlemen, may god bless you and never forget the services you paid. you endured all. remember the morning of cato. we are free. guest: first of all, i get this occasionally. there are two parts. one is not romanticizing the past or being cynical of the president. washington crossed the delaware had 2500 troops.

out of that 25001 third didn't have boots and marched in burlap bags. there weren't many of them. washington has a fairly small army at valley forge. a lot of people in philadelphia were collaborating with the british. americans were 1 third are freedom, 1 third for the british and 1 third to keep out of it. they were heroic individuals. today, the young men and women on point in afghanistan or somalia. if you look around the world, the number of young americans, i was just in iowa talking to people from the iowa national

guard. there's 2800 people in afghanistan. many for the second and third tours. we have many courageous americans. you need a leadership which looks you in the eye and tells you the truth. i will give you an example. it's going to be a real national base. the average asian student studies three hours a day. the average american student studies less than one hour. the idea that we're more brilliant that in less than an hour a day we can match someone studying 14 hours a week is crazy. do we want to keep up with our competito

competitors? host: our next call. caller: thank you very much. c-span is probably the closest to any tv station can you get. i'm a graduate from 1980. machine technology. and i give you a little of my history. i'm running a 1951 american energy for a world leading valve control process. bp. but, is there any hope that we can bring back some real trade? i'm not real sure about my fact. 65% of our country is banking. 16% is healthcare. is there any hope for us skilled

tradesmiths? thank you. guest: that's a great question and something i feel deeply about. i was just talking to the head of national manufacturers. german has the lowest unemployment rate in 18 years. germany has worked very hard at manufacturing successfully and exporting around the world. the highest share of the total economy of any country in the world. the german government gets up every day to think about how to create german jobs. i think we ought to have 100 % write off for any new equipment so american companies with invest and make sure their workers have the best, most modern equipment in the world. if can you write that off every year, you would have an increase in new technology and expand the american machine tool and the

american technology industry in order to supply that. i am told 5 to $700 billion that would come home. that would create more jobs in the united states. there are a whole series of steps we should take it. as a conscious national goal to be the leading manufacturer in the world. is that the base of our nation security? we can't maintain the strongest national security if we don't have the strongest economy. what you asked was a terrific question. host: how many people follow you on twitter? >> like a million host: john said. god bless you newt. anybody that drives democratic accurates nuts is a great

american. caller: good morning. mr. speaker, i am an american of cuban ancestry. i have been always interested in history in cuba and the united states. i understand the contribution of the ladies of havana were very important at the end of the american revolution. i have been proud of that. it's something that is not commonly studied. can you touch upon that in your book? guest: we're going to go yorktown to talk about the final collapse of the british. i suspect it will be there. let me say, by the way, if you're from miami, we have a

conference called the amercano, a center right, hispanic-american website to talk about policies. on our conference on december 2nd and third, the miami symphony is coming up. we are honoring the congress man from your city and prime minister from spain coming. honoring the president of columbia. we have a lot from miami. plus my older daughters lives in biscane. host: we will go to john on o independent line. >> good morning. how are you?

can you describe the star of the beast? what it entails? guest: that goes back to reagan's theory. if you quit paying for the bureaucracy, it will eventually go away. i'm not sure by itself that's good. i have come out with something very different. i believe we have to replace the liberal welfare state. we have to replace the radical centralizi centralizi centralizi centralizing bureaucracies. one of the proposals i made it is -- we spent $134 billion on unemployment composition. paying people to do nothing. we turn that into a training program. it's $134 billion without

increasing the deficit. tie it into training to be table to go to work. i have talked with major employers and gallup how to doa capability so people could get the skills. you're not waiting for 99 weeks. but improving your ability to compete in the world market. that would be the scale change we need to think about. we need to go through the whole system and think about those improvements to give us a more rapidly expanding country. host: host our conference is with newt, and valley forge. heather is joining us from tennessee. >> good morning. hi mr. newt gingrich. i would like so say, in the

1990's, my grand mother was a huge fan. however, i'm a democrat. i haven't heard you express anything about the war in iraq. there was no weapons in mass destruction found. i have never heard you comment about matter before. i was wondering what your take is on this? host: vice president biden has a piece on that in the "new york times". guest: first of all. when you joint forces came into iraq after the war, they thought they should weapon of mass destruction.

he said. we were right on the edge. the scientists didn't want to get killed. he wanted the iranians to be fearful of them. it was a very strange situation that history will unravel. obviously, the weapons were not there. when they interviewed the iraqis they were surprised. they had all been told they have weapons of mass destruction. the biggest mistake we made was not turning the country over as rapidly as possible to the iraqs. i wrote the paper," operation switch". we want to hire the iraqi army. not the security police. not the enforcers but the regular iraqi army. we wanted to back out as far as

we could. we made a decision that cost us years. we became close to a catastrophic defeat until general petraeus turned it around. there's a lot to learn from the iraq campaign and a significant number of mistaked made. host: twitter saying, this is bary gold water. guest: i'm not sure what they mean. the first big step forward defining the modern movement. it's reagan's speech. you can you get by going to the reagan library online. in many ways, 25 years later,

when we gives his farewell address. can you watch the original speech and his farewell address. reagan hasn't changed much. in that sense, i probably send on both goldwater and reagan's shoulders. i i am trying to replace the left. most governors are in the same position host: john is joining us from san diego caller: good morning. i wanted to make an observation. the think the government, specifically our federal government. they try to be everything for everybody.

it basically ends up being worthless to anyone. i think what we're missing here is in the form of our leadership, senior statesmanship and less political activity. i think the president, unfortunately, as used the office of presidency to forward the agenda. i wanted to get your comments on the statesmanship part and also the juggling act of the president on his focus, and that should have been jobs, reuniting dc and making it work for the people. establishing a firm foreign policy. host: thank you. john. guest: there's a lot to that. when we want to the inaugural.

i saw speeches in virginia before the election as the winner on election night at grant park, which i think is truly a great speech. and it was a very solid speech. i said on the way out from the capitol. if we will governor from the center like eisenhower. he would split the republican party. force a substantial number of republicans to cooperate with him and be a very formidable president. i think he had that potential. within two weeks, he decided to allow speaker pelosi to write an entire left-winning budget. with no republican in the room.

with the members of congress not thinking what was in the bill. i agree with you. i think second, there's no question in my mind that jobs and paychecks are the key. what we have gotten out the democrats is bureaucracy and food stamps. we are going to send a certificate, what am i doing today to create jobs and paycheck america only works with americans are working. that will be the number one step we ought to take. number one approach to the public welfare isn't giving you unemployment or food stamps. finding a way for you to find a job so you can be a contributing citizen and not a