foreign policy writer discusses the future of relations between u.s. and iraq and later, the president and co-founder of women thrive worldwide describes her group's efforts to improve the lives of women and the role u.s. policy plays in the effort. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: some of the headlines on the sunday morning from "the new york times" -- we will be talking about some of

the issues on the congress and senate for the next 45 minutes. there is a complete pullout of u.s. troops in iraq. it is sunday, december 18 and will begin with your calls and comments on the action yesterday as of the senate passed and that measure. the phone numbers are on your screen. this is from "the washington post" --

we go to the phones with our first guest. what happened yesterday and more importantly, what can we expect tomorrow in the house? yesterday we sought support of extended the payroll tax cut as well as forcing the obama administration to make a decision on whether to issue permits for construction of the keystone pipeline. this measure passed 89-10 in the senate. many leaders and rank-and-file members assumed it was a foregone conclusion that house republicans who have been pushing for the inclusion of this pipeline inclusion would agree to this. as it turns out, that is not the case. many were surprised yesterday

when rank-and-file republicans were dismayed with this deal. this two month extension they think is not enough. they think it gives the public -- obama administration political leverage. it will bring up the tax-cut issue again early next year. they are upset also that this would provide uncertainty to both middle-class taxpayers and doctors who would be affected by what was included in the plan. there was a lot of opposition on the phone call yesterday. democratic leaders in the house said they would encourage their members to vote for this. whether enough of them will back this to pass it remains to be seen. leaders are professing that they might make an attempt to deal with this when they come back to washington on monday. > host: the senate has recessed for the year? guest: is the main problem.

john boehner talked to leaders on the phone yesterday and he laid out a couple of options for them. they could take up the tax plan immediately and try to pass that or they could try to rework it which would send it back to the senate or they could try to pursue a different plan on their own. if they do anything like an up or down vote on the senate side, this would complicate things for lawmakers especially in the senate because many -- most of them have left town already. aides to house republican leaders emphasized this is not a final deal in their minds. one key strategic move on their part is they let their members go home for the weekend in order for them to come back and wrap up work on this early this week. it seems by doing that that they

might have emboldened them more to try to get more out of this deal that they would like to see. host: you say that in this squabble, it has become a deeply unpopular december battle and is likely to become a february war. what can we expect in the next two months when congress returns after the holiday and after the state of the union address? >guest: january 24 is the state of the union. both chambers will return and the house is only in session for a handful of days next month. this two-month extension only gives both chambers one month in actuality to reach another agreement on the tax cut extension. democrats think this gives them the upper hand because they believe this is an issue they are winning.

they have seen a lot of dissension among senate and house republicans extending the tax cut which has put the republicans on the defensive. their orthodoxy has been on not raising taxes. democrats lost the upper hand over the last couple of weeks because they wanted to tie the payroll tax cut to payroll funding measures. one failure has led to another. they had the super committee and the failure of congress to enact a one-your payroll tax cut has led to this issue being revisited in february.

ordinary people are tired of having to constantly read about their positions again and again. in february, both parties are gearing up for a new battle. host: we are talking with talking sonmez of "the new york post." there's a conference call yesterday by speaker john boehner who is appearing on later today.ress" he approved the deal. guest: that was one of the most surprising things about this call yesterday was that typically you will see all of them together on whenever measure comes up and it is there a charge to get the rank-and-

file members to garner support. you have only seen house speaker john banner and a couple of other top republicans 3 -- support this. erick kanter, kevin mccarthy, jeb hensarling, all of them are deeply dissatisfied with this deal. maybe there will be more happening on the house side than expected and might try to rework this to get a better deal. host: this is from "the washington post" article -- guest: the house will be coming back in tomorrow and they are expecting votes at 6:30 at night. the majority leader's office have -- has not given any guidance on what they will be voting on. members were given notice that they must be back in washington. we don't really know -- when

john boehner appears on "meet the press" this morning, we should get a better idea. this is indicative of where the congress has been this year. one aspect has been the rank and file members and the house, 89 freshmen who came in this year, have fought tooth and nail to get what they can in a deal. on the other hand, will there be an opening for them to do it? they prefer the house to work its will. host: this has been said it is the worst year in washington for congress and we will talk about that in a few minutes. thank you again for sharing your insights on c-span. back to your phone calls on this

issue of the house expected to vote as early as tomorrow on this payroll tax plan. there is some question as to whether the house will go along with the senate version. we will hear from the president in a moment but it surely is joining us from fairborn, ohio, independent line. caller: i will be 80 years old next week. the one thing that bothers me -- thanks to c-span, i watched the hearings and all these things and i have been watching for years. i study politics. my husband used to tease me about going into politics. i said i could do more damage as a private citizen. i call all of them and i think they should pass this. each one of them wants something all the time. it comes from the ones that have been there for years and years. it is the same old, same old. i respect the one -- younger

ones that have just gone in on either side. they are trying very hard i think there should be term limits to give the younger ones a chance to show they can do something for our country that is right. host: thank you for the call. happy birthday, by the way. linda is joining us from mississippi, democrats line. caller: good morning. host: go ahead -- caller: i think they should have passed this without adding anything on it. give us a clear bill. it makes no sense. every time some topic comes up for the people, they attach everything and the kitchen sink to it to see if it will rise or fall. do the people's work. host: carl, norristown,

pennsylvania, republican line. -- north town. they are debating a plan passed by the senate would that would extend a payroll tax cut through february. your thoughts? caller: good to talk to you. i have prostrate cancer. i am old and about the payroll, i hope that people get the payroll but what i want to see is president obama next to the christmas tree to say merry christmas so we can finally see if he is a muslim or christian. host: thank you for the call. here are some other headlines -- this is from "the miami herald."

from the "l.a. times." from they "boston sunday globe" -- mario is joining us from san diego, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say something. good morning. i'm from san diego, california. i live on the streets and i lost everything i had tied to our

representatives that we hired. we voted them in and all they have done is represent the 1%. the tax should be extended and i think the justice department should investigate every senator, every congressman, everyone who is a representative because when they took office, they started as a councilman and only made $100,000 and now they make multi millions. we did not hire them to become rich. host: thank you for the call. let's go back to the peace from "the hill."

it has been said that the senate bill is a bad idea for the middle class and they still need a one-year extension for the payroll tax. the president will probably be rate congress during his state of the union address. the president talked a after the senate action. this is your what he had to say. >> i am very pleased to see the work the senate has done. while this agreement is for two months, it is my expectation, it would be inexcusable for congress not to further extend this middle-class tax cut for the rest of the year. it should be a formality. hopefully, it is done with as little drama as possible when they get back in january.

this really is not hard. there are plenty of ways to play -- pay for these proposals. this is a way to boost the economy that has been supported by these very same democrats and republicans in the past. it is something that economists believe will ensure that the economy and recovery is on more stable footing. my preference and the preference of most americans is that we ask the wealthiest few americans to pay their fair share, corporations to do without special subsidies to cover the costs. i think it is important for us to get it done. host: the president yesterday afternoon -- he was supposed to leave on saturday for his hawaiian trip with his family to spend the christmas holidays. he is still in washington and is likely to be here at least through tuesday and based on what happens in the house, will head out to hawaii for the

christmas holidays. this is from "the washington post"-- he is calling it the worst week in washington. he gives congress the worst year in washington. for coming up with the incredibly low expectations. diane is you for joining us from california, good morning. caller: how are you? i am taking one day at a time. we live up in the mountains and it is very, very cold. we have snow and ice. host: it is december. caller: i'm not complaining. whinnied the water in this county. my comment is that one year ago, in november on facebook i had written on my wall that

these extensions and the continuing resolutions was a facade. it has also -- every time the congressmen and senators are continually haranguing and going back and forth, it is down time which is being charged to the government taxpayers. this is a continuing thing. it is a domino effect. these are bush tax cuts proposed i believe they should be extended for one year although i know eric kanter made that comment -- host: let me make one point, these are not the bush tax cuts. these are the payroll tax cuts that the president and congress worked on last year. this is the money used for social security which was 6% drop to 4.2% and the president

wanted it dropped to 3%. the senate wanted it by extending it for only two months but it is separate from the bush tax cuts. caller: aren't they getting 1% from the doctors? host: i don't have that figure but i think you are right. caller: i have very good doctors in san diego county. two of them are from the university of chicago. they have complained to me about the fact that they are specialty doctors and their reimbursement will be reduced due to the medicare reimbursement. as far as congress, they have been unacceptable and irresponsible this year. it is high time that they do what the american public is asking.

why they elected them in the first place, legislative terms, anybody can write anything and it is an interpretation of words. you are a body of people that was elected by a government, by people of the government and people who are taxpayers. let's get with it. what ist on line and do imminent for this country. host: thank you for the call. this is a stweet -- the house passed a one-year extension on that payroll tax plan that was tied into the controversial keystone pipeline.

the senate voted yesterday to agree to a two-month extension and there was a disagreement how to pay for the bill. the senate earlier saturday adjourned for the year meaning any action by the house of the than passing the senate version without changes could result in a tax increase for those 160 million americans. a tax cut could be about $1,500 per year. senate republicans held this as a victory and the inclusion of the keystone pipeline provision. you can read more of that story on line at thehill.com. the vote on the extension is unlikely to end the fight. the december battle is likely to become februaries or. augusta, ga., democrats line.

caller: good morning. it does not make any difference what president obama comes up with. the republicans will put a wrench in it. they knew that by putting in the pipeline because obama did not want that, they cannot agree with them. the main thing that has always been is that they are trying desperately to not get president obama rhee elected. they will do anything, i mean anything, to keep them from getting reelected again. that is the bottom line. i wish they would have term

limits on these senators. they have been there ever since they were a puppy and a need to step down. they will not change. they believe in what they believe in and they will not change. it is really sad that they treat the president of the united states like they do. thank you so very much. host: pittsburgh, good morning, republican line. caller: i'm a registered republican but i am not pleased with any of these people. i did not think bush was a conservative. we have a $15 trillion debt. they want to cut payroll taxes and social security will go bankrupt eventually. know, it does not make sense to me to cut the payroll tax. i don't like the way social security is now anyway. i think they should try to reform that and the tax code.

they should start all over again. it is all about power and money and we would not have these lobbyists if you did not have these tax breaks for everything. i've no problem with taking away tax breaks. they need to reform the whole system. host: thank you for the call. "the new york times" says that the senate ppunts. the president had threatened to veto that provision. matthew has this from our twitter page --

tom from new jersey, good morning, independent line. caller: i just wanted to comment about the keystone pipeline. i got an e-mail last night about that that there was an alaskan senator tried to sneak in a provision in the bill about the pipeline going through. president obama was going to delay that for a year or more after the election, correct? host: yes, in january, 2013. caller: i felt that the real reason why he was going to delay that decision was to get the environmental vote. he will probably end up winning by a thin margin of wants to get every vote he can. that was the real reason for his decision to delay that.

i am for the payroll tax cut. i would rather have obama in their than any of these other republicans. he is kind of like a corporate democrat. he seems to talk to both sides of his mouth. on one side, he is taking money from wall street for his campaign and on the other side, he is talking about wall street fat cats. this whole system is so influenced by outside corporate interests and the cat is out of the bag. we know this now. to theet's go back outlook section of "the new york post."

they give congress the worst year in washington. that is your phone calls on the house tax plan. the house has a vote scheduled as early as tomorrow evening around 6:30, giving time for lawmakers to come back after the weekend. dan is joining us from new york city, democrats line, good morning. we will try one more time. we will go to texas, on a republican line. caller: good morning. the payroll tax cut shuffling

and the act -- and the pipeline still was attached to it even though opec came by the green vote, the idea is is easier to clean up the spill outside the washington instead of land. that is a side note. reducing the payroll tax reduction is small. it reduces social security payouts. we don't need that right now. social security is going bankrupt host: will go to las vegas independent line. caller: 51 to extend the tax cut, then pay for it.

no one is talking about the most important issues. i have tried to catch all the republican debates and not one candidate in these debates has said the word "campaign finance reform" goldman sachs or glass- steagall. the people running for president of united states or the president of united states, none of them will actually engage these issues. nothing is going to change. all of it will just be temporary, gimmicky propaganda. host: thank you for the call. here are a couple of the e-mails --

from our tour page -- -- our twitter page. on "newsmakers"at a 10:00 is the john barrasso as our guest. among the issues is the impression that congress is unable to reach agreement on some of the major issues. >> to you have any idea why the public has such a low impression of congress right now? >> what they do is see a lot of

arguing and bickering and they don't see places where we actually do get along. the president seems that he wants to run against a do- nothing congress. there are things we can accomplish but he tries not to look at those. we had the free trade agreements with south korea and colombia and panama. we finally approved of them and they never had a signing ceremony and there was a broad, bipartisan support of those three free trade agreements. there was overwhelming support but no signing ceremony because that would have stepped on the president's message of the do nothing congress. there are a number of areas where a of work or corporately to get things done but the public does not see that. host: our conversation with senator john grosso airs at 10:00 eastern time, 7:00 for those on the west coast. this headline from "the

washington an examiner" -- the president did not reference the pipeline issue in his brief appearance. he welcomed the senate's passage of the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance. it said it would be inexcusable for congress not to extend them. jim from north carolina, republican line. what is your take? caller: good morning. i agree with their inability to act wholeheartedly.

i would go one step further with this. it has got me so angry, i am running for the sixth district in north carolina. host: has that seat? caller: there is an incumbent. they are not doing anything and the senator you just have on, he was saying that that people see as arguing and bickering and that is totally correct. we are being placed secondarily. if the members in congress and the senate were forced to hurt like the average working man during times of recession, i believe that would get us more.

the race is wide open two weeks before the caucuses in that state. ten factors to determine newt's fate is the headline this morning. and the atlanta general constitution, going rich leads. good morning. welcome to the conversation. >> i was calling to say that i agree with the fellow caller that was before me about congress and about the republicans and how they are doing. they need to shorten their pay. they need to take the pay away from them because they're getting paid to do the thippings that they're doing? no. that is truly unacceptable. they need to -- i don't know who, how grover nor quist pledged, his pledge but it's

truly not united states pledge, you know, the country. >> thanks for the country from illinois. a story that broke just within the last hour, the death of the czech republic's first president after what was called the velvet revolution against communist rule. describing him as the disdent play wriggete who wove theater into politics to bring down communism, became a hero of the epic struggle that ended the cold war. he had been in poor health. he was the first democratically elected president after the nonviolent revolution. he oversaw the country's bumpy transition to democracy and a free market economy.

orlando, florida. independent line. caller: thank you. i'm very concerned about attaching this pipeline deal to the payroll tax cut and i just want to put forth this perspective. there are thing that is we do in our socially created world of economics and politics and that's one thing. then there are other thing that is we do that affect the real world that scientists study, the world of biology. we humans cannot afford to take all that carbon that's there in the tar sands and put it up into the atmosphere. and instead of going around saying we need jobs, let's start asking, jobs doing what?

because some of these jobs are going to be jobs digging our own graves. host: thanks for the call. let me go back to roll call and the story. again, the house officially convening tomorrow evening with votes after 6:30. joe is joining us from pittsburgh. >> thank you for c-span. host: thank you. caller: we're not hearing too

much about tort reform any more, about the way to reduce health costs. texas has addressed this problem. and there's many, many doctors that are moving to texas because of this. there is a lot of population moving to texas. that is one way to cut costs. the pipeline, there's a way to increase jobs but i'm against the cut in social security tax. i think we should cut income taxes instead since the social security system is already in trouble. one last thing. the division between the wealthy and the poor, we didn't hear much about this when the economy was doing well. so that is, if we can get the economy moving again, i think that problem would resolve itself. i never heard much about that at all before the obama administration and i think he is the person who is responsible for the economy doing so poorly.

he admitted himself that if the economy was now his, he is taking responsibility for it. so once we get the economy rolling again, i think the occupy wall street movement would dissipate and we would not hear much about the division between the wealthy and the poor. one last point here. raising income tax on the wealthy does not mean you're going to raise revenue and i think that's something that people don't realize. when reagan lowered income taxes, the raised he actually raised revenue. it didn't decrease revenue. host: thanks for the call. from the twitter page. ken joining us from new jersey has sent in this e-mail.

deborah joining us, democrat's line from chicago. good morning. caller: good morning. i am so tired of being tired of being tired. now, the only thing that i would like for my federal government to do, i would like for him to make sure that my vote is protected and it is promised on a local level so my vote is not protected on the local level. how can i get somebody in congress to represent me, my vote on the local level? therefore, my congress -- -- [inaudible] by the people that's running

the government. and lastly, that's the only thing that's going to help occupy wall street. if we don't do that, we can forget it. host: thanks for the call. one of our regular tweeters following up on the earlier caller's point. here's some things you may be reading.

we covered an occupy new hampshire rally that took place yesterday and we're going to be catching up with mitt romney this week back on the campaign trail in nasm. ted from chicago, good morning. independent line. >> good morning. i would like to know how they're going to pay for these payroll tax cuts. being a federal employee myself we're under a two-year pay freeze. i can understand that. but what the house wants to do is a third year and pretty much end my pension, which i pay into and i don't think it's personally fair. and i just want to know how they're planning on paying this. host: thanks for the call.

a headline that is from friday's politico but still relevant on this sunday. from inside the national journal, a story that continues to perk laste on capitol hill and in congress and the supreme court.

we have issued a letter to the members of the supreme court. that is available on our website. kindly requesting that during the health care debate with five hours of oral argument scheduled for march the supreme court allow c-span to cover those proceedings in their entirety. the letter available on our website. bill is joining us, georgia. independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know how many of the current politicians we have in washington that would sign a pledge to go back to ruling for the people, by the people, instead of for the rich, by the rich. and secondly, why the ethics committee in both the house and the senate hasn't investigated

these people that unnecessarily abuse the filibuster just to block something to make an unnecessary point that's against the people. host: thanks for the call. bill making a point on our twitter page. veteran joblessness is concentrated among the young and those still serving in the national guard and reserve. finally from the "new york times" best seller list some of the books you may be reading.

coming up in just a couple minutes, this week's endorsement. we'll also talk about the iowa caucuses. later, further discussion about u.s. troop pullout in iraq. in our final segment we'll look at women around the world and what kind of oppression they face and what the u.s. is doing, the impact foreign aid may or may not be having. those are some of the issues and topics still to come. a very busy sunday for the other morning programs from politics to congress and keeping track of all of that. good morning, nancy. >> good morning, steve. reairs of the five network talk shows begin at noon eastern and

topics today include the politics of the payroll tax cut, the end of the war in iraq. and presidential politics. we hear meet the press. host david gregory welcomes house speaker john boehner, michele bachmann of minnesota and south carolina republican governor. at 1:00 hear abc's this week replayed. kick off a series today they call the great american debate. it's a series of debates on the key issues of the 2012 presidential campaign. the first debate today focuses on entitlements, taxes, and government regulations. participants today include congressman paul ryan, he's chairman of the house budget committee. he will be joined with george will versus barney frank, democrat of massachusetts and the ranking member on the house financial services committee. he will team up with former

labor secretary robert rishe. at 2:00 it's fox news sunday. at 3:00 hear cnn's state of the union. then republican presidential candidate john huntsman and paul bremer, former presidential envoy to iraq. also james cartwright. finally at 4:00 hear face the nation from cbs host bob schafer talks with republican candidate newt gingrich. listen to them all on c-span radio in the washington, d.c. area.

listen on your i phone or blackberry nationwide on xm satellite radio or go on line anywhere at c-span radio.org. >> i always knew that there was a risk and i decided to take it because whether it is an illusion or not, i don't think it is, it held my concentration, it stopped me being bored, stopped other people being boring. it would keep you awake. it would make the evening want to go on longer to enhance the moment. if i was asked would i do it again, the answer is probably yes. i would have quit earlier possibly hoping to get away with the whole thing. easy for me to say of course. not very nice for my children to say. it sounds irresponsible. but the truth is it would be hypocritical to say no.

because i did know, everyone knows. and i decided all of life is a wager. i'm going to wager on this bet. and i can't make it come out any other way. it's strange, i almost don't even regret it though i should. because it's just impossible for me to picture life without wine and other things fueling the company and keeping me reading and traveling and energizing me. it >> thursday, passed away at the age of 62 from complications with his battle with cancer. watch nearly 100 c-span appearances. "washington journal" continues. >> we want to turn our

attention to presidential politics and rick green, for the des moines register joining us from iowa. thanks for being with us. caller: good morning, steve. it's a pleasure to be with you. host: let's begin with your endorsement. and i'll read from what you have written today. sobe bright, wisdom, and judgment. those are the qualities that mitt romney said he looks for in a leader. those are the qualities romney himself has demonstrated. those qualities helped the former massachusetts governor stand out as the most qualified republican candidate competing in the iowa caucus. while other candidates have pandrd to extremes with a tax on the courts and sermons on christian values, romney has pointedly refrained from reckless rhetoric and accused of being too cautious but choosing words carefully is a skill for anyone who could be sitting in the white house and

reacting to world events. can you elaborate on those points? guest: this has been a fascinating exercise of democracy over the past 13, 14 months in iowa. we're honored in the chance that the register were able to see these candidates up close and personal. we go to their campaign events, we go to the one on ones from the coffee houses to the intimate gathering in living rooms and back yards for 13, 14 months. in the case of mitt romney we've had a chance to spend time with him for nearly 5 years. he's a different candidate than he was four years ago. we did not endorse him four years ago. but in this field he's a dinched candidate. we feel he's more polished, more articulate. and as we point out, there are so many issues that are percolating around the country and iowa and the things that we have heard among the candidates but for us the most important

issue is centered back on job creation, the economy, and how do you get people back to work, how do you do things that will reduce the unemployment levels and inspire a new confidence home as well as abroad. by virtue of his experience in the private sector and the vision he's got, we felt that governor romney was the best leader potentially for the republican field at this time. host: let me at the outset say thank you because you and the des moines register allowed c-span to bring our cameras into the board meeting and we've been able to carry many of the sessions all of them are available on our website so we appreciate the partnership and the relationship between c-span and the des moines register. my question though is what you have learned as you have sat down in these one-hour discussions, wide-ranging conversations. guest: with all the candidates,

it's interesting how each candidate, who i need to tell you that we've got this unique perspective of being able to spend so much quality time with them. each candidate cares so deeply about the country. they care about their party, they care about the country. the passion which they speak beyond what you may see on television, being here in iowa and going through this campaign and seeing it, it's clear they care about this country and where it's headed and where they think they can take it. with governor romney, the perspective was that he has been very measured. he has focused in on the things that we feel are very, very important. there's been a sense of hand to hand combat, if you will, in terms of who can one up each other related to spirituality or faith or who is the true conservative. and those are all very, very

important and passionate issues in which many care about. and we would never dismiss those. it's part of what makes this fabric of this couptry so great but in our minds, governor romney's trying to take a look at conversations unfolding around kitchen tables or in bedrooms before folks go to bed tonight, how do we hold on to our home, how do we deal with foreclosures and furloughs at a time when unemployment is still high in this country. iowa has been blessed, we're at 6%. but we also know that our state reacts slowly whenever there's an economic reboupped. so those are the issues we think are most important that the governor has done a good job of focusing in on. >> do endorsements matter? the des moines a major paper, the what impact do these have

on the electorate? >> i think a lot of people pay close attention to it. what i will tell you is that we write this endorsement, we share this endorsement, it's not an attempt to tell someone who to vote for. we pay no attention to the polls. this isn't a popularity contest. for us this is a responsibility of saying we have had this unique opportunity for the past 14 months or so to spend time with these candidates and things as formal as our board meetings but there's been plenty of evenings where we've attended different church services and republican events when we've heard the candidates articulate themselves. we off local opinions 365 days a year and this is an important endorsement and editorial for us. we're saying that in this time, in this field, who is the best candidate who we think coming from the republican side of the

ledger would be best equipped to be in the white house? and this isn't perceived to be any kind of a rah-rah campaign endorsement in that regard for governor romney but this is our unique perspective. it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. host: our conversation with the des moines register joining us. we welcome your calls and comments. you can send us a tweet or send us an e-mail. former senator and 1996 bob dole endorsing mitt romney. and the governor of south carolina also supporting mitt romney. and as part of the event we covered, he was asked about virtues that he would bring to the presidency. here's part of that exchange. >> what is the single most virtue of character that you

think you bring to the office of president of the united states? >> boy, that's a -- a -- a -- let me give some thought. >> poll the audience. yeah. yeah. that's a good question. well, leadership in my opinion a product of character which is that you look at people and say why is that person a leader? sometimes you'll see a young person or an older person and you'll say that person is a leader. what makes them a leader? it's not just the ability to talk fast. it's that the people around them invest in them because they see a person of character. for me, the character is integrity. [applause] >> i'm trying to balance your

other virtue of hue millty. so i aspire to be a person of integrity which means i aspire and try to live my life in a way that's consistent with what my values are. >> governor romney you hear that exchange with governor romney, who is he? what kind of a candidate has he been and what kind of a president do you think could he potentially be? >> i can't tell you what kind of president but here is what i can tell you in terms of our experience with him both in the board and out on the campaign trail from the register's presidential soap box in august . incredibly articulate. the sentiment among the editorial board members who were here four years ago when governor romney first ran for the white house is that at that time there was a feeling that he had answer force everything.

a little i don't want to say slick in a negative way but perhaps not nearly as well-conceived and as articulate as he is today. his positions as it relates to job creation, very specific on what it is he wants to do. his taxes. and he is not shying away at all from the conversation as it relates to who he is as a family man and his conservative values. it's interesting how four years ago he was perceived as one of the most conservative republicans that was running at the time. of course mike huckabee won the caucus but there was -- the governor hasn't shied away from his faith and his family but at the same time he hasn't necessarily made that the cornerstone of what he has articulated and campaigned for here in iowa. >> host: let me go back to your endorsement. this ability as you pointed out to see the merits of tough

issues and something other than a knee jerk ideological perspective suggesting that he would be willing to bridge the political divide in washington. americans are desperate for the republicans and democrats to work together. if you look from your perspective in the center of the country at past presidents, all talking about trying to find that common ground, all facing that inability to do so. guest: absolutely. and here's something that has echoed throughout iowa and it's reverberating around the country. washington is broken. we've said it on our pages. you've seen it there in washington and in your own reporting. the vitriolic divide, the

rankor, just this lack of willingness of republicans and democrats to come together in the spirit of compromise and saying here's what we think are is the best path for america just isn't happening right now we have seen that and heard that throughout this entire campaign. great fervor, incredible passion for their positions and vision for this country. but it has been a very distinct tone that the candidates have come out and have basically tried to say, who is going to wield the biggest wrecking ball in washington, d.c. and blow up washington bipartisan collaboration be damned and we just don't think that's the right approach to take at all. i think the country is looking for great leadership. i think they're looking for an injection of the bipartisan sprirpt that's going to get this country back on track. governor romney from our perspective and being able to take a close look on what

unfolded in boston went to boston in the state house that was dominated by more than 85% democrats was able to find that sweet spot of collaboration and crob ration by virtue of the fact that he was able to get past this very large health care plan that citizens of the common wealth of massachusetts wanted shows us there's a willingness and understanding that you've got to extend beyond the great political divide and try to get some things done. i don't know yet if that will happen if he's elected. it certainly will be interesting if he wins the g.o.p. nomination to see how they will address that issue. but from our standpoint and the conversations we've had and the debates we have watched and the iowa moments that have unfolded on our watch we have the greatest confidence that he is the candidate that can probably do that. >> calling him the best to lead, mitt romney the

endorsement out last night available on line from the opinion page and also in the greater des moines area. before we get our first call, can you briefly walk through past entorsments and past election cycles? guest: sure. i'll just take a look at the fact that we've been endorsing in the caucus since 1988. initially it was perceived that this was a republican and or democratic event and that newspapers shouldn't weigh in on partisan matters. 1988 our editor at the time was a great editor who recognized something that was unfolding and that this more than just a quaint little iowa affair. the eyes of the nation really cast its attention to iowa during every four year cycle. 1988 we certainly saw that and that was the first year that the register weighed in from an endorsement standpoint. on the republican side we've

looked at the past republicans. senator dole of kansas, george w. bush the governor of texas as the time and mike huckabee were our endorsed candidates in the past g.o.p. nominations and this whole process. but what i think is really important to emphasize is that we don't really care about whether or not we have chosen the candidate who ultimately wins the caucus here in iowa, republican or democrat, or becomes the eventual nominee or even the highest office in the land in terms of winning the white house. in this moment of time with all the candidates that we have watched and we have seen a very large race here. we've looked at the candidates. we feel this is the candidate at this moment in time who is the right person to possibly lead this country. host: our guest, rick green. our first call from iowa.

good morning. caller: good morning. first, i just want to thank c-span for coverage of the actual vetting process. it's been pretty helpful. you guys are the only ones that have allowed candidates to be viewed in their environment being questioned. host: let me thank the des moines register because we couldn't do it without their cooperation and the same to the leaders in new hampshire who tried to give you a sense of what's happening. continue, please go ahead. caller: mr. green, i'm in iowa here and im a caucus goer and so are a lot of my friends. and i had a two-part question. the first part is pretty easy is kind of a close call for your endorsement. was there anyone you were waying in as second or third?

and then the other part is getting in, i'm sure you may or may not be aware, the general consensus within the republican party here is that most of the previous newspaper and media in iowa did not necessarily favor "tea party conservatism." so do you think your endorsement of mitt romney will be a benefit for the primary? host: before we let rick answer the question are you going to be participating in the caucuses on january 3rd? caller: oh, yeah. host: do you have a preferred candidate? caller: i do actually which is partly why i -- disagreing with their endorsement. romney is not mine. very nice gentleman. my candidate happens to be ron

paul. host: your response. guest: we spent a lot of time looking closely. what kind of emerged for us though, we were zeroed in on the top three or four of the front runners. and it's been interesting, we've seen the rise and the fall and the surge and the slide of some of these candidates over the past few months or so. we really spent a lot of time looking closely at the former speaker of the house and governor romney taking a close look at not only their vision for the future and where they are today but for us we also thought it was critically important to take a look at where these candidates were before. and with speaker of the house going rich, i will echo what a lot are saying, which speaker of the house are we getting? are we getting a very successful yet controversial speaker of the house in the sense that he balanced budgets,

was able to work with bill clinton? or who led the charge to shut down the government and ultimately was fined and had a very controversial chapter. is it the newt gingrich who is the kinder, gentler speaker rgs the 68-year-old grandfather who has resurrected his campaign and promised to be as no negative advertising as we possibly could see? he's done very, very good in that area. or is it the speaker of the house who is raising questions about the separation of powers? and iowans are wondering about this nancy pelosi sitting on the couch ooble global warming. for us though it was a notion of what does each candidate accomplish in their previous tenure and we continue to come back to governor romney in terms of his private experience as a c.e.o., being able to come

in and save the 2020 games there in salt lake city a decade or so ago. and the again the proven ability in our observations of being able to go to members of the opposing party and sit down and trying to craft that right vision and right direction in the country. so that was kind of our deciding factor. we gave dr. paul a very, very close look and the editorial board felt some of his libertarian streaks and the notion of government's intrusion in our lives as well as in businesses makes a lot of sense. but at the end of the day we really felt that governor romney was the candidate who offered the best vision not only from an economic development standpoint and job creation but also as it relates to government's relationship in our personal lives and what might happen overseas. host: joining us from iowa.

michelle has this tweet. i think each of these candidates has taken a close look at their different positions and we've seen some modifications over time. governor romney has probably captured the most attention for some of his viewpoints to us i think that it reflects a maturity, if you will, of being able to look at the issues and perhaps be willing to say the way in which i approached that issue or looked at that issue a decade ago is different than what was necessary and how i truly feel today. the flip flopping is a big issue perceived issue for a lot of iowans for our editorial board we felt the explanations

that he has borrowed has served as a good enough explanation as to why it has unfolded. so it wasn't really a huge issue from us. >> the des moines register endorsement may or may not help romney. it certainly will not help going rich or ron paul. the fact that he is not in iowa this coming week at all will not be mizzed. guest: it's going to be fascinating to see what unfolds here. iowans are known for their great i hadance. i've had the great for tune of working in my natetive ohio and then went out west to california and worked for the sun in southern california for

seven years and being able to return to the midwest in the past year. i can tell you that i have never seen a state filled with residents and voters and general population that is so intensely independent, so vigorously embraces its responsibility from a democrat ic art of democracy civic standpoint as what we see here in iowa. they are passionate, informed, educated, and they love the responsibility that thev to be able to kick the tires of these candidates, make them better, make them become very articulate about their positions and prepare them and the rest of the country for this heated campaign that will see unfold. i don't know what's going to happen here. governor romney has not been like rick santorum, has not been to all 99 counties in iowa. he is not on a barn storming

trip like representative backman is right now, governor perry, and trying to cram as many countieses as possible just before christmas and the early final days of december. ron paul i think is somebody to watch for. ron paul has got a very established ground game here in iowa. he has some very passionate supporters and believer in his vision for where this country is going and also his solution potential loy to try to fix that. the speaker of the house is a relative new comer in terms of opening up an iowa office just happened recently here in des moines. heabt been incredibly visible to the extent of rick santorum. iowan will play close attention but in my heart i really believe it's the issues, their vision, the articulation of how it is they're going to address these incredible obstacles out there for this country as

opposed to how many times you'll see them at the coffee shop. it might be an issue but i think the vast majority are going to say basically show us the beef. where are you on these issues? what can you do for my family, my neighbors and where is this country headed? >> from the opinion page of the des moines register. jim joining us, tennessee, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. romney knows these job creations is a vital point to get them back to work. and of course our revenue is from the taxes and the people and their enployment throughout

this nation and you know perot said it best when he said that would sound as though it was the sucking sound of jobs leaving our country and those people would flourish and be benefited by making manufacturing things that would come back to this country. but we can't -- i worked at a place that had 3,000 people working there 20 years ago. it's down to 300 over shipping those overseas to indonesia, china. we had carrier air conditioning right here in tennessee that had 2500 boiler makers working theran nt t mexico. all those people in that area -- and he knows that those jobs need to come back and we need to get back into manufacturing and providing not just services or service jobs but manufacturing jobs.

host: thanks for the call. rick, you're seeing that in iowa as well. guest: absolutely. and let me tell you a story. we have a little town here called pella, iowa, population of about 10,350, beautiful little city, great dutch influence, founded back in 1847 or so from folks who left the netherlands and wanted to come into the united states. pella is dutch for a city of refuge looking for freedom from relidges persecution. pella has emerged as this very important manufacturing center here in our state. there are two companies that are there. one is the remir corporation, very large corporation of agricultural and mining equipment. and in this global economy has done fairly well in the past two or three years, employment

is up, their orders are up, business seems to be pretty good. across town not far away, less than 20 minutes or so is the pella company, the maker and manufacturers of doors and windows. and it represents what happens whenever the national real estate economy has collapsed from the residential and commercial side of the business. they have closed a factory in south carolina. there have been cutbacks in their corporate head quarters. so two manufacturing companies that have experienced different levels of success and have their own uncertainty where this economy is going. manufacturing is critical. manufacturing is key in terms of not om job creation but there is something special about the that iconic made in the u.s.a. when we talk to the candidates there was certainly a roundtable when pella this year, the candidates got together to kind of articulate

their vision. iowans care deeply about job creation and the economy. again, certainly this campaign we have seen on the republican side notions and jockeying about who is the true conservative and who has been the most consistent. incredibly important part of iowa. a retired minister recently just yesterday actually here offered his endorsement of rick santorum and encouraged representative backman to basically close her candidacy for pursuing the white house and become almost a vice presidential candidate in concert with senator san tax reform. so those issues, certainly, abortion and same sex marriage are going to pert late and have dominated a lot of the conversations but at the heart of the matter, with a 6% unemployment rate, which is very good by national standards, but iowa is very slow in terms of responding to

curves and downward slides. at the end of the day, i'm convinced that whenever caucus goers head to their polling places, more than 1700 here in iowa on january 3rd they're going to look very closely at their own economic livelihood, where the country is headed and potentially hour important their decisionsless that night. >> rick green, graduate of ohio university, went on to work for the desert sun and for the last year has been the editor and vice president of news for the des moines register. one note. c-span will be covering two caucuses on tuesday january 3rd. a chance for you to see the caucus in its entirety. meanwhile, there's a story that we want to bring to your attention. a town of about 3800 people, founded back in 1896 and now one in three residents, a lot no. the story, the role of

immigrants especially hispanics, an influx throughout the midwest including your state. guest: right. actually i gave you wrong information earlier. it's only about 20, 30 minutes or so outside of des moines. perry is a big meat packing center. we did a story within the past three months or so taking a look at those large numbers by iowa standards anyway with the latinos. we had a headline the hispanic highway and how that population has been so richly seaved in terms of cultural change that is have unfolded in perry and what it has meant to the demographics and diversity of iowa. but across the midwest from my native ohio to what we're seeing in indiana, illinois, here in iowa, there has been an adjustment we have seen in the 2010 census that came out about

rising prominence of latinos. and the role i think that they're going to play on the national stage in november of next year will be very interesting to see both in terms of the courtship of both parties but the issues that are going to emerge relating to g immigration that's going to continue to be a red hot issue for the rest of this country. >> rick prir is campaigning heavily throughout iowa and one of the issues that came up in super view with barbara walters with herman cain he remains interested in serving in a cabinet position and herman cain suggesteded the department of defense. >> he has all the characteristics of the type of people that i will bring forward. and bringing outsiders into washington, d.c., people that share my philosophy that aren't worried about the next job, aren't worried about going to

wall street after we helped them get a special interest, people like herman cain that understand just making hard decisions, sometimes you've just got to bear down. >> what about the rick perry campaign in iowa? he says it's a make or break state for him. guest: i think that's probably very true. governor perry emerged, entered this race relatively late by standards set by the other candidates. came on like a house on fire. certainly his job creation record in texas grabbed the iowans' attention, lots of headlines, lots of hoop la around his candidacy, well-docked in the -- well-documented. interestingly enough and i think you might have seen it whenever it was aired out of the register's information center we had our endorsement

interview with him governor perry basically acknowledged that he had back surgery in july and really wasn't i think physically and mentally prepared for the rigors of the debate cycle and the intensity of the campaign. new organization. it is a grueling, demanding campaign here and so i think that he -- i felt that he had his best debate whenever he was with the register, abcia hoo debate two saturdays ago. did fairly well again on thursday of last week with the debate. i think there will be a lot of eyes being paid to governor perry and how it unfolds. he's got a lot of money. his war chest has been quite large. he has a very aggressive advertising buy here in iowa. he's out on the campaign trail

and bussing around, talking to folks, which plays to his strength. rick perry is the consummate retail politician. i think he works small crowds quite well. he's very comfortable from rotary clubs to pan cake breakfasts to those intimate conversations with iowans. they get a chance to see who he really is. he's a different candidate up close and personal. >> we have this tweet. we'll get a call from bob joining us from chicago. caller: good morning. i've got three quick points that i would like you to comment on. one point four years ago there was a reporter that asked romney that you have five sons and not one of them have ever

tried to join the military. he with his nose up in the air said that they're helping me in the campaign. if he was smart he would have said i would have loved for them to join the military but they never did. the second point real quickly is this president is the most articulate orator and intelligent president we have ever had in this country and he happens to be an re african american and it gives me a warm feeling. host: your response. guest: it's going to be very interesting to see whoever the republican candidate might be and those debates with barack obama. undoubtedly president obama can work a room, can work a floor. knows the issues and is very comfortable behind a microphone and has that clinton-esque ability of being able to reach out and touch voters, touch people in the audience in person as well as through

television and other broadcast means. very effective with that. there is a part of us that really would have loved to have seen those seven three-hour lincoln style debates between going rich and president obama. i will tell you and i can't speak to the comment you might have had a second ago about governor romney and his sons and military involvement. i don't recall that so i can't speak to that. but what i can tell you is that governor romney might not be quite as brash and not have that professor in chief kind of style that the speaker of the house does. former speaker of the house going rich. but he's very comfortable on the campaign trail. he handles himself quite deftly. he knows the issues, is able to articulate the positions. i've seen him flustered once or twice but not something that would give me worry if i were a

romney supporter of how he might perform. let's say if he is indeed the g.o.p. nominee and how it might go against president obama. host: one more tweet and then our viewer from west virginia h >> we weren't in boston, we didn't see the whole process unfold up close and personal. from our research and from our conversations with people in boston as well as what we've been able to gather from the campaign is the health care plan that was created and adopted and embraced by so much of the commonwealth back in massachusetts it was what the people wanted, what the

legislative viewed was the right opportunity for the people who had no health care. i don't necessarily think that it is the perfect model for the rest of the country. i think it was a state solution. it was what massachusetts said it needed, what it wanted. i don't necessarily view that as comparison to the perceived obama care and the like. so. . .

india, china. they do not have the regulations that we do. i know that we need to produce clean coal. our electric bills are going up 4% every year for the next 10 years because they are putting in $900 billion worth of scrubbers in this country. other countries are free to do whatever they want. we need to vote and republican, get the epa out of the way -- vote republican guard of the epa out of the way. appreciate your time. host: more of a statement that a question. rick green, do you want to elaborate? guest: i grew up in appalachia. i came from a family of coal miners, relatives of west virginia who were actually in

the coal mines. i know the industry quite well. the future of america's industry -- energy policy will be essential issue in 2012. it has emerged in iowa. you've seen it unfold in the debate. yet certain seen president talk about it. when you look at the dependence on foreign oil, the influence of oil, you have the big argument, it is it the pipeline coming down from canada -- argument, is ipeline coming down from canada? i then it will be a big issue, what natural reserve to we have -- i think it will be a big issue. what better reserved and do we have? host: let me conclude very quickly. "we are building the economy.

it is the nation's top priority. romney makes the best case among republicans that he could do that. he stands out in the current field of republican candidates. he has solid credentials in a career that includes starting and running successful businesses, turning around the 2002 winter olympics, and working with both political parties as the massachusetts governor to pass important initiatives. he stands out especially among candidates now in the top tier. newt gingrich is an undisciplined partisan who would alienate, not tonight, if he reverts to mean-spirited attacks on display as house speaker." guest: that is the greatest worry that iowans might have. newt gingrich will you get? -- which newt gingrich will you get? it was critically important to

take a look at their past. how did they interact from both republican and democrat standpoint? sobriety, wisdom and judgment are the ingredients that led to our endorsement. host: rick green joining us on this sunday from johnston, iowa. the headline from "the more and register -- "the des moines register" -- we will see you on the campaign trail as we move into iowa and new hampshire. in iowa, the race is wide open. you can check out our political coverage online at c-span.org and c-span.org/campaign2012.

we are going to take a short break. and we will turn our attention to iraq as the last u.s. troops are leaving the country overnight. women's issues and rights around the world. "washington journal," sunday, december 18. we are back in a moment. >> sometimes i the would be best for government to just stay completely on a sports -- i think it would be best for government just a completely out of sports. when chris get involved, the hearings are basically television shows -- when congress gets involved, the hearings are basically television shows. >> opera commentator john feinstein -- author and commentator john feinstein. >> it has a qd back on the lives of people -- it has a huge eat at on the lives -- it has a huge

effect on the lives of pe ople. there are times when i think the federal government should be more involved. >> his new but is "one on one." to watch the rest of the interview tonight on c-span's "q&a." >> i always knew there was a risk the bohemian rationale. i decided to take it. whether it is an illusion or not -- i do not think it is -- it helped my concentration, it's got me being bored, it stopped of the people being boring -- it stopped me being going, it stopped other people being boring. if i was asked what i'd do it again -- would i do it again, the answer is probably yes. i would have quit earlier, possibly.

it sounds irresponsible. it would be hypocritical for me to say no, i would never have touched the stuff if i knew. i didn't and -- i didn't tell. everybody knew. i cannot make it come out any other way. it is strange. i almost did not even regrette , and i should. it is just impossible and for me to picture life without wine and other things -- it is just impossible for me to picture life without wine and other things. >> thursday, journalist, author, critic, and then the fair columnist and editor christopher hichens passed away at the age of -- and ""vanity fair -- an

"vanity fair" columnist and editor chris to britain's passed away at the age of 62. >> washington journal" continues -- "washington journal" continues. host: josh rogin's work is available online at foreignpolicy.com. let's begin with a couple of headlines. first from the page -- the front page of the "l.a. times." from the miami herald -- the dynamics of that relationship. finally, this is from the "boston sunday globe," "it is their country, let them have

it." guest: the last troops have left the country. many people said that the real struggle for iraq begins after the american troops leave. iraq faces huge challenges and has huge opportunities. it will take years to settle out. we see an internal power struggle, a difference between prime minister nouri al-maliki and his main opposition. already, the allow we -- allawi has left the coalition. this is only two days after the end of the war. >> there is still no cabinet. >> there is a shiite locker versus a city block -- shiite

block versus a sunni block. we have serious differences with the maliki government. we will have to see whether they are able to confront the challenges they face. host: a high price for those who lost loved ones in the war. your arsenal of figures courtesy of the pentagon -- nearly 4500 -- here are some of the figures, courtesy of the pentagon. more than 100,000 iraqis lost their lives. guest: the cost of this war, both blood and treasure, has been gargantuan. the question is, was it worth it. can the costs be used to launch

iraq into a. of prosperity n -- a period of prosperity? host: the president coming under some criticism for the policy toward iraq. we will talk about that during the segment. on wednesday, the president travels to fort bragg, north carolina, which became the main point location for u.s. troops heading over to iraq. this past week, the president said the job is over, well done. >> iraq is not a perfect place. it has many challenges ahead. but we're leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self- reliant iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people. we're building a new partnership between our nations and we are ending the war and not with the final battle, but with a final

march toward home. this is an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making. today, we remember everything that you did to make it possible. we remember the early days, the american units that streaked across the skies and the sands of iraq. the battles from karbala to baghdad, american troops breaking the back of roberta a dictator in less than a month. host: let me follow up on two points. state senator, candidate, and senator barack obama was a critic of the war from the very beginning. guest: he campaigned on a promise to end the war in iraq, which is hugely unpopular in 2007-2008 car when he was running. political advisers felt it was a core commitment of the obama

presidency to end the war in iraq and fulfill their campaign promise. so many others have not been kept, including the closing of guantanamo. this was the north has felt was absolutely necessary in terms of the -- this was something that they felt was absolutely necessary. stable, self-reliant iraq -- many people look at and say, it is it really stable? is it really self-reliance? they are not really sure. they want to keep an american presence there as long as possible. that is basic break inside the government. host: that was my next comment. how stable is the government? we have seen pictures of markets and street vendors, a sense of normalcy in the country. politically, it seems anything but. >> absolutely. there is an issue of whether or not iraq can really maintain

social security, protect its borders, -- let's remember that part of the obama administration tried very hard to negotiate an extension of u.s. troop presence in the iraq. those negotiations failed. that is not to say that the white house wants to keep troops in. they're part of the defense department and the state department. it was because of these concerns that iraq both politically and security-wise has not matured enough to stand on its own 2 feet without significant u.s. help. the decision is made. we will have to wait and see what happens. host: our guest is josh rogin. you can give us a call or send an email or tweet. these are the words of mark landler. he says --

guest: there are two things going on here. one is the recognition that america is living in an era of constrained resources, where our budgets are tight and our economy is struggling. iod of thear per

plants around the world has to come to an end. what has and pentagon have been on an opposite sides of how to use the military since obama came into office. -- the white house and the pentagon have been on opposite sides of how to use the military since obama came into office. the white house is saying and a network, we are the ones in control of foreign policy. we believe america's role in the world -- the white house is saying, no, we are the ones in control of foreign policy. we believe america's role in the world -- did the invasion of host: did or hurt -- > the invasion of iraq help or hurt? guest: president obama made it

one of his talking points, pledging to refocus on what he called the good war. for the first years, that was the case. now, obama has reversed that trend. it doesn't necessarily have a tie tack -- tied to afghanistan. the answer is, yes, the war in iraq to distract us from the task in afghanistan, but it is not clear that a greater application of troops, resources, and finances would have solved the problem. host: a number of articles can be found in bloomberg pasqua the business we -- bloomberg "business week." "the military is looking to rush packing up and shipping out. -- out what ir.

caller: this is true the in summer -- this is trudy in summerville. this takes me back to october, 2002, when my husband and i and my son went up to washington and tried to protest that silly -- why, why, why were we going into iraq. we went and protested -- we went ahead and protested. it was a horrible destruction from the attack on our country, september, 2011. we should have just gone down did -- gone after the culprits.

it should have been a crime. it would have been over with in general. the whole world was behind us. i just pray to god that everything is ok in iraq because so much blood and money -- we can only pray it all goes well and that iran will keep its shit together. host: trudy, thanks for the call. next time avoid the profanity. guest: we know that the promises of wmd being found did not pan out. without rededicating the whole thing, -- without re-litigating the whole thing, the idea that american troops can be country that is not a direct threat to the united states and has not

actually attacked united states -- it was revolutionary doctrine after the wake -- after the attack of 9/11. the application of the doctrine, because it was so flawed, has made it hard to implement. iran could be a more dire threat to the united states and probably does have more connections to al qaeda and other terrorist organizations. the question becomes, can we apply the doctrine of free and trends to run -- to iran? we now have the ability to attack anywhere in the world, but the circumstances under which we do that have not been clearly explained to the public. host: "the final troops departing iran -- iraq and." -- from iraq."

caller: good morning i get frustrated. hearing the bleeding hearts. i have waited 30 days. newmont opportunity to say this -- you need my opportunity to say this. we went into iraq for wmd's. after that, gaddafi comes up with a nuclear weapon. how in the world did he build a nuclear weapon? where did it come from? al qaeda was in iraq. this stupid man, bill clinton thought if he would have been doing something besides sitting on his hind and politicking sex - adnd taking sex from women -- we would not be in this problem. i do not know of the bleeding heart liberals remember the

bodies being hung off a bridge. people act like it was a mistake. host: thank you for the call and sharing your sentiment. there are two sides of the spectrum. guest: just a quick clarification. gaddafi did not have nuclear weapons. he had some nuclear technologies. he gave those up. the bottom line is that iraq did not have wmd at the time we invaded. they certainly had them at some public, but not when we got there. as for al-qaeda, it was tenuous at best. the bottom line is some people will always end this war was justified and some people will think it was not. we can all agree that the handling of the invasion, certainly of the aftermath, the handling of the years-long effort to rebuild were badly mishandled by the bush administration. this resulted in needless

suffering on both sides. that should be a lesson for any future actions of this nature. host: good morning. fort lauderdale. you are on the air. paula >> good morning. for starters, i am very happy that our boys and girls -- caller: good morning. for starters, i am very happy that our boys and girls, and daughters are safely on their way home. the genesis of this is disconcerting to me. it was predicated on the incidence -- wmd's. "words of mass destruction -- the section -- this at -- "words

of mass deception." i believe iraq will revert back to where it began. as far as afghanistan, as an aside, if i may speak to that -- why are we there, supporting a nation who happens to have a bumper crop of narcotics? host: pick up on the second couple with afghanistan. that is for the next focus is going to shift. guest: the obama administration is winding down the war in afghanistan. the president's announcement that we would remove all of the surge troops from afghanistan by the next summer is just the beginning. he promised to take all of our troops out of afghanistan by the end of 2014, unless another extension is negotiated with the afghanistan government. this is all part of obama's world view. we need to take our large military footprint out. this era of the u.s. having large military footprints in

foreign countries, especially the middle east and southwest asia, it is over. we do not know what the results of that are going to be. i also thought that the caller's point that we cannot change the mindset of these countries and alter their cultures fundamentally is a good one. this is shared by the obama administration. they believe that these countries have to work out their problems for themselves. we can help them, even pressure them, but we cannot go in and fundamentally change them using fund -- using military force. this is part of the obama doctrine, not only in afghanistan and iraq, but in places like egypt, tunisia. host: he earned his degree from george washington university. he has worked at brookings, the japanese embassy, and on capitol hill. barbara from cleveland, ohio, democrats line. caller: good morning, gentlemen.

the first thing i elect to say is, i do not know who said it, but "injured and rage -- i would like to say is, i do not know who said it, but a boat anger and rage -- what makes us think we have the right to take over another country? what if someone toppled our government, toward our country up? how would we feel? we would be enraged and very upset. there are a lot of the ways to kill people. we have 60,000 people a year dying because they did not have insurance. we do not pay attention. we do not know the statistics for how many people are denied after they have insurance. they are denied coverage by their insurance companies.

all we get is a lot of fox news propaganda. let me run and everybody that fox news and saudi arabia -- the second-largest shareholder of fox news, news corp. -- they did a survey and found out if you watch fox news, you are less informed than if you did not watch any news. host: i will leave it there. let me follow up with another sweet -- wtweet. the caller said, shouldn't we be nation-building at home, rather than spending aren't limited blood and treasure -- our limited blood and treasure in the middle east? this is a major theme of jon huntsman's campaign.

jon huntsman is not doing well. most of the gop candidates disagree with the basic idea that we could -- should disengage from some of these issues around the world. they disagree with the convention by the caller that american activities abroad would be viewed differently if they were conducted by another country or around the world. the idea is american exceptionalism. america can go around the world and do things and try to impose its world and -- its debut in ways that other countries are simply not able to do. obama believes every country thinks this -- i think it is exceptional. it should be a more -- -- more diverse world. us for the student at the iraq war was entered into on false information -- ask for the view

that the iraq war was entered into on false information -- the gap between the reasons we went and the reasons provided to us is something that history books will sort out, but it leaves a very bad taste in the mouth of many americans and others around the world. host: as be approached the top of the hour, we're talking with josh -- as we approach the top of the hour, we're talking with josh rogin. get more at foreignpolicy.c om. john mccain had this to say. >> unfortunately, it is clear that this decision for the complete pullout of the united states troops from iraq was

defeated by politics and not our national security interest. i believe that history will judge this president's leadership with scorn and disdain. >> josh? guest: mccain, the deopponent of obama, still waging that battle. some people think the surge in iraq -- obama was against it when he was a senator. john mccain feels like he has more credibility on this. .

host: on our republican line, bill is joining us. good morning. caller: good morning. i was just wondering what josh thought about the arab spring, the effects of the iraq invasion. in other words, like when the people were raising their purple fingers, if that kind of inspired them. guest: this is a great question and i like this one. there are exactly two ways to tell this. one is that the war in iraq mess wri and bloody and mishandled produced a fragile democracy that showed other

people around the arab world that the ability of arab people and arab nations to what we call agree to disagree by taking votes and settling their differences by means other than violence is possible. and this inspired the wave of revolutions. there's a whole nother view and the other view is that revolutions come around every once in a while and it was more about technology and a rejection of foreign intervention by both western powers and by foreign terrorists and extremist groups that caused the people of the arab world to go and stand up for themselves and use their own power and protests to determine their own destiny. i tend to favor the latter explanation. i don't think that the people on the streets in egypt and tunisia and libya were in favor of the war in iraq. in fact, if anything, i tend to believe that the protest sweep in the arab world are more of a

reaction to the war in iraq than a product of it. host: again, a cost of the war and the impact as we list ton this next caller. new orleans. independent line. caller: thanks for having me. they keep doing this 00 billion which is an asnomcal number. but in reality, it's probably 2 trillion because a lot of equipment's been burned out and we have to resimply it by the army. we have thousands of men we have to take care of for years that have been hurt horribly. host: thanks for the call. the highest cost of the war than just 800 bhl. guest: this is a great point. we have 800 billion spent in cash, money spent to deploy and fight and feed and supply all of the troops in iraq over 10

years and that money was off budget borrowed and will have to be paying for that for a generation. now, that is not the true cost of the war of course because there are several other costs including the damage to our military, the cost of veterans and injuries for years to come, the tuste cost of not putting that money back into our economy and what could all of those people have been doing or what could all of that taxpayer money been doing for us back here at home. and then let's not forget about the cost to iraq and that's a cost nobody factors in. and we're talking about hundreds of thousands of lives loves and destruction to their economy. and who knows what teeskets were on the world oil market and what cost that. so you could look at it a bunch of ways but trillions of dollars spent on this effort in iraq and that is a very legislate way to assess whether or not this was worth it or

not. host: one of our viewers saying. guest: hundreds of billions did go to corpses, private contractors. an entire industry emerged from this war in iraq of private contractors, which is more of fing into around the world. defense contractors more than doubled over the past years is all true and is a legacy of this war and a huge debate on capitol hill about whether or not it is time to start cutting the defense budget. president obama wants to cut the defense budget. this will play off in the next budget cycle and the 2012 presidential election in a huge way. host: houston, democrat's line, good morning.

caller: good morning. i have to tell you one thing. i was just watching this program about this iraq war and the funny thing is that america went to the iraq war with the information of weapons of mass destruction. they could not find it. sorry we couldn't find it we killed too many people, spent too much time, too much money. sorry we made a mistake. now we're talking about iran. we're going to go to iran and do the same thing there. i don't understand these kind of things. i mean, america is in the world power. they cannot figure it out the right way to do this. they should have a better nooges. now, once they find out what happens in iraq was totally

wrong information, who is going to pay for that? who is going to be responsible? who is going to put that person in front of the judge or something to make that person libel for it by saying, sorry, we couldn't find anything but we did go there. host: thank you. guest: so again without relit gating the entry into the war in iraq because that's done and over and it doesn't seem like anyone is going to be brought up on any sort of investigation or charges regarding the allegations that were made to get us there. so let's look forward. and i think the caller's point about iran is very good rfment we going to do this again? the bottom line is we're not going to do this again the same way. robert gates made it very clear, president obama made it very clear there is no anticipation of an invasion of iran. what we're looking for with iran is a covert war which is going on including the iranian

nuclear scientists, blowing up missile facilities, drone missions over iran including the drone that was brought down by the iranians and is sitting in iran right now. so it will look much different than the iraq confronttation and will be very much focused on intelligence. and this is the new model and what's playing out in real time right now over there and should that ever come to a very hot military confrontation it would be much more dire because iran does have more capabilities than iraq and does have promies all over the world. so that is a nightmare scenario. >> the scene along the border from friday's headline.

caller: good morning. my big problem is with the journalist here, not politicians. every country in the world all agreed that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. and this ought to be brought into the discussion. and if these journalists are not going to be honest and open all they're doing is pushing forward their own personal biased on it. and except for the american exceptionalism, if it wasn't america protecting freedom in the world, how long would freedom last year? and i don't understand the thinking on all this. it's just crazy. if america wasn't out there leading then we wouldn't have a free world. journalists are just parasites

by not telling the full truth, all sides, then they're just propagandists. thanks very much. guest: i have no agenda or stake in the outcome of the debate over the war in iraq. iraq did have wmds at one point. at some point they got rid of them and when we looked for them they were not there. those are unarguable facts. the invasion intelligence said iraq did have wmds at some point. they weren't there and there was an exhaustive search for them. they probably would have foun them. that's not propaganda. that's just the way it played out. as for this idea of american people exceptionalism, i think this is a debate that's raging now in washington and around the world. the point that the caller makes is a good one if american didn't play this role, who

would? would we leave it to china to sort of the world security arrangements,? russia, iran, india? >> none of these countries demonstrated an ability to step up and fill the role of maintaining a world of security and stability in places that the u.s. is operating. so the u.s. does have a unique role and a responsibility as the sole super power. but that role is changing and my point is that if we can acknowledge that role is changing what can we do to proactively set into effect the systems that will guide that change and preserve american influence in the greatest way possible. and i think that's what washington is focused on. host: one of our viewers writes.

guest: so the idea is that barack obama is not just in iran but initiated very aggressive violent military action including yemen, pakistan, somalia, and a few others. and because these are covert intelligence operations they're not explained to us or debated. it is hard to criticize for being tough on pakistan or yemen because these countries do harbor terrorists. but at the same time there's a lot of political and diplomatic complications with doing this including the effect it has on our reputation in those countries, including villages getting bombed by u.s. predator drones. the fear is iran is moving quickly towards a nuclear weapon. nobody knows how far along they are. but we do know that the ongoing covert war against iran by both the u.s. and israeli forces is having an effect and is slowing their program.

whether or not it's enough and what exactly we're doing there is something that our government has chosen not to share with us. host: this is from last week as they took photographs and the symbolic flag lowered during a ceremony. marking the end. in part because of deevens secretary leon panetta paying tribute to the forces in iraq and the so-called casing of colors marking the end of our presence there. here's more from deevens secretary pan elta. >> to all of t men and women in uniform today, your nation is deeply indebt to you. you have done everything your nation asked you to do and more. your dedication, your commitment to this mission has been the driving force behind

the remarkable progress that we have seen here in bad dad and across this country. you came to this land between the rivers again and again and again. and did not know whether you would return to your loved ones. you will leave with great pride lasting nide, secure in knowing that your sacrifice has helped the iraqi people to begin a new chapter in history. free from tyranny, full of hope, for prosperity and peace. particularly for this country's future generations. host: the comments of leon panetta. so in terms of his to do list

with the situation in iran, the situation in afghanistan and other hot spots around the world and the largest task of trying to reduce the pentagon's budget. guest: leon panetta has a huge monumental task. to manage a pentagon that is slinking. and the way he's doing that is in two ways. one, he is defending the pentagon's budget inside the administration and publicly and says that the cuts are sufficient and that congress can't cut any more and this trigger that might be forced due to the failure of the super committee would be devastateding. so that's his first role is to deached the budget from further cuts. the second thing is he is shifting from the focus over to east asia. the idea is what will be the pentagon's main mission?

the mission will be to prepare for a future contingency with a rising china, whether or not that contingency ever happens is irrelevant. we're talking about a focus back to the navy, back to the air force, away from the unions and army and shipping resources, and building relationships with japan, singapore, and australia and shifting it back to the far east. this is something that a lot of obama administration is on board with. this is something that a lot of people in the region of east asia have been calling to. whether or not this will improve relations with china h in terms of setting up a system where the chinese realize they have to act responsibly or whether it forces an arm's race, remains to be seen. caller: good morning. i have a couple of points.

first is the united nations i thought the united nations was organized originally when there's a problem someplace in the world so they can come together to help make a decision or chastised. and all the money being poured into that organization, it seems like they're a do nothing group. our congress has so many old men and women sitting there, i toteled the drktry in the the house of representatives approximately 4400 years sitting there of old men and win. and in the senate i think it's close to 2,000 years. we need new brains. and i'm an 80-year-old. so i'm ma lining myself in a sense. but you have to know when it's

time. and perhaps move to a cam rl form of government. host: thank you for the call. guest: first on the united nations i think this is very important because this is another discussion that's going on in congress right now. the united nations is designed to operate by consensus. therefore it cannot do anything without tum broad agreement of core members and sometimes that resulted in not doing anything. so the united nations is not going to be out in front of a very aggressive effort in foreign policy but it does provide a useful forum for countries to discuss and occasionally solve problems. the amount of money that we spend, a few billion dollars, is really not that much in terms of the total affordability. so i wouldn't worry about the cost that much. as far as people in congress being old, that isst true. and one of the problems in congress is people get entrenched there and become used to the money and the lobbying and special interests.

but there's another side of that coin is that new members, as we saw with the election of 2010 may have less experience but may also have less of a stake in compromise and coming to negotiated solutions if they don't plan to be in congress that long. and i think that's what we saw in the house coming to terms with the senate. many of the top issues that have faced congress this year. if you don't believe it's in your political interest to stay in washington and therefore by compromise and come to agreements on the other side, it's just a scorched dirt strategy. that's what weer seeing among the new members. so you can see it both ways. host: michelle has this tweet. guest: contractors are very unpopular. there used to be as many as

soldiers and these operated without the regular rules of the military and the regular oversight and this resulted in deaths and all sorts of scandals many of which have never been told before. the bottom line is now the state department will now be in charge of rirke and the state doesn't doesn't have to be an army. they have to do that using contractors so there will be a role for thousands of contractors in iraq for years to come protecting all over iraq and this does create a problem of whether or not these contractors are under the thumb of any sort of oversight who will prosecute them when they get into crimes and what will be the role of this huge contractor industry built in iraq and is now being dispersed to places like the horn of africa and who knows where else. host: thank you. again we can get more on line. appreciate your time on this sunday morning. caller: thank you.

host: when we come back we'll turn our attention that the role the u.s. is playing for women around the world in a speech that will be delivered tomorrow. a very busy session. politics. what to extect. the questions coming up. keeping track of all of those programs that can be heard beginning at noon eastern time. guest: good morning, steve. yes, the reairs begin at noon on the five talk shows. the payroll tax cut, the end of the war in iraq and presidential politics. beginning at noon we host meet the press. at 1:00 eastern hear a replay of "this week "kick off a

series of debates of issues in the 2012 presidential campaign. paul ryan and the ranking member of the house financial services committee congressman barney frank. at 2:00 it's fox news sunday host chris wallace sits down with mitt romney. at 3:00 hear cnn's state of the upeion. finally at 4:00 hear face the nation from cbs. bob schafer talks with republican presidential candidate and former house speaker newt gingrich.

listen to them all at c-span road. on your i phone or your blackberry. listen nation wide or go on line anywhere at c-span radio.org. >> i always knew that there's a risk in the bohemian lifestyle and i decided to take it because whether it is an illusion or not -- i don't think it is -- it helped my concentration. it stopped me being bored, stopped other people being boring to some extent. it would make me want the evening to go on longer, to enhance the moment. if i was asked would i do it again, the answer is probably yes. i would have quit earlier possibly hoping to get away with the whole thing.

easy for me to say of course. not very nice for my children to hear. if i was to say i would do it all again to you. but it would be hypocritical to say i would never touch the stuff again. and i decided all of life is a wager. and i captain make it come out any other way. it's strange, i almost don't even regret it though i should. because it's just impossible for me to picture life without wine and other things fueling the company. and keep me reading and some traveling and energizing me. it worked me. it really did. >> thursday passed away at the age of 62 from complications with his battle of esophageal

cancer. host: we want to welcome to c span, the president and cofounder of an organization called women thrive worldwide. guest: good morning. host: let me ask about a speech that the secretary of state is delivering tomorrow. she has been opt forefrount trying to deal with women's issues especially in areas that's been rife with conflict. guest: i think what we can expect tomorrow is an exciting big announcement about the u.s. strategy to help women and girls in places around the world that are torn apart by war. places like afghanistan, iraq, congo, many places around the world where we have just see

unbelievable violence against women and girls. host: yet this comes at the same time -- first it requires dollars and resources at the same time where the state department is looking at financial custbaks. so what impact does this have with what the goals are and where the resources come from? >> i think the beautiful thing that she is going to talk about tomorrow is that the kind of action that is the u.s. will take are things that don't require huge amounts of cash up front. for example, things like our diplomats in the region when they have meetings with organizations or representatives from the country that they ask that women's organizations always be represented in those meetings. it doesn't cost any money. it makes a huge huge difference. host: former secretary of state laura bush has been a strong advocate for u.s. presence in afghanistan to help women in afghanistan and this weekend with u.s. troop's now out of

iraq, the impact that has on people in that country. guest: well, he is going to address both of those situations. and the long term strategy for women in both countries is to really strengthen their ability to participate in society. so what that means is education, political participation, strengthening women's organizations in those countries. that for academic women is a long road. i think iraqi women are starting much farther ahead than afghan women. but one of the most important things that we have to keep in mind is that everything that we have done the last ten years we do not want to trade that away in the final peace negotiations with the taliban. that is not an acceptability outcome. host: in a result of all the advances we have made, why are women so often the source of

brutality? guest: well, i think it's because they can be. women are -- host: source of the victims of brutality. guest: right. they are the victims because it's not that hard. i mean, men still are physically stronger than women. and as much as i would like it, most women in the world haven't taken self-defense courses. so it's an act of opportunity and when too many men have that opportunity unfortunately they take it. so very predictably violence against women is much higher in conflict situations because there's chaos, there's instability and there's guns everywhere. >> your organization pushing for economic opportunity for women. how do you do that and how do you ensure that in third world countries like afghanistan and egypt and elsewhere? guest: well, the way to do it

is to first ask women what they want. women who are living in situations of poverty incredibly intelligent and incredibly creative, i tried myself to li on a dollars a day in latin america. it's virtually impossible. so what we need to understand is that women are the source of their own solutions and what they need is a little bit of money, a little bit of investment and they will take that and turn it into something more for themselves and their families. host: as you well know, with unemployment in this country at 9 to 9.5%, a $15 trillion debt in deficit, so much here at home, why should the u.s. be concerned or focus our resources on these issues? guest: ink that's a fair question and i think the answer is in the fact that we actually are investing in ourselves first. we are spending 99% of the

federal budget on the united states, on our needs, on our defense, on our security. in the 1% that we spend on international programs like josh was just talking about, half of that goes to our embassies and our programs abroad. we really only spend half of 1% really on the do gooder issues of helping the poor and helping women and children abroad. it's very little money to us but to them it is a beacon of hope. it is a huge amount of resources that if used really wisely we can have a troons formative effect. host: we have a link to the website here part of the "washington journal" program. why did you begin this organization? who funds it? guest: let me say that we are funded entirely by private

donations. we don't take any u.s. government money because we want to be absolutely independent to say to policy makers even like hillary clinton i'm a big fan but my job is to also hold her feet to the fire and make sure that announcements that are made are followed up with action and resources. the reason i started this organization in 1998 is because i really felt that the poorest women and girls around the world needed the best representation that they could get in washington, d.c. just like washington is full of every representative for other industries and other causes. this is a constituency that until women thrived was created had absolutely no voice in the nation's capitol. so our job is to basically represent 1 billion women and girls liing on less than $1 a day. >> what concerns you the most?

>> i think what concerns me absolutely the most is the lack of investment in people. and that is a universal concern. i think many people are concerned with that in our own country. but abroad, the only way to solve these problems is to invest in education, to invest in opportunity. now, is to invest in things that give people home and give people a reason to continue. because without that, it's not just that we're going to have a world that is sadder, with more unfortunate people. we're going to have a world that is a lot more unstable with lot of people being very desperate and very angry. >> you can join the conversation on our facebook page. also our twitter, or you can send us an e-mail.

guest: that's an interesting and fair point but there are things that our government can do that no amount of private charity can do. also, you have to keep it in perspective of scale. churches, corporations, private charities, even though it's half of 1% of our budget, that is a substantial amount of resource that is we can't depend on private charities to make up. it's not possible. but what the sufment government does is that we can engage other governments. we can work on education systems of a whole. we can build roads. we can build infrastructure. ngos or churches or private charities are not going to build that kind of base upon which development and growth can happen. host: let me follow up on that point because as you travel to

subsahara africa or go to haiti, it's not an isolated problem, there's a series of problems. the problems are so huge when it comes to just basic sewage and infrastructure and clean water and roads that you just talked about. how do you get to that point before you can deal with women's issues? guest: where we build the road, how we build it has to also impact women's safety. there is such a thing as a road that serves women's interests. when you ask women, particularly in africa what they want in a road, they'll tell you we want six or seven feet on the side so we can walk safely and not walk in traffic. we want market stalls so that we can stop on our journey and sell our goods where cars can pull over. they will tell you lots of things. so you can do the roads, you can do wells, you can do the

infrastructure in a really smart way that also really benefits both women and men. host: our topic women's issues worldwide. caller: good morning. i hope that this speech i think it's tomorrow you said will include condemnation or criticism of orthodox judism. women are not allowed to work outside of their home. the husband is basically a dictator in the house and can tell them what to do and a rabi can block any attempt of divorce that a jewish woman might want to get. so i don't know -- and this would cost nothing. you're talking about how much these actions might cost. it would cost nothing to just come out and criticize other

than maybe some campaign contributions would be decreased. that's the only thing. guest: i think you're bringing up a really important point and that is that religion is off used and ely twisted in a way that is radical islam or radical christianity or orthodox judism. and there's nothing in religious text that dictates that women are infearier. or should be treated with violence. i don't know that the secretary will comment directly on that tomorrow. but i think what you've put your finger on is that we do have to get religious leaders of all faiths ed kating the public, educating their faithful that women and girls have equal worth as men and boys. and the role that religious

leaders can play is profound and important. and i hope that she will touch on that tomorrow. host: our guest, ritu sharma. next is juss tin joining us from burk, virginia. good morning. and she hung up. we'll go to sigh yed joining us from los angeles. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say that this is a country they call democratic country that is not run by any islamic party. that country is run by so-called democratic party but they're a dictator. they do whatever they want and they have a record of hiding the incident that happens back home all the time from that without -- but i've lived in

america for 32 years. i know american freedom and now this that enlightance the whole world. but the thing is somehow this country has forgotten 40 years ago it got liberated but this country is always blaming the muslim people that they are the ones at fault. but it's not like arab spring. everywhere people are looking for freedom and they want to follow the american way of international democracy. with the core value of their islamic faith. but the thing is this in bangladesh, for some reason 143 million people in this small area like one third of california, the united nations is saying 165 million people. but there's this sense the reason is they want their cleansing. they're cleansing people of not

going along with the present government. very dick torle, very psych click society that they have. any students or activities that picked up. host: thank you. guest: well, i think what he is talking about unfortunately is reality for many, many many millions of people around the world. i think that one of the interesting things, however, happening in bangladesh and i'm not trying to gloss over the problems that he was raising. but bangladesh has also been an enormous source of hope. the michael credit era began is in bangladesh. the other thing i would say is that in many places like india and bangladesh, women are taking things into their own hands and they are calling out their neighbors, calling out

some of their family members where the violence is no longer kept private. they are bringing it into the open. they are surrounding someone's house and banging pots and pans and calling men out who are brutalizing their wives and children. and that is having an impact. i think that kind of sunshine is the best disinfect nt. where women can do that, that's a tremendous opportunity. host: since the earlier caller brought this up. i want to brink up the issue of what's happening in israel. along with the president championed a woman's right to sit or appear in public spaces freely during a human trafficking conference that took place in friday.

guest: i think he's absolutely right. i think he says it very eloquently. host: so what's going on there? guest: i think what's going on there is this -- when women began to bring these things out in public, when they began to have conferences on to bring to light the hondduss things that are happening, there can be a back lash and there can be resistance from the other side. and i think what the prime minister is saying is that it is an obligation of the government, of this state to protect its citizens in public citizens -- spaces. regardless of the issues they're bringing up. people have the right and obligation to bring these issues into the public light and to be able to do so safely. host: paul is joining us. huntsville, alabama. good morning. caller: i want to congratulate you on not taking government money and being part of such a

great organization. i guess i have a two part question for you. one is, is there anywhere that you can actually go and take a look at your long-term game plan? because there's so many different directions that you're going to have to go to make this work for you. you're fighting thousands of years of men's behaver deeply rooted and ingrained in their culture. i think the toughest heel you have to climb is behavioral modification for the men. you're having to undo what's been taught to them for years and years. is there anywhere that you have your game plan that you can take a look and see? you want to know that the organization has an opportunity. you can't just build bridges and put more money into their pocket, may help a little bit. but changing the mens minds is where it's going to have to come from. host: thank you for that point.

guest: i think you're absolutely right. and there are places in the world where we can make a difference and one of the pieces of the legislation that women thrive has been working on is called the international violence against women act. and that is in partnership with both republican and democratic members of congress, a very bipartisan bill. and what that bill does is it never says we're going to solve the violence problem in every country in the world but there are places where we can make some real progress. and those places where we have opportunity is where there are women's organizations that are strong with some additional investments they can scale up their work. where the government of that country actually has an interest in changing or enforcing its laws. they may need support or a little assistance in order to do that. and where there is the possibility of engaging as we talked about before religious leaders and helping to change those mind sets.

so yes, behavior change, changing what's happening in people's heads is the last fron tier i would say for the women's movement. and i think men as you're saying paul have a very important role to play. i think more men getting engaged in talking with their sons, their brothers, their uncles, their friends about what is the right way to treat a woman if? f can really change the future. host: our next call from virginia. welcome to the program. caller: thank you. this is virginia here. i worked with u.s. army headquarters in alexandria and as far as women we had our own way to help them out find jobs. because everything is technical

now, computers. we compartment with monster and also with career builders to have separate web sites. because what's complaining what we're hearing is when they come back or if they're in another country to find another job they're not able to do that because they figure, ok, you're going to lee so we're not going to hire you. also, women's rights around the world. it's just appalling to me to see women get beaten or whatever because they don't believe in whatever politics they have. i am very much distressed by this. is there anything in place that chep these poor women? host: thank you. guest: well, i think many people share your distress and frustration. and what we are trying to do at

women thrive is to help people like you find an outlet for that frustration and anger and to turn it into something good. so you can go to our website, join our action network. and what we do is to tell you how to use your voice as an american citizen because you're lucky that you have that voice and so many women around that world don't have that. how you can use that to really make a difference and forward the outcomes forward women around the world. >> we have this piece available from u.s. a. today. what's next for that country and for the women of iraq? guest: i think it's a very fragile time and i think it's a

shaky future in that much depends on the iraqi security forces and how they will bring security to the country. i mean, there is women have to have basic security in order to leave their homes and go to the store, for girls to go to school. and this will be tested in iraq. there will be radical forces, there will be radical movements that will try to prevent girls from going to school, that will try to prevent women from staying or entering the workforce. and i think that what our government can do is to continue through its assistance to iraq -- the troops are leaving but our civilian operations and our civilian engagement will increase over the next few years to kind of help rebuild that country. i think we need to keep leaning on that country to ensure the security of all of its citizens, including women. host: as you travel worldwide for women's rights have you personly ever felt threatened

or in harm's way? guest: i have. and i have felt it most acutely traveling in afghanistan as you can imagine. and just simple things, you literally cannot get out of the car without a man accompanying you. and there was one day when i was in afghanistan when i thought let me put on a burqa and see if i can walk around the streets alone because at least i will be covered. i have never felt more scared than that because i think that even with a burqa on, a woman walking alone on the streets is taboo and there are many, many men who were harassing me i think thank god i couldn't understand what they were saying. but it is very scary. and in many other places in the world i think you realize how fragile the situation is that at any moment whether back in guatemala or in africa, you know, thing ks happen. things can go wrong.

and you need to do everything you can to stay safe but it is a precarious place for women. host: we encourage our viewers here on c-span television and radio and on the channel, also if you're watching outside the u.s., you can share your thoughts on a facebook page set up by women thrive. good morning. caller: i've got two questions or actually the first is a clarification. the first clarification is a few callers back talking about orthodox jews. in any country where there's orthodox jews you can convert to being a reformed jew any time you want. host: what about that point? guest: i think he's talking about religious freedom. and that is a good point. i think that people choose to

be in a faith and remain in a faith. and if their values that they don't don't align with that faith outlook they are free to change that. i think it's a basic and fair point. host: michael from new york city independent line. you're next. guest: good morning. thank you for all that c-span who do the work behind the scenes we often don't get recognized as well many of whom are women. our ministry for 21 years have been proponeo so i appreciate the efforts economically that not only ms. sharma is undertaking in her own endeavors but what women must do around the world. i'm a former peace corps volunteer who was wrongly fired 25 years ago, i'm in the process of asking secretary clinton to send me back in the

50th anniversary of peace corps to finish a pharmacy and outhouse for each family that was not given to the village which i was wrongly accused of teaching birth control of helping dig a grave for a woman. i was cleared but women didn't get it. i've gone back three times out of my own pocket. as well in 1994 with the united methodist church i was in a city of hope, city of joy exists where women have been brutely raped in the first and second congo wars which unbelieveably when someone was talking about the media before with the former guest, anywhere, if you take the low ball estimate, 1 million people have been killed. if you take the high ball it's as high as 7 million people

since 98 to 2008 because of tar vasion. because of lack of sanitary conditions. and so what ms. sharma is trying to do, what i've tried to do is to facilitate these basic necessities of life. at the same time it doesn't have to be either or. i think it can be both and. what she has is we have to not be a spectator society and sit on the sidelines. we have to be a parts pat tri democracy that demands that we are persistent. where the federal dollars are going. host: thank you for the call from new york city. and thanks for your story about working in the peace corps. guest: i would say congratulations. and i applaud you for that. i wouldn't wait for the peace corps. i would get on the plane and go back. there are so many organizations and people i think that would welcome your help if you are approaching them in a way that doesn't dictate the solutions

but really approaches them with an open hand and say i'm here to partner with you. so i think what you're doing is tremendous and very glad to hear that you're bringing other people along with you. i so agree with you that it's both/and. we need our government engaged, our citizens engaged and the people who we're trying to help engaged, too. host: we welcome our viewers in londnd and elsewhere. mark on the phone from england. caller: my comments and question really is i would like to know, don't you think that with relation to women's issues it is about time that science and reason that we put religious freedoms on expressions firmly in the back seat? because it is not right for religions to dictate, because

basically religions are male led, to dictate for women what is right for women? to use a christian example of that. i know you guys in the u.s. have an organization, but basically if you're a female and yarmish from basically birth to death you're under man's law. now, we would criticize -- i'm a christian but we would openly criticize any other religion, islamic, jewish, it doesn't really matter for doing that. but because they're christian, they're allowed to get away with it. and i just think we need to clean out our own backyard of our own religious synagogues and churches. religious rights are secondary to the human rights of the 50% of our population. guest: well, i think it's very, very complicated.

one thing i will say is that there are many, many women of faith who are working to change their religion from within. and when i talk with him in muslim majority companies that are very devout muslims in their faith, they don't see a disconnect between their faith and women's rights. so i agree with you that there should be a separation between church and state. i think that is a founding principle that this country was built on and has soid us so well. but the change within religion many times needs to come from within. and particularly in the case of muslim majority countries if we attempt to force that separation or to force a new set of values on it, we will essentially run the risk of breaking the ability of women

to change their faith from within. so we need to really support them in their efforts to do that. but it's a slow road. it's a slow road. and i certainly understood your impationance. >> a question who says you spoke about hillary clinton. guest: we've been in conversation with many women, young women and women of all ages from the arab spring countries. and while the peaceful revolutions that have happened are mostly peaceful revolutions are i think are wonderful sign and a wonderful opening for all the citizens in those countries, i think the most difficult thing is that as soon as the revolution occurs, there are elements of society of men that try to come in and enforce

their view. i think this is a very fragile time for women. i think what secretary of clinton is doing and what she will likely talk about tomorrow is that area in particular hand how we need to again support the women in those countries, help them have the skills, keep the international attention on those areas so that as new constitutions are being written, women are not left out of that. and in whatever way our government will have a strong presence in egypt, libya, and all of the other places in the middle east. so we can do something good with our assistance dollars there. host: the website is women thrive.org. you also have a place on facebook. thank you very much for being with us. guest: thank you. host: we will continue the conversation tomorrow morning.

the house back in session tomorrow evening. among our guests, armstrong williams, radio talk show host to weigh in on this 2012 presidential race, he is also the author of the book reawakening virtues. jonathan turlie will be joining us on the issue of privacy. and the head of the ntsb to talk about highway safety and the recommendation this past week, no texting, no phone calls while behind the wheel all tomorrow morning. thanks for joining us on this sunday, the start of a holiday week. i hope you enjoy your weekend, and have a great week ahead. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> next, "newsmakers" with wyoming senator john brasso. then historians the discuss the series the contenders. after that, president obama talks to troops at fort bragg about the end of the iraq war. our guests on "newsmakers" this week is senator john brasso of wyoming who has just been elected the policy committee chair for the senate republicans. thanks for being with us. our two reporters will be questioning. i'll start because we're taping this on friday morning with news of a compromise being struck last night on sending struck last night on sending bills.