view police and have been chest and he says changed. later, a talk about federal funding for roads, bridges, and mass transit. as host: good morning, everyone. this monday, february 9, flags remain at half staff in memory of representative alan nunnelee, who passed away last week. lawmakers are returning to washington with no signs of a final deal on how to handle the budget for the homeland security department. also on the agenda is giving the president new authority to fight isis. another debate in washington is what to do about the situation in ukraine. german chancellor angela merkel will meet with president obama at the white house today and hopes to convince the u.s. not

to arm forces. we will start with your take on whether the west should arm the ukrainian forces against russian-backed rebels. host: the papers this morning dominating the front pages is the story of what to do about the situation in ukraine. we will begin with the front page of "the wall street journal," and their headline " the west races to defuse ukraine." "if inher assessment

russian intransigence has blocked a deal, they said, germany will move to step up sanctions including broader asset freezes. separately, the u.s. is considering supplying ukraine with lethal aid. president obama has held off on position until he sees ms. merkel, who was publicly opposed weapons deliveries come on monday morning. the confluence of events has given the previously scheduled white house meeting potentially moment to. europeans cautioned that success is far from assured and u.s. officials voiced deep skepticism mr. putin would accept any franco german plan even as they insisted they backed the peace effort. if diplomacy fails, the u.s. and europe will likely consider added sanctions or a combination of sanctions and arm transfers." this is what secretary of state john kerry said yesterday when

he appeared on "meet the press." [video clip] sec kerry: i have no doubt that additional assistance of economic kind and other kinds will be going to ukraine. we do so understanding that there is no military solution. the solution is a political, diplomatic one. but president cl hadputin president -- president puti has gotn to take the offramp and we have got to remain committed to the sovereignty of ukraine. host: yes the meeting with other leaders for the national security conference in munich, and "the wall street journal" reporting this "the economic pain could force mr. putin to reevaluate his tactics. supporters of providing legal military supplies argued that it could change the kremlin's

calculus, potentially by causing more russian casualties there. the question to all of you as washington debates this -- should the west be arming the ukraine against russian-backed rebels? willy, democratic caller. caller: how you doing g reta? host: good morning. caller: i am not for the west arming the great, particularly the united states. we hear talk of texas and secession and i don't know know how we would feel about china arming states seceding from us. host: you feel it is an issue just between the two of them? caller: well, it is part of russian territory their 17, and we keep hearing not to mess with texas and that these other states by secession, and let's say they decide to go with the civil war and the russians are arming them with how would we like that?

host: let's listen to what senator ted cruz had to say, from texas, republican. he was on cnn's "state of the union" and he believes that the u.s. should be arming the ukrainian forces. [video clip] sen. cruz: what we're doing with regard to ukraine and russia makes no sense and it isn't working. it is long past time for us to step forward and provide defensive weapons so the men and women of ukraine can defend their nations. they are our allies in the budapest memorandum and we committed ourselves to stand with ukraine to defend their territorial integrity. host: senator ted cruz yesterday on the sunday talk show, cnn's " state of the union," making the argument for why the u.s. should be running -- should be arming ukrainian forces. let lawmakers and the white house know what you think.

host: back to "the wall street journal" this morning. "ms. merkel and other german officials have specially opposed arming ukraine, arguing new weaponry can't match russian arms and forces and would likely escalate violence and torpedo negotiations. while ms. merkel has taken a tough line in public, she has told mr. putin privately that she won't oppose the was line if mr. obama opts to send weapons to ukraine. vice president joe biden said he supported arming ukraine. mr. obama has yet to make a decision, according to officials, and plans to wait to talk to ms. merkel." that happening this morning in washington. they will go before the cameras at 11:40 a.m. eastern time and we will have live coverage on

c-span so tune in. darrell, missouri, democratic caller. caller: yeah, i'm totally against arming the ukraine. we've got to understand that we spent $5 billion to destabilize ukraine and get rid of the elected government to put this guy that is in there now in their. we did that. this is our thing. i don't how we can sit up here in the media can listen to us blaming russia for something that we went in there and did. now we want to arm them? come on, how many more countries are we going to bomb? host: all right, dental. tom in minnesota, democratic caller. caller: yes, good morning. i'm very much opposed to arming ukraine. if you put the geopolitical shoe on the other foot, we would probably be invading ukraine ourselves. our history is very clear that

we have done the same sort of thing over the centuries. and essentially, we are risking the future of the planet and the entire species because we don't agree with what russia is doing. it is absolutely absurd in the nuclear age for us to be risking more -- to be risking war when we cost lives of hundreds of generations over original dispute. host: jim in ohio, an independent caller. go ahead. caller: good morning. i believe that we should not be arming anyone, because all it does is act against the united states of america. if the politicians want to on the ukraine, they should go ahead and do it out of their own money instead of trying to bankrupt america by doing. every time we get into a war it is the greatest readers of wealth we will ever see in our lifetime.

and then to have guys like john mccain on television calling people lowlife scums that is just a slap in the face to every veteran who has fought for the freedoms of all americans. host: ok, randy in michigan democratic caller. what do you think about this idea of arming ukraine forces to fight back? those that believe the west should do so say we have an alliance with ukraine and we have to stand by them. what do you think? caller: well, first of all, greta, good morning, and i have to thank you and all the fine folks down the scenes that we don't see for bringing us this great program. i think we should not -- i believe we should take the option of arming them off the table. in this world, this day and age we have to run diplomacy as long as we can without, but you also have to keep an eye on the ukrainian fighters to make sure that we don't completely deplete

them in the process of diplomacy . so that is a real tightrope i see they are working on. don't take that option off the table. you leave it on there. greta, thank you very much -- host: you, too, and on this issue of a summit and some sort of peace deal in the works, take a look at "the washington post" story this morning with their headline "summit on ukraine crisis could herald breakthrough." "a peace proposal for ukraine edged toward a possible addressed leaders of germany france, russia, and ukraine agreed on sunday to a joint summit alongside representatives of the moscow separatists who have waged a bloody campaign in the ukrainian east. the four leaders agreed to the proposed summit scheduled for wednesday in minsk, the capital of belarus, during a four-way phone call sunday. the success of the summit, though, appeared to hinge on further domestic talks monday in berlin, and it laying the

groundwork for a comprehensive settlement in the -- of the crisis in ukraine, where fighting has steadily worsened. the german government announced the summit plans on the heels of whirlwind visits last week to moscow and kiev by german chancellor angela merkel and french president francois hollande, who have lots of high-stakes to blended push to an escalation of the fighting and resolve are growing stand up between the west and russia. european and u.s. governments have accused moscow of subterfuge for denying its involvement in ukraine even as the west side the conclusive intelligence indicating that russian weapons and disguised troops are fighting in eastern ukraine to diplomats caution that stumbling blocks remain including the highly charged issue of whether recent land gains made by separatists would be recognized as part of a cease-fire agreement." james in chattanooga, tennessee, republican could return to all of you for this debate. what is your take, james? caller: well, i was very moved by a "new york times" article in

which a 23-year-old girl who had a wonderful career in the space industry and her relationship with her parents that just went there and sat on the wing of a plane after that plane was shot out of the sky. i feel if the republicans -- i feel like the republicans may not be with me as a fellow republican, but i don't believe what ted cruz said. i think we should just make sure they don't have those weapons anymore. those are some very high-tech weapons, and the russians can't be trusted with them anymore. host: ok, so how do you go about protecting ukrainians and bolstering their forces -- so your argument is to take the weapons away from russia? how do you do that? caller: well, we need to do the same kind of blockade on them that they did on cuba years ago do anything we can to blockade

them from getting any more weapons to give out just like they were halloween candy. host: back to "the washington post," it says "the obama administration has been reluctant to send weaponry to kiev but is under pressure from congress. a delegation of 15 -- john mccain, the organizer of a bilateral delegation of 15 senators and house members attending the conference, argued that the west must help ukraine defend itself and rais the war's cost toe putin. adam schiff, a democrat from california and top democrat on the house intelligence committee, said in a statement yesterday, any agreement must not allow the russian-backed rebels to benefit from the breach of the last accord. they must withdraw to the previously agreed-upon lines. i continue to believe that providing defensive weapons to allow ukraine to protect itself from russian aggression will be necessary to deter any further

violent -- violations of ukrainian sovereignty." al in minnesota, independent caller. what do you think? an issue of sovereignty, and should we help ukraine? caller: you know, i can't believe what the other guy just said, that he wanted to take the weapons away from the russians. that is kind of impossible. they have their own mind on what they are going to do. what we need to do is the old adage that whoever has the most firepower, you will become least likely to be attacked. that is common sense. what we need to do is just build up their arms for them and say look, if you are going to come in here and take this country we are going to back them 100% with arms. we don't even need to send our men in. just told the arms out front and let the russians know we will back them. russia is all most bankrupt right now and they need ukraine

to get money, that is why they are going after the ukrainians and their territory. it's that simple. we have to take control of that. just bringing those weapons in alone will deter that. host: al, what do you make of this vision by vice president joe biden saying we should on them, secretary of state john kerry saying there is no military solution, and then you have the president, who has yet to decide what to do on this, he wants to wait on hear from angela merkel and meeting with her this morning in the white house and she is would you argue no,k don't go that route, don't arm the ukraine forces. what do you make of this division? caller: well, you can forget the president. he has never made an intelligent decision on this matter in a long time to he since forever before he makes a decision. we need to make it for him and we need intelligent military advisers to make that stands.

once again, all i can tell you is that if you look back at history, history shows us how mores -- how wars are determined. if you have a strong armament coming you are not going to be attacked. it gives a foothold to hold a longer and more power to negotiate. if you don't have that, you can't make negotiations because russia will walk right over the top. host: take a look at what decision-makers in washington are saying. he was vice president joe biden on twitter. "president putin has to make a simple, stark choice -- get out of ukraine or face increasing isolation and economic costs at home." rob portman, senator from ohio, republican, saying "in administration can't even deliver what we've already promised to ukraine how long would defensive weapons take them?' john mccain saying "it is past time for america to support you can opening the arsenal of democracy that allows the people to defend themselves."

richard blumenthal, democrat from connecticut with senator john mccain "urging defensive arms for ukraine where region -- where putin's aggression continues." kelly ayotte, the public and furniture, saying "defense secretary nominee ash carter says using five to provide legal defensive weapons to ukraine. hope president listens." tweets from capitol hill on the reaction last week when things began to intensify, another discussion coming to washington this week with the plan a meeting between german leader angela merkel and the president at the white house today. and joint news conference at 11:40 a.m. eastern time and we will have live coverage on c-span. we will continue to get your thoughts on this, whether the

west should on the ukrainian forces -- should arm the ukrainian forces in response to russian-backed rebels. we have about 20 minutes or so to get more of your thoughts this morning. first, joining us on the phone is the congressional reporter with "the hill" to talk about what else is happening in washington. what is on the agenda on capitol hill? we will start with the senate this week. guest: well, they need to ask the funding bill -- past the funding bill for the department of homeland security. big issue, big contentious issue because of the immigration amendments that the house passed last month when they send it over to the senate could use out mitch mcconnell struggling last week. he brought it out not once, not twice, but three times, thinking that feeding the from over and over what you wrote the opposition from vulnerable democrats. -- would erotde the opposition from full of will democrats.

it didn't work. now they are faced with the question of how we passed the department of homeland security funding bill and not threaten on shutdown of the agency, but also satisfy conservatives who want to push back against obama's executive action on deportations. there is enough -- there is nothing planned in the senate right now as it stands because they don't know what the next step is, or at least they're not telling us. we are all waiting and seeing what mcconnell is going to come up with, how does the thread that needle could he is walking the tightrope to satisfy conservatives but passed something that might get a veto threat due to the immigration language and the dhs bill -- the funding expires on february 7. there is a tight timeline because they are not supposed to be in next week because of the presidents' day holiday. i expected that bill will be back on the floor. we just don't know what it is going to look like. host: homeland security secretary jeh johnson said

yesterday to go ahead and have this debate on executive action on immigration but don't tie it to homeland security funding. what is the argument by the administration? is it working with of their own party, with the democrats? guest: well, they are saying that dhs funding has nothing to do with immigration, why are you trying this does something -- they are framing it is so vital in the context of the attacks in paris, pointing out that the isis threat has been rising, and the international headlines that are reaching out public. they are using that urgency to say "why are you playing around with the department that is supposed to protect the homeland?" the republicans understand that argument and that is white house pass this six weeks in advance. they didn't want to play with the department of homeland security funding. they knew it would be a political issue. they said over and over -- they

keep saying over and over that we are not going to threaten the shutdown of decisions, but -- of this agency, but we need to do something on executive action. the house delay to this debate in december and it angered a lot of conservatives that they didn't hold obama's fee to the fire then and they are under real pressure from the right flank to do so on this must-past homeland security bill. it puts them in a very tough spot. immigration has put them in a tough spot and this is no exception. they are caught between the republicans and the party really running the hardline on this and guys like john boehner and mcconnell, who would like to pass something and get it on to the president. host: yeah, and this is playing out in "the wall street journal's" editorial today. they wonder, can the gop change? this is what "the wall street journal" says, "that this caucus can protest all it wants, but it can't change 54 senate votes into 60 without persuading some democrats. it is too soon to say -- it is

not too soon to say that the fate of the gop majority is on the line. precious weeks are wasting, and the commendation of wheat house leadership and around nine already -- a rump minority unwilling to compromise is going into democratic hands. the only winners will be obama nancy pelosi, and hillary clinton." how is this playing out between leadership and the rank-and-file? well, there is real tension, particularly in the house. we have seen it all year long. the republicans picked up 13 seats -- john boehner thought he would come in and roll over obama's agenda in the last two years of his presidency. instead, they have this very tough vote for speaker where more than 20 republicans voted against him for speaker. a lot of tension there. and then they brought up built that they thought were low hanging fruit and they thought

they were softballs they would hit out of the park and instead they have seen these revolts. you saw it on the immigration issue, the antiabortion bill that they had to pull because it literally did not have enough support, and the homeland security bill, porterville -- border build a couple weeks ago that they had to pull because they didn't have the support of conservatives. these are traditional conservative issues and they had to pull the stuff off the floor. obama and pelosi and reid have to sit back and not do anything and watch the republican struggle and turn these headlines on the round. host: what else is on the agenda? health, and what about new authority to fight isis for the president? guest: well, i think we should mention in the house -- we should mention the senate, but in the house there is a vote on keystone, and that is another big contentious issue that we will be seeing. the senate passed it last week

and they got nine democrats on the bill so it is bipartisan. it puts pressure on obama and house democrats to support it. it will pass the house on wednesday. and then obama is going to veto it. biggest veto of his presidency. it will only be the third veto of his presidency. and then the house and senate will have the democratic support to sustain the veto. this is all political messaging. keystone has been around for five years and it is, of course, an enormous proxy vote on climate change and the environment and everyone is playing to their base here. it is an interesting debate because there are amendments on their that the senate passed climate change amendments. it said climate change is not a hoax, and there might be conservatives and has who are wary to vote for it on that matter. of course, there will be democrats who support the keystone bill. that will make obama's veto look little bit worse for having

bipartisan bill and republicans are going to frame this as obstructionism. how many bipartisan bills is he going to veto? that will dominate the house. and i'm sorry, let me go back to your -- host: what else is on the agenda? will the president be sending over to congress his outline for a new authority to fight isis? guest: we don't know that is going to come. they are anticipating that. boehner said on thursday he expects the in the next few days. that could dominate the whole congressional dialogue, because of course that splits the parties -- that is not a partisan issue. you will hear liberals screaming , boots on the ground, you will hear republic -- conservatives screaming it doesn't allow for boots on the ground. that will be an interesting debate but nobody knows what the language is going to look like.

everybody agrees we need a new resolution. the old one is 13 years, 14 years on, and everybody agrees that those are outdated and need freshening up. tons of disagreement on what that should look like. when that hits, whenever it hits , that is going to be a tsunami. host: mike lillis with "the hill" and the weekend for congress, appreciate it. guest: thanks, greta. host: should the u.s. army ukraine -- arm ukraine against russian-backed rebels? the debate in washington ahead of president obama meeting with german chancellor angela merkel at the white house. mary republican, what is your take? caller: i think they should arm ukraine, greta. host: ok. why? caller: because he arms isis -- host: we're listening, mary. caller: they are arming isis.

who calls to tell them to get out of buildings? we have the greatest military honors and obama is trying to bring the whole country down. he is a national disgrace. arm ukraine. host: tom in west hartford, connecticut, independent caller. caller: civil answer is no. i think we have to realize that this is really a holdover from the end of world war ii. when the ukraine went after russians viciously and slaughtered many. any ethnic group should have the right to self-determination and be able to associate itself with whatever government it wishes. it is clear that there are many russians in eastern ukraine that do not wish to be part of the ethnic nation of ukraine and other parts of the country.

self-determination -- self-determination is a basic principle. we have seen this since world war ii, all across africa and south america. people should be free to go live and work and associate as they wish. if the russians were to do anything like move into central or western ukraine, there should be blue helmets en masse heavily armed. russians should not be allowed to go into ukrainian territory period. but let those people, russians go. the united states embassy supported the burning of kiev and the overthrow of the last government could u.s. embassy personnel were handing out food and supplies. there were guys running around their chests in the streets of kiev and the u.s. embassy was associating with them. the media is at fault in this because it did not explain to the american people -- american public what putin was talking

about when he talked about ukrainian fascism and ultra nationalism. host: stephen in gaithersburg maryland independent caller. caller: good morning, better. thank you for c-span, thank you for "washington journal." my simple answer is i'm not sure. however, i believe there is a lot of utility and being able to listen to our allies in europe, who will probably be able to tell us give us an idea of what foreign policy route to go down. throughout this whole debate, i have not heard anything from the polls, anything from the estonians or the latvians or the lithuanians. my understanding is that when putin is done with ukraine, the estonians will be next. as nato treaty members, i think it is important to get their

feedback. that is all i have. thank you. host: john in arlington virginia, republican. caller: i look at this three ways. if they settle right now and everybody is friendly, the rebels probably will stay where they are in their will be economy and things can -- there will be economy and things will get back to normal. if they don't, the russians will push to join with crimea and have a single estate -- singular state comprising the two rebel territories as they exist. if we arm ukraine, i don't think ukraine will have anything east of niebuhr. i think that this -- russians would react pretty quickly to that and the crisis would go way up and you would see a much more divided ukraine that there is now, including a lot of ukrainians in the russian section, and that is not helpful. host: so you don't think this would defus the situation bye

arming the ukraine forces -- caller: oh, no. you can imagine if we had difficulties on the mexican border and russian arms turned up, we wouldn't stand for that for a second. host: take a look at the front page of the "financial times" in london. "merkel to urge diplomacy in obama talks is calls grow for u.s. to arm kiev." senator bob corker of tennessee, chairman of the foreign relations committee, close to this question to angela merkel -- pose this question to angela merkel chancellor of germany. here is that exchange. [video clip] sen. corker: most of the united states congress would like to see us for despite in defensively arming ukraine. -- would like to see us participate in defensively arming ukraine. we believe one of the reasons the administration is celebrate

his german resistance to that. i wonder if you would speak to your sense as to as we urge ukraine to join us and they are under this extreme conflict, we would not at least give them defensive arms to counter the offenses that russia is taking in eastern ukraine. chancellor merkel: well, i am firmly convinced that this conflict cannot be solved with the military means. this is why we have decided to concentrate on a diplomatic solution to this crisis and at the same time we were gratified to know that that is truly a transatlantic approach, imposed sanctions.

sanctions in those areas of russia where we think we are strong, the economic area. i understand your viewpoint, and also the discussion is going on but the progress that ukraine needs cannot be achieved by more weapons. i have grave doubts about the validity of this point. that is all i can say. if we say it is correct that military means cannot solve this conflict and we think we ought to concentrate on the other options, there are already a lot of weapons there on the ground and so far that has not led to any chances of this conflict by military means. host: german chancellor angela merkel at the security conference in munich over the weekend responding to the question posed by the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee in the senate, senator

bob corker, republican of tennessee. you can hear her laying out her argument therefore why it is not a good idea to be arming the ukrainian forces. she will make that argument to the president this morning at the white house. a planned meeting that has now risen in importance. the two will hold a news conference at 11:40 a.m. eastern time, live coverage on c-span. john in cincinnati, republican. what is your take on this? caller: i think anybody who has raised kids would see the answer . the best way to solve a schoolyard bullying problem is to encourage all the kids to stand up to the bully. you don't want to fight the bully had on and you don't want to start a fight between the bully and the kid that is to don -- that is picked on. what i mean in this situation is that the bullies using trade and energy as a weapon and we need to help all of the former soviet

countries sought trading and develop energy ties to be independent of russia. if the bully uses a pretext like speaking the russian language as an excuse for invading a country , i think ukraine ought to ban the russian language, as did everyone else. -- as should everyone else. if these other things that provoke russia -- by the way they are the same things that provoke hitler, according to his take on things -- that would seem to be the most direct way to remove the problem. yeah eventually some things are worth fighting for, but a crappy strip of land on the edge of the crimea is not worth that much to the ukraine either. i bet they would happily trade a piece of land to get rid of the russian influence in their country. host: all right, john. ira in brooklyn independent caller. caller: i don't think the u.s. has any business giving any arms to the fascist, racist anti-semitic ukrainian

government. i believe this is just another sign of inter-imperialist rivalries with the u.s. and russia and syria and other places around the world. this is an attempt -- with the u.s. permit soviet missiles in cuba in 1962? why would they allow -- why would russia allow an anti-russian military alliance named nato on their borders? this is a classic example of inter-imperialist rivalry. the u.s. would like the oil in the black sea. and also to sell the fact oil in the ukraine. they manufacture this crisis and it provided the tools for the overthrow of the government. while unpopular, it was a legitimate government of the ukraine at that point. host: sharon in hanover pennsylvania democratic caller.

go ahead with your thoughts. caller: yes, good morning. i will like to say to the woman from pittsburgh who called in that if you think it is so easy to just send out military power use it in the president's chair for one day. try it -- you sit in the president's chair for one day. try it. i think we should let the diplomatic people work as hard as they possibly can. after all, france and germany and all those of european nations are much closer to russia then we are. also, i suspect congressional hawks of having fat contracts with weapons producers, as well as using this as a diversion for our own problems in this country. we simply can't arm every hotspot in the world, or we will be bankrupt. thank you very much. host: sharon mentions this

diplomatic effort that is happening by france and germany. there is a plan to meet wednesday in minsk, the capital of belarus. france germany, the leaders of russia and ukraine, along with representatives of the pro-moscow separatists will all be there to discuss some sort of peaceful solution to what is happening there. so some in the u.s., many members of congress calling on this administration to arm the ukrainian forces. that will be part of the discussion this money with angela merkel, who believes that the u.s. and the west should not take that next that. in other news this morning front page of "the washington times" on the president's strategy against isi, "obama downplays islamic state risks alters language from destroying the organization to defeating them."

"washington times" with that story this morning, as well as insider newspaper, a couple stores on this. secretary of state john kerry was asked about where we are with defeating isis and the strategy gary yesterday on the sunday talk shows and that is the headline in "the washington times." take a listen to what he had to say. [video clip] sec. kerry: i believe we are on the road to, i actually do, and it is on the facts of what is happening. first of all, the coalition is strong, more committed than ever, particularly in the aftermath of the burning of the jordanian pilot. the resounding reaffirmations of commitment throughout the arab world has been heartening and strong. we have already seen -- here is what is happening. 22% of the populated areas that they help have been taken back

already. that is without launching what we would call major offensive. it is with the emergence of the iraq he army as it is retrained to stand up again and reclaim some territory as they begin to probe. we have taken out a significant proportion of the top leadership of isis. their command-and-control facilities have been attacked from interrupting her command-and-control. they no longer can communicate as openly. they no longer travel in convoys as openly and when they are due -- when they do, they are at great risk. there is a lot more to do. we have said is the beginning that this is a long-term operation, not a short term one. we believe everything, including the governing process in iraq itself, is moving in the right direction. host: secretary of state john kerry on nbc's "meet the press" yesterday saying that the strategy is working against isis

and on the road to beating this terrorist group should also in "the washington times" this morning, "white house is feeling the pressure from congress to put together some sort of authorization plan for fighting isis. congress expects the white house to officially ask lawmakers next week to authorize the fight against the islamic state providing details -- known as an authorization for the use of military force, the request would and a months long stalemate in which each side has waited for the other to make a move. capitol hill demanded that the president proposes specific strategy for a legislative vote." that could happen next week, according to "the washington times," or it could come in the coming days from the white house could also in "the washington post" this morning "strikes are targeting islamic state

according to jordanian leaders." "jordan's air force has carried out 56 airstrikes against islamic state weapons depots and training camps in syria and iraq in the days since the extremist group revealed it had burned a jordanian pilot to death." back to the conversation with all of you about whether or not the west should be arming ukraine against russian-backed rebels. gavin in illinois, democratic caller. good morning to you. caller: good morning to you too. i don't think that we need to be destabilizing another theater in the european union there. this is a dangerous way to go with very little outcome on the good side. if russia takes to airstrikes or decides to use the air force this game will be over within a hurry.

thank you. host: all right, tim in california, independent caller. good morning to you. caller: good morning to you. i want to remind everyone that at the end of the soviet union the breakup, ukraine is the third-largest nuclear power on the face of the planet, and there were make promises by others that they would be protected by us if something should happen. well, they gave them up and sure enough -- how are we going to negotiate anything in the future is our word is in good now? host: all right, let me show you and others on the issue of nuclear weapons what secretary of state john kerry had to say also yesterday about he was asked on "meet the press" on a lot of issues and one of them was iran's nuclear talks and whether there would be another extension of the deadline. [video clip] sec. kerry: well, the only

chance of an extension i can see at this point in time is you have the outlines of the agreement but if we are not able to make the fundamental decisions that have to be made over the course of the next weeks literally, i think it would be impossible to extend. i don't think we would want to extend at that point. either you make the decisions to improve your program -- prove your program a peaceful one, or if you are unable to do that, it may tell a story that none of us want to hear. host: secretary of state john kerry yesterday on "meet the press" ruling out an extension of the nuclear talks, maybe one that would allow them to clarify some details. in other news, front page of "the new york times," "judge testified gay marriage law." -- has defied gay marriage law." "in a dramatic show of

defiance was the federal judiciary, chief justice roy moore of the alabama supreme court on sunday night ordered the state's probate judges not to shoot marriage licenses to gay couples on monday, the day same-sex marriages were expected to begin. the order, coming just hours over the january decisions of u.s. district court case were scheduled to take effect, was all most certainly going to thrust this state into legal turmoil." that on the front page of "the new york times" this morning. coming up next, we will be talking with bloomberg washington bureau chief jonathan allen about the week ahead in congress and what will be happening in the white house as well. later, american enterprise institute senior fellow karlyn bowman will be here to talk about their new report on how americans view law enforcement. if you missed it last friday the white house released the latest national security strategy.