>> dickerson: welcome back to "face the nation." we want to continue with our panel which includes peggy than noon. david ignatious. "washington post." jeffrey goldberg with "the atlantic" and michael gerson is here. i want to start with you since the attacks in paris, how if at all do you see republican race changing? a lot of people think it's changed what do you think happened? >> i think some of them are pressing important case. after paris we now have isis which showing strategic ability to strike. solidify holds on territory, it has affiliates or followers in 20 different countries. so i identify with senator graham's sense of urgency here. we seem to have a strategy in

place a five-year defeat of isis. maybe we need strategy for one to two-year defeat of isis. republicans -- many of the things are the same but the difference is urgency in leadership. >> dickerson: did you get that sense of urgency from the men you heard today or in general? >> no, i don't think anybody on the republican side or the democratic side communicates a sense that they know exactly what needs to be done, how to do it and how it could all realistically happen. i heard the other day, mike morell said one of the things that can concentrate the mind when thinking about policy, when thinking about isis, is suppose isis hit the united states as everybody fears. what would we all be thinking the next day was absolutely the right urgent strong thing to d. he said, maybe concentrate on

the answer to that question. >> dickerson: right. david, you know what that is, that would be preemptive action of some sort. isn't that -- tricky thing about that formulation we would need the initiating event to get the country behind the action it seems to me that would be then required. >> use your imagination, what would that look like to us? what would be the proper response at this point. >> dickerson: do you think the country would be behind such a thing. >> if it were hit directly the public would support, demand retaliation. i think two roots that we would fall in that case should think about following now. one to augment the direct action strikes that are special forces are already making every day inside syria and iraq. we are killing dozens of people who get back in touch with would-be attackers in the united states who come in on social media. if you get a call back, if you

are one of those people trying to direct an operation, we'll try to kill you. that is already going on, it should be augmented. second harder question is, whether to add ground troops from all the talk from mccain and graham there is not arab ground force that clear iraq or any of these places eliably. will we do that with nato, with coalition? those are the kinds of questions that we would ask the next day we should ask now. >> dickerson: don't you have to do do something after? >> we have lot of experience, it's he's he's to take some of the sunni arab cities, it's also hard to hold them. so i think -- i have very little doubt that president obama would be under huge pressure to insert ground troops in a major way. and to take territory from isis should god forbid there be an attack in america. i also know that he has a tragic sense of the difficulty of taking iraq then doing something with it. the first week we'd have

victory. second week we're being attacked by sunni militants, we've seen that movie over and over again. the challenge is huge. which is why he for many reasons, this whole thing that never has to face this question. >> dickerson: michael on refugees, dr. carson's plan that more can go into jordan what did you think of his -- >> i think republicans have hurt their ability to make critique by relative indifference. we're seeing the situation in the middle east, the massive betrayal of children on unprecedented scale, millions of children were refugees. children who are forced to work or forced into urban marriages, response of the administration according toll special advisor that they ploy for syria, he called pantomime of outrage. there should be serious moral outrage at the problem here. republicans can't provide that because they're conflicted about the issue of islam and issue of

refugees. >> the issue, analytically speaking is that americans are so tired of the middle east, they want to cauterize entire region, don't want to hear about it or know about it, don't believe anything we can do would make it better that's the problem that any policy maker who is looking for any kind of intervention is facing. >> a foreign policy person once told me that americans when they consider foreign policy issue they always think back to vietnam. or back to munich. i think -- do you know what i mean? the dynamic in play. when they think of the mid east they think that's chinatown. that's where tragedy happens no matter how hard we try to do the right thing. >> what's happening there is that young people are being put in camps or refugee situations. they are marinated in the outrage of their parents. creating generations of problems

here. this is not just, we can ignore this. creating generations of violence here. >> is it reasonable to say then let's get the christians in syria who are desperate, who want to flee, who are living in terrible conditions, let's get them over here. they appear to be people who are not connected with those who are going to blow us up. >> they are minorities in general are in great peril, we saw that with the range of minorities. i'd hate to just say christians only are the ones worried about. i heard one thing today on your show that really surprised me. i heard from john mccain talk about candidates bloviating in this race. i heard from ben carson talk about hateful rhetoric that was hurting the country. i heard from jeb bush how donald trump was preying on people's fears. the first time i can remember hearing one on one show three

candidates speak out against tone. maybe that marks -- >> let me ask michael about this. donald trump has offended a lot of different groups and lot of controversy, this year he operated new ground. he appeared, we're going to watch here for a second to make fun of disabled newspaper reporter. >> i don't know what i said, i don't remember. >> dickerson: trump denies that he was impersonating the reporter at the event, the reporter is with the "new york times" he has a disability trump says, he wasn't referring to him. picking up on david's point. donald trump is wildly popular within the polling among republicans. what is the state of things here? >> well, i think it's time, to confront not just trump but followers. it is fashionable in certain quarters to obsess of reality

tv, shock radio, social media version of reality. which is fashionable to attack people and groups. in this sort of way. this is exactly at odds with what the founders talked about virtue. in their view restraint and civility all these things that under guard democracy are undermining. >> he's got 35% it appears of the republican base. that's a significant piece but only a piece. it seems to me everybody always saying with trim that's going to do it him. that's the end of him. it's never true. but at the end of the day a cumulative affect and impression comes together and in his case will not help him. >> dickerson: thanks to all of you we'll be right back with our panel of presidential authors. can a business have a mind?

a subconscious. a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive? this holiday season, gewhat's in the trunk? nothing. romance. 18 inch alloys. you remembered. family fun. everybody squeeze in. don't block anyone. and non-stop action. noooooooo! it's the event you don't want to miss. it's the season of audi sales event. get up to a $2,500 bonus for highly qualified lessees on select audi models.

>> dickerson: we're back with our physical shall good panel. doris kearns goodman, long time george w. bush political strategist karl rove is the author of "the trial of william mckinley" john meacham's new book. and edward larson the author of "the return of george

washington: nighting the states in 1783-1789" he's also with us -- almost lost it there. let's talk about presidential at tributes we're in season of electing presidents. let's talk about each of your presidents what they did that will help us to form our choices. doris, start with you. what attributes from the presidents you've written about should we be looking for, prospecting for. >> the first thing we need to figure out is whether they can master themselves and their own emotions. have they been able to get through adversity. have they come through trials of fire. have been able to manage negative emotions. once they have grown themselves can they grow other people. can they inspire staff. can they make collaboration happen. can they communicate with people in way that country is going to understand. i really think that's what we should be looking at after dealing with the presidential candidacy. we've been dealing with polls, who said something stupid. the question, we should look at

guidance tell us something, the dead guys. >> dickerson: you've written about the dead guys and been on the inside. what in mckinley's life should we use to help us inform ourselves? >> first, doris was right. here is a man who was unbelievably courageous individual in the civil war, three battlefield commissions, suffered enormous personal tragedy in his life. these i think informed his character. in 1896 wins an election up in the air because he first of all, deliberately seeks to unite the country. his opponent is using language like the enemy's country referring to the east. attacking wall street. excoriating the rich. here is man who is determined to help working class people rise and he seeks a language that is conciliatory and unifying in his race. there by contributes great deal to winning the contest. the other thing is, that he doesn't -- he wants to initially not engage on the biggest issue

of the campaign. he wants to straddle it then wakes up in the middle -- the money question, wakes up in the middle of august realizes i don't get to choose the issues, the voters get to choose the issues i have to talk about that issue in a way that allows the people who are up for grabs in this election, work can class, to to vote for. takes on the biggest pressure group confronts the anti-immigrant, anti-catholic sentiment there by modern nice his party, creates a new coverrening coalition that lasts for four decades. >> dickerson: the american protective association. john, give us attribute that we should look for from george herbert walker bush. >> stability. the fundamental political transaction in the democracy, do we trust our fate in his hands or her hands. and george h.w. bush became president through series of life experiences, he was able to convince enough people that he was someone who could be trusted

at the helm. it was not a glamorous figure, he was not greatest of other for i think safe to say. but he gave up up a sense of command, i think that whether it was being last president of the world war ii generation, series of jobs, almost impossible to imagine now someone with his resume getting even remotely through a primary. u.n. ambassador, chairman of the republican national committee during watergate, what second prize. director of the cia, vice president for eight years. he was a public servant who i think culturally and temperamentally had as much in common with the founding father as has had with his own successors. >> dickerson: i want to talk about present day in a moment. where did george washington, my goodness, he seemed to have it all. what would you pick in terms of something we should look for fellas and women who are running these days? >> did he have it all.

everything doris said about attributes of leadership, washington exemplified. i think of the scenes, courageous, consensus, cautious risk taker. he was courageous he always led from the front, whether from revolution. he was in front. and as consensus, doris of course famously talked about rival are lincoln. nobody put together a team of rivals like that. in the same group, he wanted to pull consensus together. that's how he led his battles he call all his lieutenants together get their advice then think about it then make a decision. he made them all part of the team. then encouraged risk takers, which i think we need in a president. he was willing to think of yorktown then as president, other things. the national bank. he was a risk taker, always

cautious. always by building a team first, that is how washington made it work in a very difficult time. >> one thing i'd like to add what they're looking for, they're all ambitious when they run for president s. there ambition doubled is it for the people, accomplishing something that will stand the test of time. i think about the risks that lyndon johnson took when he became president after kennedy died he made priority to have that civilized bill that would end segregation in the south pass. if he had failed in that, his whole presidency would have fail, he would have never been elected in november. even succeeding he knew he was going to undo the south for a generation for the republican party. he took that risk then once that ambition was fulfilled, he wanted to go for voting rights, affirmative action. when you feel that as a president, if you're really able to cruise that power to do something important then you become a different person. >> dickerson: let's talk about risk taking for a moment. seems like that we're talking about leadership.

we hear the word a lot but bent out of shape. john, what would you say in george herbert walker bush's career, jeb said going back on no new taxes pledge was great symbol of modern presidential leadership. i don't know if you would pick that. what moment would you pick that was risk-taking moment where he really stepped up? >> well, in 1968 as member of congress that houston he voted for the fair housing act which lifted r discrimination. he had opposed 1964 civil rights act that doris mentioned when he was running fog the senate. once in 1964. once he had power, did he the right thing. he consistently did that. 1988 campaign was hard hitting race. but once he got to washington, he tried to seek consensus. he have members of congress come down take pictures with the polaroid one step, the early selfie. he would -- no one used the horseshoe pit, camp david as much as he did.

to george h.w. bush it was one long class reunion. some of his best friends were democrats. for him, the ambient reality of washington was more bipartisan one and so, when he faced tough decisions he was able to make a consensus-based one, it hurt him with the right. hurt him with his own party, he broke with the base of his party on read my lips. i asked him once, which is your regret, he said, shouldn't have said "read my lips." >> is there a reason why you pointed to me when you kept saying the right? >> with great love. dickerson: we'll come back after this commercial talk about mckinley with karl rove and rest of our panel as well.

>> dickerson: we're back with our presidential books panel. go back to you on mckinley and the american protective association. tell us what this is and why there might be parallel to it in today's republican party. >> one quick comment much we tacked about all these presidents, lincoln with rivals and washington and so forth.

presidents have certain amount of self confidence and self awareness, they have cob confident that they can command these personalities and self aware that they're not necessarily and should not be always the smartest person in the room. mckinley was like this as well. this is why he brought together the divergent elements of the republican party. the example, largest pressure group in america in the 1980s is the american proceed -- 1890s, it is a anti-catholic, anti-immigrant group founded in clinton, iowa, it has millions of members, plays a huge role in voter guides to tell people how to vote. and they declare in the 1896 that one candidate is unacceptable that is william mckinley he's thought to be too close to the catholics. he's smart enough to know that the country is changing rapidly. many of the new immigrants are catholics and not from the normal sources of immigration. they're not from the british isles from eastern europe and southern europe and central

europe. he wants to modernize his party he wants to win, he has to get the vote of catholic voters. urban et knicks. he goes out to do so by i.t. rally taking on the apa frontally but in a very smart way. he doesn't call them names. he doesn't excoriate he knocks them. he's a member of secret catholic set his campaign puts out list of secret societies to which he belongs, the grand army of the republicans. college fraternity. he then on first day of the republican national convention demonstrates that he's in command by not having the traditional invocation offered by a protestant priest but jewish rabbi, deliberately saying to the apa i'm in charge, you aren't. this coalition that he creates for 40 years has a significant number of catholics and urban workers, he's the first republican ever endorsed by

member of the catholic hierarchy. >> dickerson: ump r you were talking about washington and saying cautious risk taker. convincing him to come to the convention, the train of evils must be sorely felt. people maybe are weren't up in arms, he wasn't going to go yet. that sort of smartness about political capital. talk about that a little bit. >> washington was a tremendous retail politics, he knew people, he was dignified but he wasn't aloof. he had the sense about where the country was going, he knew that in the years after the revolution, before the new country, that a stronger government was needed. we needed national market economy, that required central government that controlled interstate commerce. we needed a strong country that could raise taxes and build military bus we needed national defense. he showed the issues were economic progress, and respect

overseas of strong military, national security. and realized the country had to be ready to buy that. idea of the new constitution which he strongly supported from the time of the revolution. had to be popular sense. how to bring the people together, he knew he only had limited capital from the revolution. he had to wait for the time was right, timing was right and build together large consensus. he would only go when he had a vision of what could happen, cautious risk taker. waiting for the right time to build consensus. that's what he did. >> dickerson: presidents have good sense of timing. do you see in our current political moment something one of the presidents you've written about would grab say, this is what they would do. >> i think two things. two of the guys that, one fdr, think about how confusing isiss we don't even know where they are, we can't figure out on a map where they are. in 1942 we were in similar

situation, we lost the asian theater he he says i want everybody to get a map in front of them for fireside chat i'm going to point out why this is a different war. why it has different methods why you have to care about what's happening. because it's our security we're going to get through this. unlike anything i've ever seen, more maps in that room than ever. even the guys who didn't like map, i want to watch what fdr is going to do or listen to him. we should do that now. we need to understand from our president where isis is, we need to look on our maps, have to figure out where it is, what we can do about it how it's going to affect us. >> dickerson: we're going to have this conversation and continue online. thank you all for being with us. there's lot more i can talk about unfortunately we'll do that right after the show, it will be posted later on "face the nation" website. we'll be right back.

pc does whaaat?! (helicopter engine roars) ♪ (music begins. the song, danger zone by kenny loggins plays from the pc) ♪ pc does what?! ♪ hey, guy! pc does what?!

shhhh pc does what no pc has done before. does yours?

>> dickerson: until next week for face the make i'm john dickerson. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

about to inflict more damage before he surrendered. the explosive new ev . the suspect in the planned parenthood shooting was about to inflict more damage before he surrendered. the explosive new evidence investigators uncovered. >> the police officer known as san francisco's hot cop, arrested. the crash he was involved in that sent two people to the hospital. attack on a planned parenthood office colorado. beside . good evening. we are learning new information tonight about the alleged gunman in the deadly attack on a planned parenthood office in colorado. besides shooting, cbs reporter david begneau on what else the suspect was planning to do. >> reporter: investigators are still processing the crime scene,