well i'm john donvan in washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture a republican representatives comes out in support of it acts like america's wealthiest one can say no that others don't know about the good old days of the grand old party also as the middle class continues to suffer new numbers suggest many can't even afford to rent a home it's now time we end the failed experiment of reaganomics and call on the rich to pay their fair share to help this country and the taliban has ceased talks

with us officials in afghanistan should we accept this is the last straw and withdraw from the country. you need to know this somewhere or grover norquist is freaking out the millionaire lobbyist and anti-tax master of the republican party may be losing his grip on power but a freshman republican representative rip proffered is introducing legislation in the tea party controlled house to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires crawford's legislation mirrors what democrats in the senate have been trying to do for months at a small surtax to anyone who makes more than two million a year on a close to representative crawford said about the legislation if we're going to make any progress in addressing the deficit and the debt eventually then we need to find compromise and so it looks like at least one voice in the republican party is waking up to the reality the situation that republicans can't ride

a rich people only engender to an election victory in two thousand and twelve even though they seem eager to try as vice president biden said in ohio iowa today republicans are about protecting the privileged but it wasn't always this way. these guys have a fundamentally different economic philosophy we do. our philosophy ours values the workers success of a business values the middle class and the success of our economy simply stated work out for voting in the private sector. protecting the privileged sector in the old days of the republican party there wasn't just one voice willing to make the super rich sacrifice just a little bit more to protect the middle it was in fact a party platform here's the big picture. back after world war two we came out of world war two with an absolutely massive here it is right here this is

this is debt in the united states literally from the revolutionary war war of eighteen twelve the civil war world war one world war two and the question is how did the white eyes in the how are the republican president pay off all of this debt and create this incredible drop all the way down to the point where reagan came into office and with his tax cuts on the rich exploded the debt and clinton dropped the debt and then bush came in with his tax cuts on the rich explode the debt again so how did eyes and how are do this after world war two very simple he'd borrowed money and spent it he created a national highway system the equivalent of today building a high speed rail system across the country and it created a boom for communities all across the nation and for him and manufacturers we want to get products support for export which of course stimulated our economy and a down where it used to be that paid down the debt he created eisenhower nine hundred fifty three and department of health education and welfare welfare and made

it a cabinet position to reduce the number of hungry and poorly educated americans and stimulate the economy to pay down our debt he pushed for and built the st lawrence seaway linking the great lakes with the atlantic ocean to build trade with europe thus creating manufacturing jobs for. sport those stimulating the economy and paying down our debt he reached out to alaska and hawaii and brought them into the u.s. he openly supported a top income tax rate of ninety one percent of the very very rich which helped pay down our debt he openly supported corporations paying over thirty percent of all tax collections at the federal level we shall pay down our debt today it's closer to fifteen percent he pushed for federal aid for r. and d. so in one hundred fifty six i.b.m. built the first hard drive in one nine hundred sixty the laser was imbedded with largely federal funds he openly supported unionized workers having the right to organize which kept pay up thus increasing tax income to the federal government paying down the debt he aggressively defended social security and said the right

wing oil men in texas who want to privatized it were in eisenhower's were stupid and their number is small and in one hundred fifty six he pushed for a twenty five percent increase in the minimum wage further stimulating the economy and helping pay down our debt he was anti-war and in one nine hundred fifty nine invited cruise ship to the united states let's begin the process of what we today called the tone which kept our military budget from exploding and helped us pay down our debt in one hundred fifty three he fulfilled his nine hundred fifty two in pain play a form of vote for peace vote for eisenhower by ending the war in korea we stop the hemorrhaging of money from that war and help pay down our debt he made it easier for veterans to get their g.i. bill benefits discounted mortgages free college education that's building the middle class stimulating the economy which paid down our debt he supported civil rights aggressively supported the one nine hundred fifty four supreme court decision brown versus board that led to the integration of schools in fact in one thousand fifty seven thousand federal troops in arkansas it would force paving the

way for the creation of an african-american middle class that further stimulated the economy and pay down our debt and on his way out of office he warned us about the military industrial complex which is now bankrupting us by tripling our defense budget since one thousand nine hundred seventy we a greater percentage of it going to private for profit corporate. than any time in the history of the us these were all considered pro-american back then and they were also considered conservative positions during the eisenhower administration republicans real republicans please take back your party. so as republicans let their party get hijacked by millionaires and billionaires over the last thirty years the middle class has been screwed and that's most evident in a new report from the federal center for housing policy which found one in four working households in america more than ten point five million families spend more

than half of their pretax income on rent and putting a roof above their heads on top of that a new report from the national low income coalition found that there is no community in america none in which someone can afford rent and the other essentials to live by working at a minimum wage job in fact that eighty six percent of the county surveyed americans couldn't afford rent basics even when they made twice the minimum wage and a huge chunk of their paychecks go into housing that means more and more americans have to make tough choices for gas clothing or heat in the winter college or health insurance so is it time we end the thirty year experiment reaganomics and call on the rich to pay their fair share in taxes just as republican representative or a crawford is proposing here offer his take on this is just pour a reporter with the daily caller jeff welcome. great to have you with us how much longer do middle class families who are losing their jobs and health care after wait for wealth to trickle down since one thousand nine hundred we would see trickle down you expect it to happen because of the tax code or as are other things

of the economy going on it are unrelated to the tax code when you talk about trickle down and i spect i expected to happen because in eighty one when reagan became president he said that if we change our tax code so that millionaires and billionaires is painted eighty four or seventy four percent income tax rate sort of paying twenty eight percent and corporations instead of paying thirty five percent of actual the total federal collections they're now paying over fifteen percent he said of all that happened in the rich got richer it would trickle down to the rest of us it looks to me like what's happening to the rest of us is poverty i'll tell you that you will so he raises. all those top earners back to where they were on tour eisenhower and kennedy was out what does that do does it doesn't make us feel better or does a really trickle down to haze off our debt and stimulate the economy does that stimulate the economy to shift you know does do we have evidence that will will they will that paid out the debt are you will go to more spending by the government to get your ex why it's a little wet have a question i think people are willing to pay more taxes if there's some kind of to show they're getting something they're looking at ways to go i mean we could we

could go back to one hundred thirty five and i mean we could look at the tax increases of the one thousand nine hundred so we could look at the tax and increases of the one nine hundred thirty s. where we went from twenty five percent on the very rich to over ninety percent of the very rich and in both cases what happened was an increase in employment an increase in g.d.p. but more recently bill clinton raised taxes three percent newt gingrich stood on the floor of the house of representatives and said if this passes there will be a great depression like no one has ever seen before it'll be the end of the american economy instead we've got a balanced budget out of it for three years in a row which newt gingrich and which every single republican house voted against a balanced budget for three years in a row and we decreased the american debt so again why shouldn't we say to wealthy people and you know obama wants to say you know only over a quarter million dollars this guy is saying over only over two million dollars a year you get a lot of paid over three percent yet a lot more going on back i think you had some give and take i think you had some cuts coming out of clinton and you had more wheeling and dealing going on back then

and with the the welfare reform and things like that that that made the economy grow as well now the taxes went up but you had a you had a real ever been it was pretty irrelevant because it was a boom time there were that many people had a lot of things in the economy going on that land a lot of confidence in the economy when a lot of investing into like the tech age that was coming up at the you know toward the end of the clinton years so i things going on right now i think there's a lot of that it could be said about it we're going to tell you but it was really five g. all this you know what you have the bits you have the crisis and you have a lot of other things right we've got all these things are brought to us. by phil gramm deregulating the banks and the regulating housing and to regulating derivatives his wife wendy in ninety two reagan appointee at the end of the bush administration that led to this incredible crash i you know i agree we should go back and re regulate those things and make banking boring again instead of dangerous but none of that is going to put our economy back together i don't think raising taxes especially going to do the trick it has in the past you could show that is a kind of circumstantial thing that happened in the past which you could also use

it in the eighty's it did in the thirty's it did in the in the one nine hundred eighteen that did in the eight hundred sixty s. the thirty's a bit different to hoover what he really did to the great depression i was talking about before harding i'm talking about warren. wilson and you know raise taxes up to ninety one percent harding came into office nine hundred twenty one drop them from ninety one percent out of twenty five twenty five percent and the result of that was the twenty's this boom which was sort of it's totally a ball to he was totally involved but in the thirty's you know when you talk about raising taxes yeah crash it in the depression happened but there were some they raised taxes took a lot of time together pression and you think that that is why we approach i think it was a war to you know there was necessarily you think to do with so you think you think massive government spending is necessary to a depression but this one it took it took a whole new reshuffle of the economy clearly so i don't know if i'm asked don't think raising taxes on the rich is going to be the way to save the economy. has got to pay the bills and if you're if you're saying that massive spending like world war two massive government spending gets us out of an economy why not do that kind

of massive spending to build a national high speed rail system like the chinese are or you can do like the spanish and portuguese are doing in their economies and you know they're putting they're doing austerity they're doing what what will this reality will be will have the united states we go down to speak i think well that's really going to give it its what will happen if we go the austerity spree that jeff thanks for coming by appreciate your perspective and it's a legitimate we need to have those discussions as the middle class shrinks and the only jobs available are minimum wage ones more and more americans are depending on food stamps to me me and. and these food stamps are keeping millions of children out of desperation that the number of children living in extreme poverty which is defined as a household earning less than two dollars a day was cut in half from two point eight million to one point four million thanks to food stamps so why then did fox so-called news this morning do a piece on food stamps and call for their elimination i'll have an answer for that later in the show in tonight's daily take. after the break the taliban has suspended afghanistan talks with u.s.

officials the peaceful resolution the country nowhere in sight is the time we station all withdrawal. we just put a picture of me when i was like nine years old until the truth. i confess and i am going to get a sense that i was a rap and hip hop is second and. he was kind of the jester. i'm very proud of the world with its place.

you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so silly you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and you hear see some other part of it and realized everything you thought you don't i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.

more setbacks for the administration's war strategy in afghanistan after u.s. soldiers snapped in massacred sixteen afghan civilians including nine children afghan president hamid karzai called for all nato troops to be pulled out of rural areas which is most of the country i could throw a wrench in the u.s. exit strategy which depends on handing afghanistan over to nato and afghan security forces by twenty fourteen but clearly after kill squads body desecrations koran burnings and now this massacre the afghan people want the u.s. military out of their country and another blow to the u.s. exit strategy came today with the taliban suspended negotiations with u.s. diplomats in order to end the civil war in afghanistan a power sharing deal. with the taliban must be worked out but taliban leaders

walked away from the table claiming that the u.s. keeps changing the terms of the negotiations so after a decade of war both sides are reaching a tipping point a new gallup survey shows that half the nation our nation wants the u.s. troop withdrawal date currently scheduled for twenty fourteen pushed up but as though all of this turmoil on the ground in afghanistan isn't happening president obama and our top ally in the war british prime minister david cameron reiterated their commitment to the current withdrawal timeline. do i think we can get to a situation by the end of twenty fourteen where we have a large afghan national army a large afghan police files both of which are pretty much on track and that with the afghan government capable of taking care of the own security in a way that doesn't require large numbers of foreign troops and that country isn't a threat in the way that it was in the past in terms of a base for terrorism yes i think we can achieve we're now in a position where given our starting point we're making progress and i believe that

we're going be able to make our achieve achieve our objectives in twenty four but with violence spilling over and calls for the coalition of forces to get the hell out of afghanistan are these guys being naive about the current timeline for withdrawal here discuss this as you like but the national security reporter at think progress ill i welcome back. thanks for having me tom thanks for your thanks for joining us obama and cameron are still optimistic about their timeline for withdrawal should they be after everything that's happened after after today's events. well i think that the response we saw today from the administration and from from the british as well really reflects what i think could only be seen as a degree of uncertainty right now senior advisers to secretary of defense leon panetta were telling journalists that the messages that supposedly were coming from homemade karzai about encouraging or calling for even a u.s. withdrawal from rural areas and forward operating bases was actually not delivered

in the meeting so i think there's an uncertainty and really we need to wait and see what concrete demands our requests come from how many cars are as government and then examine how the administration responds in kind how are we supposed to head off to nato and afghan forces on cars i once. i think that is definite you they definitely an important question karzai is in a very tough place politically following especially the massacre this weekend but certainly i think it's safe to assume that in the afghan parliament that there were calls for a full ought to calling on the u.s. to fully withdraw all foreign troops to leave now cars i obviously sees that the security also depending on a presence if you a foreign troops he his government as well as the united states were hoping to go she had a strategic partnership agreement which would actually extend through twenty fourteen and possibly beyond to keep the special forces and advisers on the ground in afghanistan in some sort of

a support role for afghan forces now i think karzai is probably facing even more political pressure to get a full for withdrawal of nato troops and how that plays out in terms of future negotiations between the afghan government and the taliban is a very important question as far as negotiations with the taliban go how realistic is that whole process that we can negotiate our way out over through this thing particularly with them saying you know we know you're leaving with this way. well i think there had been a lot of hope i think at least in through january there had been signs of at least some progress now mind you those talks were bilateral at that point between the united states and the taliban some of the deliverables that seemed to be coming out of those included the taliban being pleased that there seemed to be movement on negotiating the release of some senior taliban commanders from guantanamo bay and from you know the end in terms of a broader moving forward toward

a possible by lateral negotiations that would incorporate the karzai government it seemed as if there was progress with the taliban announcing that they would be opening offices in qatar the idea being this might be some sort of a venue in which in which multilateral negotiations could be initiated now i think that certainly the taliban have indicated they will not be opening that office that was another one of the announcements made today and with the break up of talks between the taliban and the united states that really does not leave much in terms of ongoing negotiations or communications between either the u.s. and the taliban let alone the karzai government and the taliban so if we were able to somehow patch this back up and get the taliban involved again and get karzai government involved and i'm sure that there's a lot of people in the state department working on that right now my conservative warhawks here in the united states are lower if you go she is just as easily and

then go on to argue particular as we go into november that the president's making deals with terrorists. it certainly is possible but i think in terms of the shifting political winds in the united states we're seeing conservatives and republicans starting to call for a withdrawal as well you know newt gingrich was making sounds earlier this week about that we aren't going to fix afghanistan rick santorum has made similar comments recent polling done earlier this week was showing that for the very first time republicans are evenly split on whether the war in afghanistan has actually been worth both the financial and human costs so although it's assumed that this is a bit of a partisan issue i think what we're seeing now is a genuine shifting in the in the public sentiment toward this war that goes across the political spectrum. in the last minute we have here is there a way out without a deal with the taliban. it's hard to envision a situation in which the united states considers it to be a satisfactory situation for a withdrawal

a great deal had been riding on these negotiations and that said i don't think that the possibility of these negotiations moving forward is off the table yet it seems very uncertain what exactly it is that the taliban has said they are not going to engage in or engage in with with regards to diplomacy with either the united states or the karzai government right now we're hearing a lot of messages coming from both the taliban spokespeople as well as from the karzai government now exactly what those mean and how many of those will actually be implemented and what that's going to look like even a month from now i think really only time can tell and. it's certainly seems that we like the thanks so much for being with us. thank you for having me to end the war in afghanistan we need to rediscover our roots here's the big picture george washington was our first president and a federalist that was the conservative party of the day although george was sort of you know lukewarm about it when he actually became president there were no political parties but he gave

a long rambling warning about foreign entanglements and foreign wars in his farewell address which was by the way ghost written by james madison our fourth president or probability opposition to the war of eighteen twelve destroyed the federalist party the first republicans the first conservatives they were anti-war and a lead in the creation of the new york pieces cited nine hundred fifteen. this is the are of conservative anti-war sentiment in america them that i'm sharing so here we had the war of eight hundred twelve then then the mexican american war abraham lincoln was a member the us congress at the time he was totally disgusted with an eight hundred forty seven he wrote it is a fact that the united states army and marching to the rio grande marched into a peaceful mexican settlement and frighten the inhabitants away from their homes and their growing crops linking oppose the war he called on president polk for proof that the war was necessary he said before congress that soil was not ours and

congress did not annex or attempt to annex it he voted for a resolution declaring the war was unnecessary and accused polk the president of violating the constitution starting the with the mexican american war from what george washington's presidency in the seventeen eighties all the way to the one nine hundred seventy s. republicans were the anti-war party they opposed world war one they condemned president woodrow wilson for taking us and into it glenn beck still goes off on him about that they opposed our entering world war two here's some quotes from some republican members of congress representative fred bradley of michigan this is in the lead up to world war two before we had to close before pearl harbor he said think your vote over seriously tonight my colleagues because this may be your last chance to cast a vote for peace constitutionally declared wars are out of date word today is by presidential dictatorial to create out by the voice the people and represent of george the george dinero of michigan he said we're not at war and no nations ever suggested or insinuated that if we are to become the object of its wrath of us we are provoking these republicans trying to avoid

a war with hitler congressman hamilton fish the republican from new york in the one nine hundred forty s. he said we have much more to fear from the war makers from within than from our enemies without others don't be afraid to have learned go you know be afraid if we don't have to go to war congressman lewis level of indiana the interventionist tell us that appears but is a horrid word they would have us believe that appeasement and war is wrong that appeasement to keep war. it is perfectly all right and congressman daniel reed from new york another republican these were all anti-war republicans lost our young men again be called to go three thousand miles this is to fight hitler keep in mind to sacrifice their lives for inept leaders foreign warlords and profiteers is the american youth to be led to the slaughter by the paid propaganda of those who are blood for financial profit and congressman do a short the republican from missouri on the floor of the house of representatives said little did we ever realize that we would live to see the hour when a president in time of peace said we were at peace europe was at war when no one

has attacked us where no one has insulted us would ask the american people to grant him the dictatorial power they can strip picks conscript young manhood of his nation in order that they might goose step to the commands of generals and salute brass adds this is when roosevelt was talking about having a draft because we might have to go to war against hitler that eisenhower ran in one nine hundred fifty two after the war but during the korean war that harry truman another democrat had started on a platform a vote for eisenhower vote for peace he was it was against the korean war truman it started here it is. the number one for the number one job. oh oh oh oh oh oh i. hate bill i did was an eisenhower republican he used to claim a complaint about the democrat wars including the vietnam war started in sixty four by l.b.j. the democratic party pretty much started every war in the twentieth century until reagan invaded grenada to get a political balance even with vietnam mcgovern ran as

a democratic peace candidate in seventy two nixon ran as the super peace candidate with a secret plan to end the war right away and he won reagan change that republicans became the party of not just war but a chicken hawks people like reagan and cheney and today's long list of neo con chicken hawks who have never been to war now want to send our poor people's kids off to iran it's time to get back to the american roots of interventionism. crazy oh i'm g.s.t. if you owe a fifteen year old arkansas teen was having some fun sending random text messages earlier this week until her prank backfired a girl just happened to text a local detective telling him that she had hid the body now what knowing whether as a harmless prank or part of a more sinister plot the detective launched a full investigation into where the terrorists came from trace the girl's phone number went to her house to interview both her and her father after some length any

lengthy questioning the duke detected term of the text just another case of kids will be kids and let it roll off with a warning in related news parents all across america told their kids last night see this is why i told you to be careful what you text. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then a glimpse something else you hear sees some other part of it and realize that

everything is all. part of the big picture.