diplomacy over iran's nuclear program. he won a major election victory four months ago in june. succeeding the former iranian president. some international observers are dare to believe that despite 35 years, the new president can usher in a era of talks between the u.s. and iran. at the un he said that iran was willing to, quote, engage immediately in time-bound and result-oriented talks to build mutual confidence, end quote. on iran's nuclear program. the new president noted that io januaries had voted for, quote, a discourse of hope, both home and abroad, unquote. they did so in june. when he was elected. iran says the president would be willing to cooperate on a

range of foreign policy issues including syria. question, was new ground broken this week between the united states and iran? >> yeah, it certainly was. we have in this fellow tough, intelligent, grainy and diplomat, a hardliner, someone who has been given the franchise to negotiate with the morning, to get rid of the sanctions on iran because they are hurting badly. and i believe that this fellow is basically committed to do that and get that accomplished. he knows what the americans will want. and there's a real possibility we could have a deal with this fella. frank through opposition to this, him and obama doing this comes from israel and the war party in the united states, washington post, wall street journal and all of those who don't want it between the united states and iran. >> what's this?

>> lindsay graham has alled for authorizing war on iran right now -- >> what's that got to do with mccain? >> he and mccain are like one. he wants to attack not simply the nuclear facilities but the whole defense establishment. >> he campaigned on a promise that he would reengage with the west. he won, a surprising upset. and they got the message because he has running room. and the sanctions are crippling. the value of the money -- >> against iran. >> against iran are crippling. and they want a nuclear deal. he said we can get a nuclear deal in three months. that's a little ambitious probably. but if they're willing to put a cap on the uranium that they enrich, if they let in inspector, this is doable. and in mid-october, they'll meet with the europeans, john kerry will probably be there. they have already put the measures out. they are inviting proposals

back. we will see soon whether this is serious. and you know, sure looks serious to me. >> and they use the nuclear energy for civilian purpose, cardiac equipment. and they want to sell their oil and generate their own electricity -- >> well, they made a calculation, can i say one thing? i think they have made a calculation f they go nuclear, they set off an arms race in the area that they cannot win. >> they want to sell their oil? >> the number one difference this week at the united nations general assembly compared to past years is that israel is now not sitting in between teheran and washington in a possible conversation, including iran's nuclear ambition. >> what does that mean? >> if we roll it back one year, when the general assembly met a year ago, the united states was engaged in the presidential

election, preoccupied and the israel prime minister seized the stage to give one of the performances using a red magic marker to show the world how close iran was to developing a nuclear weapon. that set the tenor of the entire conversation around fear over the possible accusation of nuclear weapons by teheran. >> before i turn to you, obama at the un -- >> the america prefers to resolve our concerns over iran's nuclear program peacefully. although we are determined to prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. >> the president also emphasized caution. >> the road blocks may prove to be too great. but i firmly believe the path must be tested. >> the president was also cautious and critical. >> at the un, he was sharply critical of u.s. foreign policy

including the use of sanctions on the iranian economy, quote, these sanctions are violent, pure and simple. whether called smart or otherwise, sanctions cause warmonger and human suffering, unquote. and approximate he criticized the use of u.s. drones, quote, terrorism is a violent courage and no knows no country or national border. but the violence and extreme actions such as the use of drones against innocent people in the name of combating terrorism should also be condemned, unquote. the israeli government told its diplomats to meet the hall before he spoke. there was no public hand shake. something the iranian president later explained in an

interview. >> well, afterall, we were speaking of two countries who have had no relations for 35 years. so it's clear that to begin talks requires some reparation work. and whenever the prep work is completed, i believe it's possible to have a meeting. perhaps if we had more time here in new york we may have been able to coordinate what was necessary for that meeting to take place. >> how are you impressed by the new leader of iran? >> let's start remembering the fact that this is a man who said we were able to create a calm environment in order for us to complete one of their major nuclear facility. he is an expert at creating calm environments. he does it very well. very sophisticated. but his basic policies are just the same as they were.

this is a very dangerous time for the world because if we let iran go forward with their nuclear program and they are not far from completing it, they've got hundreds of center finals. they are a country that's swimming in oil and energy. the only reason they are doing it of course is to develop. ♪ already weapons at some point. let me finish -- >> not going for a bomb. >> all i am saying is, it makes no sense to believe that these people have energy on every level of the next game, building for nuclear electricity. >> he says the holocaust didn't exist. he didn't do anything like that. he did not do that. you understand? >> yes. >> he made other different comments. we don't have to go into all of the comments. that's not the point.

i am really concerned about what this country can do and what threat they represent and from the israeli point of view, you never take the slightest risk. if they develop nuclear weapon, they could destroy israel within minutes. >> and what would happen to them? >> israel -- >> a bomb -- >> let him finish. >> israel has to defend itself. >> i agree with that. >> and after israel gets bombed, i'm sure iran will get bombed. >> you may not like it, he said, what do you think i am, nuts? we're going to build one and the americans have 5,000. >> not everyone was impressed with him. including the outgoing israeli ambassador to the u.s. >> what in his speech was peaceful? we don't get it. he called the united states a warmonger. made no concessions on the

nuclear program. talked about israel, didn't mention israel but that palestine was occupied. i saw no elements of peace in the speech at all. they have a 30-year history of supporting terrorists around the world. they have suppressed the iranian people there. is not a regime you want to see get its hand on a nuclear weapon. >> you want to comment on that? >> well, one of the key things that happened this week in president barack obama's own speech is he said outright that iran z a signatory of the nuclear treaty could continue to create nuclear energy for electricity. the israelis are not a signatory. and they are fining themselves up against the wall with how they can deliver rhetoric that puts pressure on the situation. >> the israelis don't want iran to even have a peaceful nuclear

program. and there's a debate among their leadership and pun lick that's just as contentious. and you have some members of the cabinet saying, look, we have to find a moment here where we have to say yes. they are entrenched in an argument they have made for 10 years and now there's an opening and the president of the united states is taking it. >> something else, both nations have nuclear reactors. i have visited -- well, you can't get near it, but the eye glasses and up on the side of the mountain, you can see it functioning. go ahead. >> the basic point here, united states bottom line is iran can have a peaceful program because it signed the npt. no bomb. the israeli position is, no nuclear program at all. they got to stop enriching uranium, get it all out of

there. no capability. the iranians agree, they have a capability of build -- >> no, they haven't reached that level -- >> they have the capability they just haven't -- >> they just brought in, they'll be able to develop the amount of nuclear materials within a short period of time. >> they've got 20% uranium, not enough for one bomb. >> and that's why they've got the 3,000 -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> it's like saying to the u.s. you can't have renewable energy because you have a lot of coal. >> on friday, the new york times had an excellent piece which i think the audience would find satisfying. we will be back to this issue. if the un was round one of the nuclear negotiations with iran, who came out ahead? iran? or united states?

>> iran. he refused to take that meeting as though he were some guy sitting on a rope line shaking hands with the president of the united states. >> well, there was a lot of behind the scenes ground work laid to the meeting that didn't happen. and the iranians in the end decided it was a bridge too far for their politics. and the same thing happened in 1995 when there was a new diplomat and they were trying to do it. to read a lot into that is ridiculous. both of the leaders won because they are finally getting after 35 years of a stalemate. >> i think he comes out ahead because we need discussion. and obama admitted that in his own speech that iran can proceed forth with a peaceful nuclear power generating facilities and that israel is now sidelined out of the conversation. >> i don't think this was the

kind of gesture that franklin spies confidence that he wouldn't meet with the president. that wasn't the big issue one way or the other. so i don't give it that much weight. but we are in a very delicate situation. >> i'll represent the point of view of him. he has hardliners at home. >> yep. >> he did not want to shake the hand now. that will come later. it seems he has a great deal of diplomatic cunning. in order to maintain constituents at home so they'll be solemn during the proceedings: >> sure. >> i think you feel around the edge of something that's important. >> i would grow with that. >> when we come back, ted cruz talk-a-thon.

cruz talk-a-thon. >> intend to speak in support of defunding obamacare until i am no longer able to stand. >> reporter: ted cruz republican senator from texas did speak on defunding obamacare, extensively. >> when you have a law that is causing more and more people to lose their health insurance, you have a law that's not working. >> reporter: and he spoke occasionally veering off topic. >> i did not like green egg ham.

>> reporter: and he spoke comparing opponents of obamacare defunding to the appeasement of the nasty. >> he told the british people, accept the nazis. yes, they'll dominate europe. but that's not our problem. let's appease them. >> reporter: and he spoke and admitted fatigue. >> i will confess as we sit here a few minutes before 7:00 a.m., i'm a little bit tired. >> reporter: in tend, the senator cruz spoke for 21 hours and 19 minutes on the floor of the senate, a marathon speech that began at 2:41 tuesday and ended the next day wednesday at noon. as he stated, senator cruz wanted to bring attention to the affordable care act. obamacare. the legislation that the senator considers a job killer and not affordable. this is directly from the republican majority in the

house of representative's play book. >> the joint resolution is passed. >> reporter: the gop house voted last week to deobamacare. but the u.s. senate is predominantly democratic. that majority does not want to defund obamacare. president barack obama's health care act is the law of the land since 2010, three years ago, and requires everyone to be covered by health insurance. and enrollment for the still uninsured begins on october 1st, tuesday of next week. all u.s. citizens of all ages will have a six-month window until the end of march 2014 to buy health insurance if they do not already have it. if uninsured people do not buy in during the six-month window, they'll face penalties from the irs. question, republican leaders have questioned cruz' strategy. why is that? >> well, the obamacare passes

out of existence on september 30th. and if the house doesn't renew obamacare by spending, it doesn't exist. what cruz is doing, can't do it in the senate, trying to get the house to hold firm because if the house majority and not reobamacare. but the problem is, obama and reid will say, they're shutting down the government if they don't renew obamacare. and i have argued, what they ought to do is pass bill by bill, pentagon, state, continuing resolutions for each department -- >> and they're not going to listen to you. they're listening to their own leaders in house. i am grateful for that. it's just suggesting that his idea is really far off on the fringe. even fringier than what ted cruz is doing. ted cruz called it a filibuster, it really wasn't. it was against a bill he eventually voted for after he taunted the house into passing

the bill. and announced it was going nowhere in approximate the senate which is true. and then they got mad and he decided, he would have to stand on the senate floor and prove his man hood or whatever it was. >> more cruz on obamacare. >> when you have a law that is killing job, when you have a law that is hammering small businesses, when you have a law that is forcing people into part-time work and working 29 hours of a week, when you have a law that is causing skyrocketing insurance premium, when you have a law that is causing more and more people to lose their health insurance, you have a law that's not working. you have a train wreck. >> question, is cruz right? >> well, i checked with the labor of sadistics this day. and they said that 88% of the jobs that have been created this year are part-time jobs. a large part of the reason for that reason is it's unprecedented in american

history because people are apprehensive about the impact of obamacare and the cost of obamacare on full-time jobs. if there are part-time jobs, they don't qualify. now i happen to support national medical service and care but we have to do something about its effect on the job market there. is a disaster for the average american family. >> the white house is coming back with a different set and saying this is not correct. that obamacare is causing the creation of part-time job. maybe there's a fix that you have to work 40 hours a week to be eligible for health insurance instead of 30 hours but i have never seen the sort of subversion of a law that has passed both houses and signed by the the president, approved by the supreme court and minority of the minority is acting like they did back in the days, just mass i resistance. and what cruz is mostly worried

about is that once this goes into effect, people are going to love it. they'll be hooked on it. it will be like crack. >> let me ask you this question, if anything should, what about the gop and obamacare, the answer to that is, boehner should pass two amendments, delay the individual mandate for one year. two, strip congress and its staff from their exemption from buying insurance on the exchanges. follow me? >> i do. this would require the republican leadership to focus on fixing a law that has now been in place for and upheld by the supreme court and not clinging to the sinking ship politically of trying to defund this law. so the problem here is that the gop clinging to a minority within a minority. they have lost sight of 2016 here -- >> comments early about the impact on the economy.

>> let's look at this, turn it 180 degrees. from the perspective of the left, the left would be if president barack obama would have invited the leadership of occupy wall street to catch in the rose garden for two or three weeks. the liberal base would have been entertained but it would have pushed people from the center off the -- >> the one they got to stop this, the house has got 9 to defund this. and it's within its power. but look at cruz and paul, they don't have four years between them and both are being talked up as presidential candidates? why? because they're speaking for a huge segment of this country. >> you have health insurance? >> and i think the government pro -- >> leaving the government. we'll be right back with predictions.

out of time, sorry, bye- bye.

>> welcome to "government contracting weekly," sponsored

by aoc key solutions, incorporated. "government contracting weekly" is the only television program devoted exclusively to the competitive and dynamic world of government contracting. a world where coming in second place is not an option, but where principled, centered winning is the only approach. >> good morning, and welcome to "government contracting weekly." i'm your host--hilary fordwich. our regular viewers know that winning government contracts is at the heart of "government contracting weekly." that's why i'm especially excited about the discussion today that centers on the subject of procurement. joining me this morning is roger waldron, president for the coalition for government procurement. good morning, roger. >> good morning, hilary. >> thank you for coming in. and also angela styles, partner and head of government contracting for the government contracting group at crowell & moring. good morning. >> good morning. >> and also david drabkin. he's the corporate director of contracts at northrop grumman. good morning, david.