>> yeah, correct me if i'm wrong, but you're quoting david brooks.hink of anyone more poorly placed to accurately describe modern conservativism. the party has become so extreme and so far to the right that they won a majority in the house of representatives. you know, that speaks for itself. simplts the question is, can they maintain the majority? a lot of them are in trouble, according to the polls, and a lot of governors are in trouble. the fact they may won may end up being their worst night mares if the polls are right and we go to the next election cycle this way. >> well, i think i and every other person on the right will take the nightmare of being an incumbent majority. we'll figure out a way to handle that. >> jamal, you were communications dnc, can't the democrats use the fact that they've been so extreme, and all polls has shown that americans want to see certain things protected, want to see some of the wealthy americans pay their share, won't this gabfire on them in the long right? >> absolutely. >> and medicare, of all the republicans

"new york times - -- have we read it is talking about conservative "new york times" columnist david brooks, wrote that the republican party is no longer a normal party. its members, he says, don't accept the logic of compromise. >> forgive me, i have to correct your copy again. he is a great calmness, but he's not conservative -- great columnist, but he's not conservative. he is moderate. >> moderate conservative. >> no, he is moderate, open to all views. what you are saying, if you hear eric cantor john boehner, we are ready for tax reform, which was done in the mid-1980's. you cut out the loopholes and you use the money to cut rates. you get the fairness. rich don't have advantages by having the lobbyists create loopholes and exploit them. you stimulate economic growth because the loopholes and in and of themselves is starting economically and the low rates encourage economic activity. that is what republicans have been asking for, not to eliminate a loophole here and there, which, in the end, but not absolutely nothing. >> the validity of the public debt of the united states will not be

the president of the united states is saying that is what he wants to do. >> do you agree with david brooks that this group of republicans have no moral theory or were the of the name? >> the extremes don't, but john boehner actually, who often touts the views of the nuts he ads- [laughter] --a responsible bguy >> can i get a word in here? >> and then pull it off. "i cannot control them, they are crazy, they are crazy," it is up valuable bargaining chip for him. >> i like being on a show where ad hominems cannot use. liberals are always thought about why the's conservatives. everybody today worships ronald reagan. i lived in the ronald reagan era. liberals called him an amiable dunce asset to -- and a threat to civilization. a sickly, on the question of the 14th amendment, the -- secondly, on the question of the 14th amendment, it would end up under the jurisdiction of john roberts. >> we've been talking about this stuff or 20 years, the need to fix entitlements. everybody says you have to do somethin nobody does anything, and here we are. >> think this is the most historic weekend of the o

because you yes he could well you know this is what david brooks of the new york times and republican. already has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest their practical governing alternative the members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise do matter how sweet the terms because on the right the members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars to lecture with already members of this movement have no sense of moral decency and members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name and congressman duncan hunter said this about ronald reagan he said well here it is. here. here. out a way i care republicans that even their savior ronald reagan couldn't get a life but i disagree with that ronald reagan inspired argument that he was a moderate i don't subscribe to was an amazing individual i mean that i've been times on what i'm talking about campaigning i'm talking about getting capturing or you know really get to know i'd be backed up to i mean he would lead the role of head of state brilliantly well yes but you kn

back to david brooks for a second. david brooks basically is saying that for republicans not to take a deal-- that you seem to believe in yourself-- if they don't do that, then they will be blamed for the crisis. >> rose: charlie, i think it's what... the thing that matters in that statement is what are the details of the deal? and we have not heard the details of the deal that seemo be satisfactory t most republicans yet. if, in fact, you want to set it up where you eliminate a large percentage of tax expenditures and tax credit-- let's say 50% or 60% of them-- and lower rates thereby getting an economic boom that would markedly increase revenues to the government and lower thdebt that's totally different. and with that a siificant 3.5% or 4.5 $trillion in expenditure cuts i think republicans would jump at that in a minute. the question i is can you do that in a timing where you've got them both locked in? that's where the lack of trust is not evident between the two parties and the shame of that is because of that la

>> i think they're in danger of alienating david brooks, which is very sad for a lot of people, but davidink he's a smart person. i'm not sure what david brooks' constituency is across the united states. and for all the little snide comments over the last few years about the tea party, i think we know one thing. if we had followed the american greatness conservativism model and continued to go down that road of more spending then certainly the republicans wouldn't have won the elections and we saw what happened with john mccain and bob dole and every republican has come around who wanted to be a, quote, normal republican, which is a very kind way of david brooks referring to the rest of us, i guess, as kind of mutant, weird, strange people. >> dana: one of the things about the david brooks thing that's interesting is that he says the white house is offering a republicans trillions of dollars of cuts. but that's not the case. if that's true, then they've not released that to the public. >> he does have a really good access to the white house. we know that. there are certain type of republi

the issue of raising taxes which for the most part of this point means not ending any subsidies david brooks called as the mother of no brainers but for some reason they're not willing to play so this when you really have to ask what the hell is wrong with the republican party joining me to discuss this is james poole los host of the bottom line and reform school on p.j. t.v. james thanks so much for joining us tonight. i got to ask. you will you answer my question what is what is wrong with the republicans i just don't understand what is going on with them why don't they want to compromise or do anything or work why do they just dig their heels in the sand it just doesn't make sense to me. because they're winning because they're good she's treasury is it it's actually it's actually what you're getting what they want they think they can get more until they feel like they've reached only to be sure turns they're not there yet but isn't their entire job i mean is it really a winning and losing situation if you're a congress of your lawmakers are supposed to do with the best for the country and

do you agree with david brooks and that conclusion? >> oh, i do.en festival. bright guy, thoughtful person. but, you know, really, i know these wonderful republican colleagues and democratic colleagues. houn how could they ever get to a point where some guy is pulling out a sheet of paper that they signed when everything was roses in america and now we're headed for the bow wows and he's standing throughout shrill on the edge of the hill saying you're going to be cremated ? the worst thing that will happen to you of course is you will not be re-elected. by god, if that's the talisman of your whole life, should have quit long ago. >> as always, alan simpson, truth teller and everybody does love you and should read your report. i'm supporting you for president. thanks for joining us. >> king. if i could be king. >> we'll give you that, too. he is a national treasure, indeed. alan simpson. up ahead, the next development in the casey anthony trial. at bayer, we've been relieving pain for over 100 years. and today, we're re-inventing aspirin for pain re

the phrase, "the old guard wins," even david brooks has come to recognize this.a used pejorative language about republicans and conservatives. what did they do? they came to town. they promised folks they would fight even if it cost them their seats against any new taxes. they did. they've been beaten up, they've been abused. the ratings are down. they may have risked their seats. but they're winning. who dares wins. i do agree with you that if the president agrees that signing -- not signing a debt ceiling will not royal the markets but i go back to what harold said earlier. if he believes that he's going to send down this market 1,000 points and damage the credit rating of his country and throw the world situation into chaos, the president of the united states has got to do what's responsible, even if it's a political defeat for him which it will be. >> we actually have an interesting one on "the daily beast" where we called all of the investor services and they say it may be a downgrade anyway. the fiddling has gone on so long. >> no matter what happens. >> wh

but david brooks is absolutely right. what weave seen here in washington is kind of a sad note over the past couple of years. we've seen negotiators and compromisers leave. so many senators have left, they're no longer on capitol hill behind me. they were the ones who would be able to cut the deals. that's why i think you're seeing at this point that the deal is a little bit hard tore cut. having said that, it's not just the extremists, so to speak, on the republican side. it's the extremists on the democratic side. we've already seen fund-raising letters go out from these liberal groups saying that social security cannot be touched, that medicare cannot be touched. guess what? it has to be touched. so the question is, how can it be touched? extremism right now here in washington is, i hate to say this, is at an all-time high. >> it really is. jeanne, you know this more than anybody else. when you look at the numbers, these kinds of cuts have to be done very carefully so that you don't really change our living standard dr

but i sort of hope so. >> thank you, david brooks. david david leone hard. >> thank you roger cohen, thank you tom friedman. david david brooks. anthony bour sdaefern is here. he workeds a chef for more than 25 years, his big break came wit miss memoir kitchen confidential t made waves with shocking stories about life in the professional kitchen. bourdain has since left the restaurant business to pursue a career as writer and television host. here is a look at his program, no reservations. >> so this is white meat. >> nice and rare, when are you eating fresh killed beautiful chicken with. >> it has to be pink. >> it's got to be pinked. >> yes. >> in new york that would tolly freak people out no matter how good the chicken is. >> this is what connects the liver and the intestine. >> interestingly. >> he is unusual in that they prefer to use an electric grill over traditional charcoal kbleefing the consistent heat makes better product. >> it's crunchy but not as crunchy as the gizzard but a lot more succulent. >> it's absolutely fantasti

syndicated columnist mark shields and "new york times" columnist david brooks. it's good to see you both. >> few. >> woodruff: so we're just watching a tough situation in california. we've got another kind of a tough situation here in washington. mark, what about this ongoing stalemate over the debt limit? does it look like they're going to reach an agreement and not breech the deadline? what do you think? >> judy, anybody who-- at this point is really just shooting in the dark. i am hopeful that they will. i think that the more likely scenario is that the senate works first. i think senator-- republican leader mitch mcconnell came up with something that was devilishly shrewd with his proposal to basically yield responsibility for the budget process, appropriation process from the congress and putting all the responsibility on raising the debt on the president it politically puts the blame there, in his judgement. gets by the possibility of the government closing down and avoids as he put it damaging the republican brand with a showdown or shutdown. and damaging

katrina, here's david brooks saying -- have most of the me a media -- >> yes, though i think in the lastthe fact you no longer have a republican party nixon would recognize. this is an extremist republican party willing to blow up the economy. a debt ceiling, by the way, republicans seven times voted for to lift under george w. bush, but i think the largest crisis, the media malpractice, howard, is the fact that i have the idea, the concept that america is bankrupt. it is not bankrupt. what is bankrupt is the inside the beltway consensus that the real crisis in this country is about deficits and debt. when you look at the front pages in the last days, the last few years, howard, what is it? it is a jobs crisis. so when you listen to bill daley and he said president obama came to washington to do something big, what we -- -- >> tony blakley, i'm not taking sides here. journalists could easily write that by saying we'll negotiate anything, except tax increases, republicans are blocking progress toward a deal. >> look, i'm in favor of objective journalism. when i was newt's press secretary,

from a david brooks column. was taken out of context, pawlenty argued and the newspaper issued a clarification. but if you read the interview, pawlenty talked -- >> the sentiment was factual. >> very much. and government needs to be more active. >> we know you're going to be some pawlenty statements, later today, you'll have some some of the pawlenty barbs back and forth. i have noticed it's actually gotten more truthful around here, why is that? >> in the debt debate there's been more responsible dialogue. >> you've got to be kidding me, irresponsible abilities to get things done, but the dialogue's been responsible? >> the truth index is flirting with positive territory. >> how about that, bill adair, editor-in-chi editor-in-chief. >>> it is only wednesday, the hump day panel is going to talk about developing news, we just talked about the cbo scoring of the harry reid plan. and is mitt romney counting his chickening before the hatch. and they heated it up and called it roasted red pepper and tomato. just book

david brooks is not alone in his feelings about this, is he? >> no, he's not, but the number of people who are willing to speak out publicly as i and a few others have is still painfully small, i'm afraid. >> we can report that the cut, cap, and balance bill has passed the republican-controlled house now, 134 to 12 republicans against. 9, 9 republicans voting against it. there's hope for nine republicans now working in the house of representatives. they always have, ever since you left office in your party, bruce, pointed to ronald reagan as the great man, the man who was right about absolutely everything. i want you to listen to what he had to say about the debt ceiling. >> congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. this brink manship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on social security and veterans benefits. interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets and the deficit would soar. the united states has a special responsibility t

this is david brooks from "the new york times."ublican party has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical governing alternative. if you ask them to raise taxes an inch to cut government spending by a foot, they'll say no. to members of this, tax levels are everything. members have taken a small piece of economic policy and turned it into a sacred fixsatioation. if you were offered for revenue increases of some kind, would you say no because you don't want revenue increases? >> i would love to do tax reform. i hate the fact we use it for social engineering. number four on the contract from america, which is a tea party manifesto of sorts, is fundamental tax reform. so we're all for that, but this is a spending problem. this is a -- >> you would accept a very good deal? >> why would you -- >> would you accept a deal? >> why could you wow taould you revenue -- >> no, in other words, saying we won't accept revenue increase under any deal. >> i'm saying if they put real spending on the table th

. >> brown: and david brooks and ruth marcus analyze the week's news. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> well, the best companies are driven by new ideas. >> our future depends on new ideas. we spend billions on advanced technologies. >> it's all about investing in the future. >> we can find new energy-- more cleaner, safer and smarter. >> collaborating with the best in the field. >> chevron works with the smartest people at leading universities and tech companies. >> and yet, it's really basic. >> it's paying off every day. the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> brown: americans seeking work, and many hoping to hold on to their jobs, found little to cheer about in june. new numbers from the government

there was, we're seeing some blame game and i had excerpts of the david brooks article. he goes after the permanent campaigner, the interest groups. names grover norquist by name, frankly, the implication is all of the purists in the interests, in the activists community on this. how do you respond to him? >> he knows something we don't know. he says there was some plan that was close to a deal. the only plan we heard earlier is the president's do nothing, spend everything and go bankrupt. we're not aware of a plan. >> why not call his bluff? i went through this. you just heard -- it seems everybody is afraid to just see how much the other side is really willing to do, and instead they pull back and say, well, publicly he's only said x? >> i think republicans should call the president's bluff. i think republicans hold all the cards. >> say it. say, okay, want to do this, we'll consider tax hikes only if you are in favor of -- >> no. the problem is the size of debt and deficit and it has nothing to do really with taxes but everything to do with spending. republicans reall

. >> this week david brooks which i'm sure you're familiar with this article in "the new york times"responsible republicans don't take control independents will conclude that republican fanaticism caused the default. they will conclude that republicans are not fit to govern and they will be right, end quote. so are republicans giving too much weight to the tea party caucus right now? what do you think? >> i don't think so. if you paid attention, i know you did and jamal did to the elections last year, we saw a lot of democrats campaigning not to raise taxes in a time of recession. that that would be a jobs killer. an economic mess for us. and we want to listen to those democrats who push that in november, certainly a lot of republicans did as well or republican leadership pushes that. that's good and proper. we want to remember that the bush tax cuts as they're called really have become democrat tax cuts. they were signed into law and passed by a democrat house and senate. >> as we look at this very important chapter this debate over the debt, august 2nd has been put out there as the

the criticism ofim, by david brooks most recently this week, is that he is too much like the senate majority leaderer. the president has the bully pulpit and he used it. at that republicans started screaming bloody murder indicates that they are worried about it. >> charles? >> the problem is that this has the feel of a town where the president, the leader is not beating. he did not propose a budget. well the one he did was voted down by the senate 97-0, it was so preposterous. the democrats in control the senate have not produce a budget in two years. republicans have. we have a president at a full campaign mode was not proposing anything at a public -- who knows whether in private. there is no democratic proposal on the table for a budget. he is demagoguing against medicare and the ryan plan. he has deced do that and that is how you get reelected. that is why the town is floundering. >> consistency has not a problem with republicans. they have endorsed the ryan plan which does not provide for a balanced budget, and now they are pushing for a balanced budget. 103 house republicans have alre

david brooks saying if it all collapses, it is you, the republicans, who will be blame. right? fully think part of the problem is they are talking about $2 trillion in spending cuts but over a 10 to 15-year period. you know, we kind bind future congresses so there's no guarantee that any of those cuts ever occur. larry lindy had an article in the "wall street journal" the other day and said if interest rates go up two points, you'll have 5 trillion extra in spending on interest. if you look at the exploding charts on spending and debt, it's going to be driven by interest in the next ten years, so i don't think we can count on and trust congress to do what they say they are going to do for ten years. i don't personally trust the body of congress to do what they say or any of their promises. that's why i would only trust it if we actually amended the constitution to say you have to balance your budget. >> we'll watch how this plays out over the next two weeks. senator rand paul, thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> just ahead, marcia clark and jeffrey toobin with

but what i think david brooks underestimates is what it's going to take to pass this. not only through the house but also through the senate. it's going to require 60 votes in the senate. so it will take more than the president having a press conference or having a meeting. we need to come up with a package that can actually pass both branches of the congress between now and august 2. and i just frankly don't think tax increases particularly during a weak economic recovery, are likely to pass either the house or the senate. >> woodruff: we hear you, senator john cornyn, thank you very much. >> thanks, judy. >> ifill: next, taking desperate measures in cleveland to deal with a massive foreclosure problem newshour economics correspondent paul solman has the story, part of his ongoing reporting on the housing crisis and "making sense of financial news." >> reporter: in cleveland, ohio, someone's former home. since foreclosure, though, it's been stripped of anything you can sell, not even worth the price of the wood left behind. so down it goes-- an ever more common answer

. >> what david brooks wrote last week, interestingly, and certainly some republicans took note of it because david brooks is well known and well respected in republican and democratic circles as a "new york times" writer. he said if the republican party were a normal party, it would take advantage of this amazing moment. it is being offered the deal of the century, trillions of dollars in spending cuts in exchange for a few hundred billion dollars of revenue increases. and there have been bipartisan and nonpartisan groups that have suggested it would be $400 billion of loophole closures that could be affected without calling it in effect a tax increase. >> well, our budget which was passed last april, proposed to close all these loopholes in exchange for tax reform. so we were the first to call for closing all these corporate tax loopholes to lower our tax rates, to create jobs. so nobody should hold a candle to us on wanting to close loopholes. we have been saying that forever. it's just all the spending cuts, we have yet to see specifics. we have yet to see commitments to do this.

daniel, i want to ask you about what david brooks wrote in "the new york times" today, the columnist,columnist wrote, quote, obama's friday appearance had a gigantic unintended consequence. it brought members of congress together. they decided to take control. the white house is now on the sidelines. democratic and republican congressional leaders are negotiating directly with one another. the president really on the sidelines and do you think the white house is concerned about that perception? >> i think on friday that's where it put him. david brooks, of course, is the bellwether columnist, tell us where a lot of washington is, president went out there emotional on friday and very upset and with his speech last night, i don't think we saw the effect that he wanted, the effect that his people wanted, that's why they've been all over the networks today trying to make their case, but i don't think the president is as engaged in this fight as he'd like to be and certainly without as much power as he needs at this point. >> jackie, i know you talk to as many people in this town as anyone