let me quote e.j. to e.j. as i often do. obama has shown he can still accomplish a lot on his own.der test will be whether he can advance ideas and arguments that strengthen the ability of his allies to sustain his policies beyond the life of his presidency. how does the president strengthen his allies? >> well, i think he continues to advance arguments and puts forward ideas and makes the republicans choose. do they kill these ideas? or do they actually pass them and allow things to go forward? what i have in mind is the core idea that if you really want wages to grow, we have the unemployment rate coming down, we have economic growth. we still need wages to go up. and there are a bunch of things government can do to help that. one is, let's invest in our infrastructure. it's crazy that washington can't even build roads anymore, or mass transit. we talks about pre-k and helping people with student loans. i think there's a whole agenda on workers' rights, not only minimum wage, but overtime and family leave. he can put ideas on the table, and either the republicans go along, but in

and e.j. di onne for "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst. the good news for jeb bush is that rush limbaugh is against him. and in the past at this stage of republican campaigns, rush limbaugh is always against the person who ends up geing the nomination. >> well, look, i come from the more moderate side of the party and i welcome people who are going to reinforce that. and i welcome jeb bush's policy chops. he's got deep policy knowledge and that's important. i think, though, there are going to be a lot of concern, not just from the rush limbaugh side, but whether or not this is the way republicans take on the likely democratic nominee, hillary clinton. elizabeth warren has shown us how to fight hillary. you fight her as a candidate of big money, you fight her as the candidate of citigroup, bob ruben, her husband, secretary of treasury. somebody whose family has made a lot of money in ways that are troubling. to do that, you need somebody who really turns the page on the political institution of the past 20 years. somebody who can speak for

e.j. dionne is here, a senior at the brookings institution, columnist at "washington post," and professor at georgetown university. kev visible eckstrom editor in chief of "religious news service." kim lawton is managing editor of this program. as preparation for our discussion here is kim's survey of the major religion stories of the past year. >> across the u.s., a series of incidents where unarmed african-americans were killed by white police officers prompted a re-examination of inequities in the law enforcement system and of ongoing racial injustice in other areas of society. clergy helped lead peaceful protests in many cities while houses of worship hosted town hall meetings. religious leaders from across the spectrum urged dialogue and new efforts toward racial reconciliation reconciliation. militants launched a brutal campaign to establish what they called a new caliphate or islamic state in parts of syria and iraq. isis particularly targeted religious minorities, including christi

e.j., let me start with you., is that what he said? probably a good idea? probably opening up cuba is a good idea. >> how fraktious is it going to be? >> the ernesto show and ted cruz. he's happy to be here. i think what you're seeing here is a further indication of the split in the republican party between a more libertarian conservative wing represented by rand paul. on foreign policy he really is very different from the rest of the party, from ted cruz, from marco rubio and also from jeb bush and liberals and libertarians have been on the same side of embargoes in general and particularly the cuban embargo. politically, the very conservative folks make one important point that doesn't actually harm the case for doing this. their joint are point is cuba is still repressive. it is still repressive. the argument and rand paul made it pretty well is that we are more likely to undercut a repressive regime in the long run by sending american citizens there, diplomats there, businesses there, and then to continue a p

he must have some muscle memory left with that, doesn't he, e.j.?rted out as a moderate republican way back in 1986. so he has a whole other self back there that he could draw on. >> i think there's a war between mitch mcconnell the instituti institutionalist and the operator. you know, i think he was candid about one thing in that interview, which is what he's hoping to do is load these appropriations bills with lots of new policy, basically rolling back obama policy. and he wants to make the president pick and choose. i think the theory is going to be, the president can't fight us on every single thing. if we load these things up, he's going to insist we take some of the stuff out, which means some of the other policies might survive. so i think it's going to be a, you know, a flood the zone approach to to rolling back obama's agenda. >> he knows he won't be able to override the veto, but he'll be able to take the veto on certain thing, show it to the republicans in the senate and say look, if we put that thing on this bill again, it's going to be

e.j. joins us now.hough, have you thanked a politician today angle may not be the most populous thing i ever heard. it makes some good points there and i want to talk about the contrast between some of the people you're describing and some of the people you salute in that column and where we are right now because this seems like a changing of the guard moment. when we talk about a waxman or a george miller. talking about people who politically came of age during and around watergate. the watergate babies and the class of 1974 and their sense of the possibility of politics was maybe set in stone back then. now, this weekend, we're talking about elizabeth warren and her role in the democratic party and you look at elizabeth warren and she came of age politically because of the wall street meltdown. it seems like there is a generational changing of the guards here that could be very significant for the party. >> there is a generational change, although it's part of the same, in many ways, part of the same

. >> joining me right now, my friend e.j.ionne with "the washington post" and jason berry for "the washington post." i think most of the viewers of the show, certainly the progressives, love the fact about this, and a lot of jewish friends of mine bring this up, they like this pope because he's inclusive. but here he draws the line. you go around killing people because they don't join your religion, you're the bad guy. it's so stark. you're evil. >> he's going after them because they are not inclusive. it was really striking -- >> i'd say. they crucified people. they behead them. >> that's right. and he went after fanaticism and fundamentalism and what he called for was the solidarity of all believers. that's a remarkable thing. the catholic church is a dogmatic church. dogma is a good word in the catholic church. here he's saying -- >> so this is a community of the faithful. >> yeah, but it's the solidarity of all believers. so his view is, the way you stop this persecution of christians is not simply to bash isis, which he