., ect.. of course, he didn't mean it. he intended to completely change the nature of what was being plushed by random house, and then he would sign up trump, for instance, for his book, and that kind of thing and various other people of that literary quality, and at the same time, he would, you know -- well, i don't want to go into details, but changed the structure of the firm, quality going down the market which didn't work well, and finally at the end of the exercise, they ended up selling to a german firm, and now, you know, most of the american publishing is by far companies which is not to be center phobic, but the reason is viking is on pierson that owns the financial times which owns the whole group of ouster house, ect., ect., and leading publishers, so all of these people, many of whom wanted out of the trap of publishing in their own native language, right, one was willing to take a loss in need be in buying random house because they knew the market was limited, and once you were i

>> guest: uncle ben's rice, ect.. she was somebody who when she got the job to sell america abroad, some folks in the, in our work said why are they appointing her? i thought, gosh, if she's as good at doing this as she was in her other stuff, let's give her a chance. i went to see her. she said what do i do? i said listen. she didn't listen. her idea of marketing brand america without paying attention to what people were thinking, saying, engaging on the level where people's discourse was was a fatal flaw. she thought she'd buy advertising and change attitudes and the wanted dead or alive poster really played into al-qaeda's hands as did some of the commercials where they were offering the networks, you know, huge amounts of money to carry and it looked like america was trying to buy friends. it didn't work. that's unfortunate. it's the moment when people were asking really important questions on both sides, and i think we squandered that opportunity to reach people. >> host: i remember the commercials of wonderful l

., ect.. they had been really significant. the other thing is they sustained because they owned the institution. it's their solution. they developed it. it also seems to have a ripple effect in terms of behavior of expectations for the broader community, so these are some of the results. we track 230 indicators, and, you know, i can answer questions later. we have 230 indicators in our data tracking system, and there's patterns we look at in terms of income. we see informal income. in o one makes from welfare. there's other stuff going on. we get those reports. we see all the initiatives that different types of people have. let me take you back a couple slides. this goes back to my mother, so what was happening with my mother which then i saw replicated in all the families i've been telling you about is that if this is the pointer -- no, nevermind. okay. i'll point. my mother, she was working really hard. she worked two jobs every day. what she was able to do is get one kid over to here. my si

i don't know how many are dying in china, ect., ect.. one more. when nafta kicked in and all the heavy industry went south of the river into mexico for cheaper labor, that area became the hardest hit area in the world according to the -- what is it? world health organization for birth defects because there was no epa, because there was just rampant waste and pollution. >> host: clyde, we got the point. thank you. >> guest: yeah, absolutely. quite a few things there as far as regulations and he mentioned education. i'll tie those together. i'm a firm believer with a bipartisan mistake for no child left behind there's more federal regulations on education. our education dollars should be turned back over to the states. that's one way to reduce regulations. there's a new governor in kansas, and he'd be more than happy. take 5% less money on block grants, give them to the 50 states, let them do what they can do. the best answers are not found in washington. they will be found back home. i think that's how we address a lot of the regulations. these are

shops and high oil prices lead to higher prices for food travel hearing everything soaring oil prices ect like a tax on consumers which will force them to pay more at the pump to fill in their tanks and they will have less disposable income to buy other stuff so the calculation here is very simple absolutely well the price hikes have ripple effects on everything as we have seen a while more on this i guess will get in your business both in the later in the program but are now there thanks very much indeed for this. and you're watching r.t. live from moscow still have a sour an alliance without a mission takes a look around nato continues to function without a clear goal or common anomie. he has his critics but ukraine's president's first year in office takes on a rosier glow after the release of new figures on the economy. a rubber stamping process that's how whistleblower joined us on to describe the london court's decision to extradite him to sweden on sexual assault allegations he said the ruling didn't catch him by surprise and that he's going to appeal as laura reports while britain

states -- will the president of the united states ever apologize like the germans have to the jews and ect., will they ever apologize for the genocide of the american indian for 500 years. don't tell me it's not a genocide because i don't want to listen to that. >> i won't tell you that. [laughter] but, i don't think -- i don't think that's likely to happen, and -- >> why not? >> the circumstances are so different in each case, but not in the way you describe it. what you would like to hear said. >> 65 million buffalo -- >> that's true. they haven't apologized todd buffalo -- to the buffalo either, but they're sorry about it. [laughter] >> you don't want me to be a full blood because i would have been with crazy horse, i guarantee it. >> he had several with him in a fighting mood, did what he did -- >> a check point with their soldiers that were 100 feet away. the israeli check point, and i told the story in this about going through the gate one day because we lived in east jerusalem. my father was in the senior dane -- senior -- jordannian sector. i was a privileged little boy then, and i

fisheries, tourism, ect..of ability to force rules and regulations cost business a lot of money? >> yes, sir, it would cost business a lot of money. >> gat answer. .. safety case approach, and what that requires is that the operator and the driller must demonstrate on a site specific basis that they have put into place all of the adequate safeguds and measures necessary to properly drill in a particular place. further, we recommended that the industry, it's in the industry's interest that it should set up its own watchdog of the would be of and by and for the industry to provide oversight, similar to what the nuclear industry has done and which has been very effective. >> thank you, mr. sherman. >> thank you we are going to try to be accommodating in this committee, but i think it's important in the initial session -- mr. cohen, he pointed out a good point in the last couple sessions i wasn't goingto cut off the witness is but that isn't fair to the folks who don't squeeze in a question right at the last momen

in particular, you mentioned perks, ect..i think one direction that at least should be considered would be in the corporate tax code, for example, to reduce a lot of loopholes to broaden the base and therefore be able to lower the tax rate which is now soon going to be the highest in the industrial world so that the decisions made by corporations are based, you know, not on tax distortions, but rather on the economics of where, for example, they should locate their plants and so on, so i do think that growth friendliness is a very important part of this, and that lower rates and broader base is something that most economists agree is a good direction to go in the tax code. on short run versus long run, again, i understand there's a lot of focus on this year's budget. without commenting directly on that i do think in order to be credible given that the budgetary problems get worse over time, that is as the baby boomers retire and health care costs rise and so on, given the perspective deficits are rising over a long period of

in particular, you mentioned perks, ect.. i think one direction that at least should be considered would be in the corporate tax code, for example, to reduce a lot of loopholes to broaden the base and therefore be able to lower the tax rate which is now soon going to be the highest in the industrial world so that the decisions made by corporations are based, you know, not on tax distortions, but rather on the economics of where, for example, they should locate their plants and so on, so i do think that growth friendliness is a very important part of this, and that lower rates and broader base is something that most economists agree is a good direction to go in the tax code. on short run versus long run, again, i understand there's a lot of focus on this year's budget. without commenting directly on that i do think in order to be credible given that the budgetary problems get worse over time, that is as the baby boomers retire and health care costs rise and so on, given the perspective deficits are rising over a long period of

fisheries, tourism, ect..of ability to force rules and regulations cost business a lot of money? >> yes, sir, it would cost business a lot of money. >> great answer. .. safety case approach, and what that requires is that the operator and the driller must demonstrate on a site specific basis that they have put into place all of the adequate safeguards and measures necessary to properly drill in a particular place. further, we recommended that the industry, it's in the industry's interest that it should set up its own watchdog of the would be of and by and for the industry to provide oversight, similar to what the nuclear industry has done and which has been very effective. >> thank you, mr. sherman. >> thank you we are going to try to be accommodating in this committee, but i think it's important in the initial session -- mr. cohen, he pointed out a good point in the last couple sessions i wasn't going to cut off the witness is but that isn't fair to the folks who don't squeeze in a question right at the last

. >> host: can borders emerge from bankruptcy with its remaining stock of stores, ect. and become a profitable company? >> guest: it would be wonderful to see them emerge as a more profitable cut company. i believe that many of the factors have enabled them to go into bankruptcy may not be kind and forgiving. to my mind, there's a little too much concordance with what happened with businesses when they went bankruptcy and went through the courts and didn't have an appropriate business plan and went into chapter 7. numerous reports indicated that publishers are not terribly happy with what borders has in mind. their priorities are highlighting their border rewards plus card. if customers come in and know that the company is in trouble, do they want to redeem their rewards card or sign up for a membership in a company they may feel doesn't have a future? so i think unless borders has a really rock-solid strategy on surviving, they may suffer, but at the same time, we won't know for several months at the earliest. >> host: sarah weinman, thank you for joining us here on bo

where within the government would we have the capacity to manage a read, ect., ect., but i haven't heard that proposal, and therefore i can't give a satisfactory answer. >> what i'm looking for is not necessarily the mechanics, but whether or not governmental intervention, taxpayer funds are needed to solve the problem, or is it a problem to be solved by the market over the next two or three years? >> i think once, i mean, funds have been falling back into real estate reits of late, and i think another point, i think certainly all of us made, ultimately the fate of these and the value of the commercial real estate properties very much is driven by developments in the broader economy whether it's the path of interest rates on employment so i think maybe the best thing we can do is again try to support the recovery through prudent and appropriate monetary and fiscal policies, and they may be, perhaps. most single handed most effective thing to protect the assets. >> thanks. mr. wilson. >> i agree, i think there's a lot of money out there, private investor money, just looking for the right

economists make that point, you know, the more disruptive the facts will be, ect., ect., and it bounces off people's skulls and they stop thinking about what that means. this is a very real consequence, and it's going to have a very real impact upon real individuals, and we need to wrap our minds around the fact that the longer we put off action, the poorer many classes of people will be. we're going to be responsible for that if we don't act. i'll give you the extreme scenario. we don't do anything until 2037, and then therein benefit cuts across the board of 22%. that's not just affecting people retiring in 2037, but everybody on the rolls, including a few people collecting benefits today. if they live long enough, they would get a sharp harsh reduction of 22% in their benefits. now, by bipartisan consensus, there is a general agreement that we shouldn't cut the benefits of 595-year-old widow by 22% which raises the question what if we try to shield people already in retirement? suppose we implemented this bipartisan consensus to shield already retired people from change? how much wou

economists make that point, you know, the more disruptive the facts will be, ect., ect., and it bounces off people's skulls and they stop thinking about what that means. this is a very real consequence, and it's going to have a very real impact upon real individuals, and we need to wrap our minds around the fact that the longer we put off action, the poorer many classes of people will be. we're going to be responsible for that if we don't act. i'll give you the extreme scenario. we don't do anything until 2037, and then therein benefit cuts across the board of 22%. that's not just affecting people retiring in 2037, but everybody on the rolls, including a few people collecting benefits today. if they live long enough, they would get a sharp harsh reduction of 22% in their benefits. now, by bipartisan consensus, there is a general agreement that we shouldn't cut the benefits of 595-year-old widow by 22% which raises the question what if we try to shield people already in retirement? suppose we implemented this bipartisan consensus to shield already retired people from change? how much wou

become concentrated in cre is other p kinds of loans they made because of development in securitization, ectger are the most efficient lender on those projects. in some sense their concentration in cre is a result as an adverse selection to other things they used to fund no longer can do so competitively. it's understandable i think why they've ended up where they are. it does pose risk although i think one the things that's emphasized in the testimony and i think it is worth emphasizing is that while lots of banks with cre concentrations are in deep trouble, there's lots of banks with concentrations that are managing the concentrations quite well so that, you know, that thumbs down to the importance not simply of what their port portfolio is, but their capabilities of managing. our guidance has not been specified on putting an arbitrary limit on the concentration, but trying to encourage the institutions to manage those concentrations effectively. >> thank you. my time's up. >> thank you. dr. troske in his opening statement opened the door for role of government and financial regulators, an

. >> they pursued social ends, betterment of the political order in egypt, ect., and then the other -- >> it's not the violence side i'm interested in, but the nonviolence side. >> in other countries there's franchises of the muslim brotherhood, but there's not an overarching agenda in pursuit of violence at least internationally. with that because there are entities associated with the brotherhood in the united states, i'll ask director mueller to speak to that. >> at the outset, leapts here and -- elements here and overseas supported terrorism. >> right. >> to the extent, i can provide more information in closed session, but it would be difficult to do it in open session. >> i appreciate that very much. i also wanted to mention relative to what's going on with al-qaeda, and i know that some of you have brought that up before, but this, in particular, when you talk about the internet and the web inspire which is the 4th edition and what they're doing and encouraging young people in america in a way that we've never seen before. we've got to pay more attention to that, and i know you'

what measures are being taken to secure communications, documents, ect. inside the embassy? >> i'm not going into our processes on security, but i can asur you that there is nothing -- assure you there's nothing left behind that could be compromised. >> they are still working, like the guards are still there, but they are not authorized to do business of the government with the libbian government; correct? >> unless instructed by us. >> not issues visas? essentially the embassy is closed for business. >> operationing -- >> i realize you don't want to use the word closed. >> operations are suspended and those activities that only can be carried out by american personnel are suspended. >> white house used the word "shuttered," would you agree? >> of course. [laughter] >> have to sign a document for this to take effect or issued verbally for order? >> she does not have to sign a document. >> has the libbian government said to you how to deal with the embassy now? have they given assurances it will remain in tact, untouched by them? >> under secretary burns with a brief conversa

theory is in terms of what's in baseline, what's in budget, what's counted in the deficit deficit, ect.. is there a way to explain how you laid these out? >> it's a good question, and i can see it's confusing. there's a lot of aspects of baselines that's very confusing. you know, the baseline assumes that the middle class tax cuts where there was a bipartisan consensus extended is permanent and the upper tax cuts is not extended. we don't cut the spendings to let the top brackets go back. that's in the baseline. on the war spending -- spending for afghanistan in iraq is in a category that's called oversea contingency operations. we do see that coming down from 11 to 12, and that's really reduction in outlays. we have projected in the future that, you know, we don't know exactly what the levels will be, but there will be some level of ongoing activity, and we have estimated that to be $50 billion in the outyears, so as we get to each year, that will be a little higher or low depending on where we are, but the budget is not the place to project very specific precise estimate that implies

notion that our united states-arab allies in the region, saudi arabia, egypt, the rest of the gulf, ecte aligned in a unified front and would support a u.s. or israeli military attack on iran. this has been something that much of the reporting has suggested. the narrative goes something like israel is not the only state in the region worried about iran. in fact, some of the gulf states may be more concerned about iran than israel putting arab states and israel on the same side, that the peace process is no longer the major problem in the region. the major challenge is iran and its nuclear efforts. it might not be surprising that the prime minister shortly after the reportings came out suggested some since of indication, you know, look, you know, we were telling you guys all along, israel is not the main problem in the reason. we're not the impediment, but the real problem is iran, and look, everybody else in the region thinks this, and so this is really, i think, led to an incomplete picture that needs to be corrected. nor the u.s. or israelis for that matter should be con come complace

to opt out of major provisions that the expanding medicaid, individual mandate and employer mandate, ect.. what's left? >> guest: it allows states to make decisions. in wyoming, we know one size doesn't fit all. i was in the state senate in wyoming for five years, and we know in wyoming that what may work in new york city isn't going to work in wyoming. you have 26 governors now suing washington through the court system to say this law is unconstitutional specifically the individual mandate where the law says # you must buy this product. this is what governors decide, and let them opt out if they would like to do that. the 33 governors have written to the president saying we need flexibility on medicaid. medicaid is going to cause us to go broke. story in the "new york times" the other day. the two governors that were highlighted as concerns about the cost of medicaid, the program for low-income individual, the two big pictures? jerry brown of california, democrat governors saying we cannot afford these mandates. you have the democratic governor of tennessee, resen, who called this the m

fisheries, tourism, ect.. would the lack of ability to force rules and regulations cost business a lot of money? >> yes, sir, it would cost business a lot of money. >> great answer. .. safety case approach, and what that requires is that the operator and the driller must demonstrate on a site specific basis that they have put into place all of the adequate safeguards and measures necessary to properly drill in a particular place. further, we recommended that the industry, it's in the industry's interest that it should set up its own watchdog of the would be of and by and for the industry to provide oversight, similar to what the nuclear industry has done and which has been very effective. >> thank you, mr. sherman. >> thank you we are going to try to be accommodating in this committee, but i think it's important in the initial session -- mr. cohen, he pointed out a good point in the last couple sessions i wasn't going to cut off the witness is but that isn't fair to the folks who don't squeeze in a question ri