my name is john levin. i have been here for the last 50 years. 50 feet from this proposed building. i think what attracts me to san francisco and most people are two things, it's neighborhood and it's culture many certainly it's culture brought me here and the neighborhoods urged me to stay. this building that is being propose is a knife in both the culture and the mark and a knife in one of the most unique neighborhoods of the city. liberty hill. it contains many preearthquake buildings in the city. i urge you to demand the developer to modify the construction that is compatible to our neighborhood and does not destroy one of the great cultural institutions in the district. thank you. >> hi. i'm kenny. i wasn't going to speak. i really get we need housing and need to track all the talent that comes in the city, my inside view working in tech is trying to solve the housing problems for people working in palo alto and seems at the expense of the culture in san francisco. i would like you to go to marsh.org and you will see all the diversity of san francisco reflected in this theatre.

mark levine announced that john baner is weak for backing that budget deal and trying to avoid another government shutdown. glenn beck confirms the republican speaker as not just a liberal but, get this, he's calling hum a progressive. oh, my god. acting like the king of the crazies, beck says ted cruz is a good right-wing boy and opposing the deal because "he did what we told him to." we, glenn beck and company. now the cat is out of the bag. the people calling the shots are the loudest, angriest, nastiest voices in the right-wing media. people are always watching any deal with the president are the cruzes, ran paul and mike lees. not only them, the many mitch mcconnells and lindsey grams all scared at the moment that they will finger them for destruction the way kim young un just fingered his uncle in pyongyang. what is not north korea but boy is it getting tough on the american right. david corn is the washington bureau chief for mother jones and we have a columnist from "the washington post." of course, both are proud, i hope. anyway, john boehner continues to face all out revolunt

john boehner faces all-out revolts from the tea party, a bit of an anger coming from the conservative media htitans like mark levin and glenn beck. listen carefully. what beck said is the reason they love wackobirds like cruz and lee, they're taking orders from him. >> i find him feckless. >> i think john boehner is one of the prime examples of worthless, worthless republicans. these guys are big government progressives. they're not liberals. they're not rinos. they're progressives. we have to take a stand. mike lee and ted cruz, they did what we told them to do. mean whooi meanwhile, the john boehners and mitch mcconnells of the world are trying to take ted cruz and mike lee and destroy them. mitch mcconnell is the biggest two-faced liar i've ever seen. >> mitch mcconnell, two-faced liar. i mised some of the good stuff here. are there people in the radio world out there driving in their cars that actually believe, as glenn beck just said, that boehner is a progressive, a big government progressive and the other guy is a liar, whatever the word is they're using, a two-faced liar? >> i don't know what levin and gle

democrats voted against the bill, including some of your colleagues, such as bass and chu, john conyers, sander levin, ranking member of the ways and means committee, raul grijalva. how much swaying was done? guest: there was no whipping on the part of the progressive caucus toward this deal. i had a good talk with keith ellison, and i do not fault him for voting against the deal. there were no benefits for extended unemployment benefits. there are over a million people who will lose benefits, starting december 31, and it is going to wreak havoc on our economy on top of it. these people will not have not only money to sustain themselves, that will not have money to put act into the economy. we extended unemployment i cannot count the number of times since the 1960's what out any offset -- >> both the professor and the doctor of the world health organization will he here on monday. if any journalist would like to have a one-on-one interview or one on two interview with the doctor or with the professor i will pass out my card now and you can get in touch with me and we will see if we can set something

john boehner majority leader and barry jackson worked for karl rove. what ended up being happening she was criticized by tom levine. and the other part to it was she had been part of this cover up of torture. her appointment was basically in trouble. at some point in time when john boehner in august called me issue -- and cut a deal with me. he said i had 24 hours to consider this deal. that in fact, i would be able to get a job comparable to the salary i made in congress and he would help me raise legal defense money to put this behind me if i pulled out of the election. they then would get it a replacement which congressman boehner named -- >> what year was this? >> this was in 2006 in august. i had 24 hours. i remember john boehner saying if you don't accept this deal in 24 hours, it's off the table, we won't have this deal again. i called within 24 hours and i said fine. i'll take the deal. comparable salary, you find me a job and you help me raise legal defense money to fight this thing. i just won the primary in 2006. boehner's call made the seg difference -- significant difference in me getting out just in

levin and paul ryan. the tea party is saying that john boehner declared -- speaker boehner declared war.let's take a listen. >> this agreement prevents a government shutdown in january and in october. >> you're all worked up about that. lots of us don't really care about that. >> don't care about it? i mean, you know, look. i think we can agree -- >> how callous is that? >> exactly. there's things we would have liked to see in the final deal but getting something done is certainly worthwhile. >> it is. and again, i'm no cheerleader for this particular agreement but i think we should all cheer the idea that we can move forward at least in the short term without lurching between crises. the idea we govern by crises is not cost effective and people claiming to be the people to shrink government and being more responsible when it comes to fiscal issues, it doesn't make sense at all that you don't care about a government shutdown. a government shutdown is very costly. >> right. >> in terms of jobs and straight direct hit to the economic growth. and so, the logic of this is always been insane.

levin was joined by james in half and john mccain. this is 35 minutes. will beresident, senator withhold? >> morning businesses close. the senate will resume consideration. military activities and so forth and further purposes. left for the thanksgiving break, senator inhofe and i said that we would come to the senate floor today to update members on the status of the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2014. before the break, we spent a week on the senate floor trying to bring more amendments up and to have them debated and voted on, but we were unable to do so. we tried to reach agreement to limit consideration to defense-related amendments, but we were unable to do that. we trade to get consent to vote on two sexual assault amendmen s that had been fully debated but we could not get that accident. -- get that consent. we tried to get consent to lock in additional votes but we were unable to do so. at this point, mr. president, the house of representatives will be adjourning for the year at the end of this week. and there is simply no wa

and: that was senator levin the senate talking about the deal that was announced yesterday. we are joined by congressman johnaramendi, a member of the house armed services committee. saw this deal as a place to push for new sanctions on iran. do you think that is the place it should have been or will we see sanctions through another route? guest: at this point it is not a wise thing to add to the sanctions. keep that in reserve. sander levin laid out the problem. they wanted to use a must pass piece of legislation. on put all kinds of riders it to get around that. we are playing what is called ping-pong. we pass a bill over to the senate. we leave. "hmm. now what do we do"? there are things in this bill that are essential. variousay, pay for the personnel and the like. there are things in this bill i would like to see in the house would like to see in it but are not because the senate did not have a chance to work those out in a conference committee. host: we mentioned the irran nuclear deal -- iran nuclear deal. the witnesses include john kerry. you can see that live at 1:00 p.m. on c-span3. you can share y

senator levin, democrat from michigan and the chair of the armed services committee in the senate, talking about the deal that was announced yesterday. we're joined at the table by congressman john garamendi, a democrat from california, member of the house armed services committee. and, congressman, some senators saw this deal as a place to push for new sanctions on iran, as a place where possibly to start that effort to move it. do you think that is the place that it should have been, or do you think we're going to see sanctions through another route down the road? >> guest: well, hopefully, through another route. and i think at this point it's not a wise thing to add to the sanctions. keep that in reserve. we can do that at any time in the future as the iran negotiations go on. but senator levin laid out the problem, is that the senators -- some of them -- wanted to use a must-pass piece of legislation, in this case the house armed services defense authorization act, and put all kinds of riders on it using it as a point of opportunity. to get around that, we're playing what sometimes is called ping-pong. we pass a bill over to the senate, we leave, and they go, hmm, now what d