theou are just greeting next generation of enemies. -- breeding the next generation of enemies. >> potentially, yes. my hope is that we will see a groundswell of support for transparency of how the weapons are used. that is what is needed. this is also to protect the operators. this is also to protect the men and women in uniform who sit behind the consoles and fly these missions. we are talking about their welfare as well. make sure it's a very clear mission and goals are very clear, the rules of engagement are very clear and agreed to buy the international community. >> thank you, robert. good to talk to you. the sudanese army has started pulling out troops from the border with south sudan as part of a deal between the two countries signed in the ethiopian capital on tuesday. sudan and south sudan also agreed to resume the full of oil within two weeks. the two side nearly went to war last august over oil north korea's army says it will retaliate against south korea and the u.s. promoting joint military exercises. the state-run media has released the images of the leader kim jong un inspectin

and ilistened with care to what michael had to s about theou increasing sophistication and calibration of the american a military effort, and he-- i, like here, felt at the time of the withdrawal that it was a pity that there wasn't an american residual force there td attempt to maintain some kind op stability, but in the end, i've concluded that we've-- that's to say the west, the united states, the united kingdom-- had challenged history itself, history which has rejected any number of invasions going backf to the persians, macedonia, thes turks, the british, all of which have ended up literally buried beneath the sand of iraq. and i fear greatly that is whati will happen to the americanll invasion and history will probably conclude that the united states, a new world, which has always been first to try and encourage the growth of democracy and human rights and civil society, outside its own borders now for 200 years, just took on anmpossible taskn iraq. it just wasn't going to acceptst that. and i would say much more likely than that the american-- tank american influence will be in

theou compare that with radicalization of syria, together with the impasse in the peace process, this will be a serious threat to an already volatile region. the window is fast closing for negotiations, primarily due to increasing sectarian activities. there is no time to waste. the prime minister shared details of jordan's homegrown model. we believe that we have a model as a clear end goal, a parliamentary government. checks and balances of democracy. a new constitutional court. we will also add a new independent election commission, and we are looking at jordan as a model for the revolution, consensual and peaceful, and ensuring there is tolerance, moderation, and unity. and equally as important, a level playing field. we will ensure regard for civil liberties and civil rights. today, we look to our prime minister of forming his parliamentary government in the next few weeks. with on his consultations parliament's come up which is an extension of the same constitutional process that resulted in his nomination. i am very proud of this process. what we are seeing is the third way in

that the parents have full equality, the gay and lesbian parents have full equality apart from -- theou want us to assess effects of same-sex marriage, the potential effects on -- of same-sex marriage, the potential -- the effects of proposition 8. but what is your response to argument which has already been mentioned about the need to be cautious in light of the newness of the concept of -- of same-sex marriage. the one thing that the parties in this case seem to agree on is that marriage is very important. it's thought to be a fundamental building block of society and its preservation essential for the preservation of society. traditional marriage has been around for thousands of years. same-sex marriage is very new. i think it was first adopted in the netherlands in 2000. so there isn't a lot of data about its effect. and it may turn out to be a -- a good thing; it may turn out not to be a good thing, as the supporters of proposition 8 apparently believe. andyou want us to step in render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution which is newer than cell pho

theou are listening on radio, here are the phone lines. 3881.licans, 202-585- democrats, 202-585-3880. $975 billion in targeted cuts with regard to health care, military, other programs. it also raises $975 billion in new revenues from closing " -- closing tax loopholes. $100 billion in stimulus spending focusing on job training and infrastructure. house republican plan has $1.80 trillion in savings from the repeal of the health care law. it leaves $1 trillion in automatic cuts as a result of sequestration. it includes $962 billion in cuts from agriculture subsidies and food stamps, reduces money for medicaid and changes to medicare. $800 billion in savings from interest as the debt comes down. $249 billion in discretionary spending cuts. guest: that is right. things to watch our medicare, medicaid, and the tax portion. those tend to be the most polarizing on capitol hill where lawmakers are dug in the most. there is major financial impact with any of this issues if they are changed. one thing that is interesting, we are not talking about social security, possibly the biggest part of

host: here is your piece in reuters -- of theou talk about some justices on the court wondering why aree hearing this case. explain, why did they take it? guest: they cannot say why are we here. they took the case. let me explain how it works. last fall, they needed only four votes in the private conference to take it. it must've been at least four justices thought they need to resolve this. sames coming up at the time that a challenge for defense of marriage act was coming up. i could see how some justices might have thought, let's take the two cases together. .hey need five to resolve it clearly, there were no five justices yesterday who appear to be ready to say something consequential one way or the other. host: before we get to phone calls, justice kennedy, what role did he play? guest: he sent mixed signals, but the bottom line is, he is not ready to decide this case. bashedme down to mostly his sentiment was more like why are here. should this case have been granted? he questioned at one point -- justice scalia said wasn't it too late for that? it is never too late for justices t

theou have not had opportunity to meet the ship, this is a treat that you're going to have today. bishop. they are the presiding bishop, the fellowship of affirming ministries, he is a fantastic speaker and a wonderful mentor. they have been working tirelessly for our right, so help me welcome the bishop. >> good morning, brothers and sisters. claim all right, let me that out. ofm the pastor of the city refuge in san francisco, california. many times in the history of our country, the question of my new laborites -- rights. my rights as a woman, african american, and a same-gender loving woman. i have been in a loving relationship with my partner shirley for 29 years. we were legally married during the window of opportunity in california i stand on behalf of all couples, our families, friends, and religious communities to thank our supporters for the overwhelming support for our right to marry. i also stand to encourage the court to follow the art of justice. as you have in the past. and we can put this issue to rest. can we say, put this issue to rest? put this issue to rest. our

theou know, you bring up military community.is a group of people that have chosen voluntarily to serve our country. i think that both parties are able to look at the military portion of the population that is sort of the above the partisan politics. when you see something like sequestration you see the toempt lawmakers have taken try to believe the military and veterans of the heard and that sequestration will have. there is definitely going to be a fair share carried by the military. you look at the idea of everyone talking about the deployments that will stop. you reducing naval presence. .ermanent changes as station to this is from the defensive perspective and everyday life for the millions americans part tary families.arrat of the department of defense civilians are veterans. they will be furloughed. that is 10% of adults. even though the va is being fair with the benefits and services are still being employeeswhen the dod are furloughed, we will longer lines of commissaries. reduced childcare hours. maybe school weeks are

theou don't believe that guns banned by this bill can be used lawfully for self-defense, then you should be offering an amendment to strike the exception for retired law enforcement. but of course i don't expect that. >> does the senator have an amendment he wishes to call up? >> i would like to call up 13115. >> 13115 is before us. >> in amendment, mr. chairman, would allow members of the armed forces and veterans to obtain and possess the self- defense weapons prohibited by this legislation. members and veterans of the armed forces are the most highly trained and qualified individuals to own these weapons for self-defense purposes. we should think long and hard before disarming these heroes, preventing them from protecting their families and their communities. >> senator feinstein. >> if i understand this, this adds an exemption of retired military. as i understand our bill, no issue has arose in the regard during the 10 years the ban was in effect and what we did in the other bill was exempt possession by the united states or a department or agency of the united states. so that includ

theou have a plan to end bloodshed, the killing? nd now talking about -- what is your comment about that? >> first of all, the problem with refugees comes down to a humanitarian issue and how are we going to turn back at women, children, and the wounded? it is something we cannot do. it is not the jordanian way. we have this sort we open our arms to those who need services. we cannot turn our back on challenges. that is the reality we are facing. jordan has always been a safe haven to the people around us for many, many decades. unfortunately, from that point of view, refugees will continue to come to jordan, and we will continue to look after them as best as we can. the problem is obviously, the burden this has been having on jordan. we have tried to quantify this as much as possible. it is roughly $150 million per year. if those numbers double by the end of the year, we are obviously talking about more. that is not only a problem, but that will be a tremendous drain on our infrastructure and it is causing social problems. that is