tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 28, 2015 7:00am-10:01am EST
the u.s., terrorism, cyber security and relations with iraq, russia and north korea. later, "e&e' greenwire" manuel quinones talks about the top nergy-related stories of 2015. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015]] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] host: as 2015 draws a close, the folks have chosen their person of the year. this year it is angela merkel, the chancellor of germany. number two, according to-time -- ime" is the head of isis and self-declared leader of syria and iraq. and "time" magazine's number three this year, donald trump. a divert list. will go through the rest of "time's" list, we will go through the rest of them. ho is your person of the year?
here is how to take part in the conversation. call the following number on our screen -- looking forward to your comments coming in already or you can leave us an e-mail. good morning. good monday morning to you. "time" magazine, when writing about angela merkel, the german chancellor, they say she brandished a different set of values. -
mr. trump has been making the rounds and making his point in recent days and here's what he had to say recently in grand rapids, michigan, on a rally on this topic. >> so who is number one? trump drudged 46%. "time" magazine, they didn't give me man of the year or the person of the year. they should have. that's why it's heading down the dukes, folks. they gave it to a woman who's not done the right thing in germany and is not doing too well over there. nice woman. i like her. i better like her. i may have to deal with her. hey, putin likes me. i want her to like me too. right? right? host: recent event there at grand rapids. one says anyone who doesn't say climate change should be considered for person of the year. christopher writes bernie sanders because he actually cares for the people and not his
image. -- zach is on the line now from appalachian, new york. zach's a republican. good morning. caller: hello? host: hello, zach. caller: oh, hi. my name is actually jack. i think the screener must have misheard me. very well, jack. you're calling from new york, right? caller: yes, i am. >> who's your person of the year, sir? caller: well, my person of the ar is without a doubt -- host: from sarasota, florida, independent caller, joe. are you there? caller: yes, bernie sanders is going to make a difference. i hope he wins, a positive person and obama and a negative
person. it's bill cosby and mr. garber. they act like they're anxious and innocent and they are -- ey result they're evil and ll cosby, he's a millionaire -- the recent event tchashe have money. that capitalist church for the vatican, the bank, they're billionaires. host: owe, what do you make of the choice of "time," the german chancellor? caller: you can see she's an angel to many people there that are saving their lives and get them from isis. she's kind of like an angel. but europe is like the united states. they're kind of divided.
some people don't want people there fleeing and the other half, it's like the united states. they're afraid of what happened in 9/11 and what happened in the boston bombing. so the brothers that came as child, as children fleeing for their lives and united states opened our doors for them and see how they repay us, i mean, kill americans with bombs, with homemade bombs. host: joe, thank you for calling. jerry is from detroit on the line for democrats. good morning. who is your person of the year? caller: i would -- if i had one to pick for the year, i would . y malala she was the girl from afghanistan who was shot in the head by the taliban for trying
to advocate for education for girls in that country. and she was also the subject of a movie called "he named me malala." host: tell us more about why she would be at the top of your list. caller: i would say because i think of her heroism. i think of her perseverance and standing up to injustice of all kinds and her ability to really speak out on the issues that really matter. -- in the sense that she -- i don't know quite how to put it, but she demonstrates through her courage that people really can make a difference in the world. host: thanks a lot for calling, jerry, from detroit. to twitter. the president of the united states is this person's person 5152 is r, ran love,
the writer here. his presidency has shown the world how racist our country is. potus has brought people of color together. that's at twitter this morning. a little more from facebook. patricia writes pope francis. the crowds he drew with loving speeches makes trump and the rest of them look like the chumps that they are. james writes for better or for worse i say trump. not because i like him. the fact that he's turned the process on its side and pump new life into politics that seem to ram down our throats without proper debate. he is the person of the year to me. travis is calling now from centerville, virginia. good morning, travis. caller: hey, how's it going? my person of the year is a close tie but pope francis and bernie sanders right behind him. and the reason why i say pope francis, even though i'm an atheist, i still think pope
francis brought a light to climate change and he sort of challenged the role of his community to say climate change is real. it's a threat. we've got to solve this now because it's going to hurt us big time. and that's why i think pope francis should have been the person of the year. host: thank you for calling. appreciate it. here's a little bit from "time" and the managing editor. everything you wanted to know about "time"'s person of the year. a little bit about their process and their history in all of this. they write here that the criterion is the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives for good or will and embody what was important about the year. a lot of news is bad news and a lot of people who make bad news are very powerful people. "time's" editors aren't immune to that reality. famously, they named hitler in 1938 and stalin in 1939 and again in 1942.
these were men who had a huge impact, not just in those years, but over the entire century. it's easy to stand by those choices looking back, arguably, you could do a bad guy every year and be justified. that, from the managing editor at "time" regarding how they pick their person of the year. looking forward to your social media comments and your call but first, about angela merkel. she's actually featured in the "washington times." this piece out of berlin. the headline says "queen of europe keeps careful balance in turbulent times." they write that the political climate in germany had set the stage for a busy winter as ms. merkel struggles to accommodate the refugees and convince her countrymen of the fundamental morality of accepting the desperate visitors. the refugees, they're talking about here, as during much of her tenure, the chancellor
appears far more appreciated and respected beyond germany's borders than she is within them. she was picked as "time" magazine's person of the year this year and ranks second on "forbes'" most powerful people list behind president vladimir putin but far ahead of president obama and pope francis. she is not backing down from a fight as the continent struggles to deal with the crush of migrants from syria, writes the "washington times," afghanistan and other crisis spot. many say her welcoming attitude has only worsened the problem. and a little bit lighter note regarding the chancellor, "saturday night live" recently spoofed this whole decision making thing and poked a little fun at the process here. here is "s.n.l."'s kate mckinnon portraying angela merkel discussing the named "times" person of the year. >> "time" magazine named angela merkel as person of the year.
here to comment is german chancellor, angela merkel. [applause] [laughter] i'm sorry. are you ok, chancellor? >> i'm trying to celebrate and my body is rejecting it. >> your body is rejecting celebrating? ok. >> well, let me throw up. >> well, "time's" person on the year, right? you must be flattered by the honor. >> of course. 2015 has nothing. greece wanted to borrow more money. syria asked if one million refugees could sleep on my couch. and my favorite blazer has been disconned. -- discontinued. plus, look at my face on the cover. this is like a pile of oatmeal with two blueberries for eyes. are we done here?
[laughter] host: a little bit of fun there from "saturday night live". who is your person of the year? this respond nothing what "time" is doing. they picked angela merkel as number one. the head of isis, number two. donald trump number three. number four as we can see here, is the group black lives matter. a new civil rights movement is turning a left into a political force, writes the folks at "times." that's number four. and we have jane on the line from ohio, independent caller. hey, jane. caller: hello. host: good morning to you. caller: hello? host: good morning. you're on the air. caller: yes. lawrence lerks sseg. -- lesseg. he attempted to run for president in the democratic
party. host: right. harvard professor, right if caller: yes. >> and what do you like about him? caller: well, his philosophy, which is we need to change our way of voting and paying for our elections. host: anything else? caller: and the criteria to run for president and democratic party changed the rules after the fact and he was unable to run. host: that was jane there, picking lawrence lessig who briefly ran for the presidential race. got out several weeks ago. christopher calling from. . go ahead, christopher. caller: for me, it's the chancellor, angela merkel.
she lived for a particular time in the old g.d.r. and so she learned what that means for germans in particular. she's helped the immigration issues and economic crises across europe. the european union is in tatters at times. other times, it's been stronger. so for me, she's an extremely important figure on the global stage. she's also been to an extent here and there, between countries like russia and belarus. been authoritarian but she's been able to bring them together. she's been a major bridge for middle east issues. and even questions over in china. so for me, yeah, it stands out why i can understand she's an important figure and she should probably be the number one person in "time." and i really appreciate that. and in terms of -- host: go ahead. caller: in terms of secretary of state kerry, i extremely look up to this man who's done a lot as a secretary of state in the iran
deal. people will look in the future and would say it wasn't a perfect deal but it's the best that he could for the time. i don't have enough time to talk about it as much, but i respect these two individuals the most on a world stage. host: all right. lots of different names. a diverse group put out my "times" and our viewers. looking forward to your calls over the next 30-minute period. here is "times" number five. the president of iran. they write that iran's pitts battling hard liners in an effort to end his country's isolation. it's part of "times'" list of people of the year. here is steve. the american cup, he writes. the american cup. they've been the news a lot both in the bad and the good. we have david on the line now from auburn, new york, republican.
good morning, david. aller: good morning. i'm going for the doctors without borders. host: tell us why. caller: i would say, well, what they've just been through recently with the bombing and the fact that they've been out there forever and ever, i would say courage and duty and verything that goes with that. they're all positive. i admire them. so i think they thousand get a -- should get a vote too. host: let's hear from james, a republican from north dakota. good morning to you, james. caller: hey. how's it going? host: good. who is your person of the year, james? caller: well, i would think it should have been trump. i'm kind of might support him. i'm a little worried about it. i think it's the perreault syndrome.
i think -- perot syndrome. i like what he has to say hough. host: do you think you would make a good president? caller: i'm not sure. i've got a text coming in. host: all right. go ahead, james. caller: i like -- i wish he articulate better what i've been saying for years and what other conservatives, not the knee. owe cons say. -- neo-cons say. it's the reason we don't have different groups of voting blocks. moratorium, we had in 1924 to 1965 where we halted the immigration and that was necessary and important for my generation. he's courageous enough to talk about eisenhower who rounded up mexican illegals with the military and he brought that conversation out.
and the shock wave it produced was an example of the power of racial orthodoxy, the incredible liberal reaction and even the republican reaction of total emotion. trump actually has history on his side. he's saying our leaders always halted migration from different areas. even norwegians coming into this area, into wisconsin, they were a problem from 1870's to 1900's because they were not assimilating. i guess those blue-eyed, blonde haired norwegians, it was racist, i guess. it absorbed them into the country. german migration was halted in 1914 because the hornet's nest of german mill trasme. -- militarism. and the great depression before that. it was necessary. you have to have a halt and a
lull in order to unite the people and he's right about that. i wish he would articulate it better. he's not a good speech giver. and i think merkel -- was a good choice. hitler was also chosen by "time" magazine in the 1930's. he destroyed millions of people and he destroyed germany for many decades, but he never destroyed the german people. merkel will end up destroying the german people because of the migration of a million people in germany. germany can never absorb them and never will. the media is not reporting about a lot of the brutal things that are happening with these muslims. host: james, going to let you go. get some other voices here on the person of the year. jordan is here from missouri. an independent caller. what's your name? what do you think? caller: my name is jordan.
i just think that donald trump should have been "time" person of the year just the fact that nobody thought he could achieve with what he's achieving right now by being in front, especially in the national polls through the republican party. and nobody really thought at the beginning. they thought he was a joke and he wouldn't survive it. and he's actually been thriving. so i think he should have been it. and look, i used to like merkel, but, i mean, she opened up her borders to all them people coming in and flooding her and look what happened over there in paris with that terrorist attack. and, you know, we just don't want that here for america. it's loot like we're amendment immigrants and we want the good ones over here and i think everybody agrees on that. the good christians and the good muslims that are just trying to flee that continent, but they need to set up like safe zones
out there in syria because i know them people want to stay in their own country. i mean, i know i would if i had to flee this country, i would want to come back to my home country. and that's my take on it. i just think that she's just destroying the country and it's sad, it really is. host: thoughts of jordan there. a couple of callers, a few callers, at least mentioned donald trump. one of the more interesting stories from over the weekend concerns donald trump really, through the eyes of bernie sanders over on the democratic side. here is a headline in the "wall street journal." these trump backers as his allies. he thinks he could persuade frontrunners to back him in the 2016 race. he was on cbs yesterday and talked about this on the "face the nation" program. >> you and donald trump are the big surprise political stories.
you've suggested recently that your message about the economic inequality can appeal to the trump voters. explain how that happens. >> look, many of trump's supporters are working class people. and they are angry. and they are angry because they're working thunderstorm warning hours below wages. they're angry because there are jobs that left this country and one to kind and are low wage countries. they can't retire with dignity. and what trump has done successfully, i would say, is take that anger, take that anxiety to terrorism and say to a lot of people in this country, the reason for our problems is because of mexicans and he says they're all criminals and rapists. we've got to hate mexicans. or he says about the muslims. they're all terrorists. we've got to kick them out of this couldn't that's what we have to deal with to make america great. and this is a guy who does not
want to raise the minimum wage. in fact, he thinks wages in america are too high. but he does want to give hundreds of billons of dollars of tax breaks to the top .3 of 1%. i think four years -- i think we can make the case that if we really want to address the issues that people are concerned about, why the middle class is disappearing, massive income and wealth inequality in this country that we need policies that bring us together, that take on the greed of wall street, the greed of corporate america and create a middle class that works for all of us rather than an economy that works just for a few. >> and regarding bernie sanders, b.c. writes twitter. bernie sanders gets his message out in spite of a media blackout. he works tirelessly for the people of this nation. he is the choice for person of the year. we're still covering "time"'s
list led by angela merkel. you folks out there on who you think should be person of the year. rhonda writes the unemployed americans because while they are ignored, their skills and third-world educated people are brought in to do their jobs, they still help each other because d.c. isn't doing anything but hurt them more. adam says hillary clinton because she is so brave to run for president of the u.s. while under federal investigation on felony charges. it must take so much courage to on national e live television. lots of supportive hillary clinton comments as well from other folks. victor writes congress is the most corrupt of the year. and thomas this hanging on the line from d.c., independent. good morning, tom. caller: good morning, and thank you for taking my call. host: you bet. caller: first of all, i want to thank each and every one of
those honest americans that did their best to do good this country. i don't think our president obama -- i want to thank president obama to bringing help to this country. and you tried your best to give us the news. thank you, anyway. but i want to say that my person f the year, first of all, is the minority leader who is now on the custody by the nigerian army and he has lost six of his sons. he's the nelson mandela of "time." we need to pay attention to this guy. and second one, i believe that the general who tried his best to fight terrorism in iraq and in his utmost to save as many lives as he can. what we have been successful for years, but using the most, you know, accurate weapons that we still believe are going to save lives. i think we have to listen to people. and we have to do right this
year. and i am supporting all those people who are killing those isis liars in iraq and i really want to change want to bring change to this country. so the president must be elected to bring some change to this country and unite us against terrorism which is tearing us apart. thank you. host: thanks for calling. more from "time" number six is the founder of uber. with his $62.5 billion start-up. uber founder is changing the nature of work. they also have caitlyn jenner on the list at number seven. and we can take a look at the page for caitlyn jenner as well there as we take this next call, hopefully by telling my story, i can make people think, he writes. and chris is calling from texas, republican. good morning, chris. caller: good morning.
hi. i wanted to -- my person of the year is glen beck. host: how come? caller: because he -- about eight years ago, started letting everyone know what was going on in the progressive era in the republican and the democrat party. because i didn't know. i just trusted that the democrats were, you know, americans, too, that they wanted the same thing we wanted which was capitalism and successful lives and independent free life. and that's not the case anymore for the democrats. and there's a lot of republicans that are tending to want to be socialists as well. that's not going to work in this country. we're a capitalistic society. and we have to earn our way to have the things that we get.
thank you. host: thank you for calling. let's go to vero beach in florida, republican caller. what's your name? caller: noshi. host: go ahead, please. caller: well, i choose trump because he's a leader. e tells the truth. -- ould change -- and undiscernible] they do not agree with the german people and now there are four million muslim turkish, you know. and this is not good for the country and they want to destroy
the country. ook at egypt, syria. all these countries became minorities. americans, take care of yourself and take care of europe. host: let's hear from delanore now who is in conway, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you caller: the bernie sanders clip said -- he lied -- donald trump never said that. he never said he hated all muslims wereall terrorists. he never said that it the news media put that out all over the country. host: are you putting donald trump the top of your list? caller: no. i think bernie sanders is on the
right track but i don't like for him to add on to what donald trump said. it's not the truth. they are doing that all over the country. they even brought in tom brokaw to say what trump said but he never said what tom brokaw said. the truth is critical in this campaign. if you go to time.com, you can see what they've done in the past and this year it's angela merkel as person of the year last year, it was the bola -- the apollo fighters. in 2013, it was pope francis. in 20 oh, it was president obama. the year of the protester according to time magazine. zuckerberg, mark the founder and head of facebook.
line frombert on the st. paul, minnesota. republican line, who is your person of the year? the minnesota vikings had a blowout last night against the giants and are well underway to the super bowl. ted is without a doubt. host: how come? caller: he is a fair man and a decent man and he is for the common voter. is not for the rich. he is not for the people who have all the money. i know what donald trump is about. he is not going to win this election. ted cruz is for the common man. and, in woman. he is a decent family man and i think he would make an excellent
president because he cares about the people out there. that's about all i have to say about ted cruz. i think he is an excellent man for the job. host: all right, there is lots of other news this monday morning. today has this headline -- the storms are out there and you can see that people are assessing the damage to a storage facility destroyed by a tornado in garland, texas with 11 people killed. epic snow and floods are forecast for the region, not just texas that much of the central part of the country. iraq you forces claim victory in ramadi which we have been following all week. looking at "the wall street
journal" - the iraq you forces have built up momentum across -- against the militants. some say that rqamadi is now free from the islamic state and one of the other big battles coming up is for mosul. barney is on the line from bradenton, florida, independent caller, who is your person of the year? the police officers. use daily force against black citizens of the
united states. i was wondering, you can hear a black person was shot 15 or 20 times. putaren't other groups are it like that or does it happen? host: why do you think? caller: i don't know. it should be discussed. we should have had the discussion on that magazine. host: ok. talking about police and shootings and the washington post has this headline -- this is a photograph at a vigil in chicago. that is in "the washington post times," "the new york
more of your calls on the person of the year. georgia, democrat, good morning. my person of the year is president obama. host: why? caller: he tried to help , they got those crazy people in the white house. host: what are you looking forward to in his final caller: year in the white house? he should keep doing what he is doing. host: ok, let's hear from howard in new york city, good morning. caller: good morning.
i just want to clarify one thing. someone who should not be private -- person of the year should be donald trump. several weeks ago, he was on "60 minutes" with vladimir putin and and he said he met vladimir in and they formed a nice relationship except for one detail. vladimir been was in moscow and i never met. -- and they never met. the other new hampshire later was also on the news. for a person to be person of the year, they have to be trustworthy. as for donald trump to claim that he met vladimir putin when he was the continents away is beething that was certainly a skeptical provision for anyone suggesting he should be person of the year. i'm surprised c-span is not done
a whole program on that print you need to get the bottom of this story. host: alexis calling from north carolina, independent caller. caller: good morning. malalastrongly about being up there. another caller mentioned her but she is pushing for women and in remoteand equality parts of the world that we would never think about going. she does it hopefully and graciously. we've got to change the way we see things. taking everyone only as strong as our weakest link. we have to bring them up.
she keep the mise is that. -- i think she optimizes --epitomizes that. i don't have sons. but i have a daughter in the military. i worry for her safety. knowing, she wants to have children. we've got to change our perspective. host: thanks for calling. we have time for a few more calls and will run through some of the previous person of the year nominees. 2009 on the he in heels of the major financial crisis in this country. 2008, 2007bama in
was the russian president vladimir putin. choice in 2006. and persons of the year, there were several here for this particular year including will gates. george bush in 2004. inverness, florida, you are on the line, democratic caller. caller: hey. please, who is your person of the year? officerst's two police that i believe they are from texas. and aull over a family set of giving them a ticket because their children did not have car seats, they took them to the store and got three brand-new car seats for their children. they sent them on their way for a holiday. that what's going on
in this country between the police and the public come i think these two officers did the right thing. i honor them. host: thanks for calling. in wisconsin, independent color, good morning. are you there? victor from georgia. caller: yes. good morning. for person of the year would be obama. host: tell us why you caller: because he has stood up to the republicans, because he has continued to try to do what is right. refugeesied to get the
joann is calling now from vero beach, another call from florida, go ahead. caller: hi, good morning. president obama i think should be the person of the year for endured with obstructionism for the past seven years. i am very happy at this time with all of the rush to troops on the ground and all the hawks coming out of the woodwork that he is showing grace under fire that he has shown against incredible obstruction for seven years. , i voted forhings
him and i like him but i don't like everything he did but i think it's amazing his grace under fire. i hope he has great support at home with what he has to go through. that is why i think he deserves it. host: that was our last call it if you did not get in, try again on the backend end of the program and we will do this again hearing about your person of the year in the last 30 or 40 minutes of the show. and whene a break now we come back, we will talk to kevin baron, the executive editor of defense one and we about the defense issues of the year and major national security threats looking ahead. we also talk later with green manuel quinones.a will have your calls him
those issues. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ with congress on holiday recess, the c-span network features a full line of a primetime programming. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, laura logan and sebastian younger and other journalists who have risked their lives covering events in the middle east. tuesday night at 8:00 p.m., celebrity activists speak out on issues.nd a variety of it thence from the c-span archives featuring notable public figures wednesday night. thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a look back at the year in congress and on new year's day, friday night at 8:00, law enforcement officials and activists and journalists examine the prison system and its impact on minority communities area on booktv, tonight at eight 30 p.m., memoirs reporters and activists
and a former white house press secretary. tuesday night at 8:00 features books on economics and the economy. wednesday night, authors talk about the books on science and technology. thursday, discussions on isis and terrorism and on new year's day, friday night at 8:00 p.m., several in-depth programs from this year. c-spanican history tv on three, tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, the 70th anniversary of the liberation of auschwitz. tuesday night at 8:00, it can congressional ceremony on the 100th anniversary of the 13th amendment and a debate wednesday night on which present would be a better model for gop candidates today. calvin coolidge or ronald reagan? thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, road to the white house rewind and on new year's day, friday playwright and starve the broadway musical the book" accepts prize special achievement award.
those are some of the progress featured in primetime on the c-span networks. tonight on the communicators, we will take a look at how the music industry works. of music professor business at berklee college of music discusses how many music platforms have impacted the way musicians are paid and what reforms congress can implement to make the payment structure more transparent. is joined by jim phillips, a reporter for communications daily. >> certainly, the narrative of artists and songwriters feeling like they don't understand where their money is coming from is not new. i think we are living in a world today where everything is trackable. the nsa knows where i am and knows where you are and nos what you're talking about and there is no reason that artists and creators should not be able to know where their songs are being streamed and how they are being paid for that.
communicators" tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. >> "washington journal" continues. executiven baron is editor of defense want to talk about defense and national security threats in the coming year, good morning. inwake up to this headline "usa today ." what is ahead for this battle against isis? guest: on the ground, the next raqaa ises mosul and the headquarters for isis. we had lower level generals that said the city was liberated in the central government building had been taken over and they
said we had not gone into it later, they said we went in an overnight we heard from the spokesman for u.s. forces in iraq saying -- using language more measured and saying we congratulate the iraqis on their progress in the city. there are parts of the city that are still not liberated. this is not a total victory but iny are on the way it host: your piece and defense on, you talk about the anti-isis campaign. , how do youoadly expect this campaign to play itself out? who else might be involved? guest: it's more of the same. the president has said more frequently the last month that they wanted international coalition and local fighters and iraqis and the saudi's to be involved and the turks.
they want the region to do its fighting for itself. that is nothing new. what's new is how isys has spread and there have been leaders that have popped up across libya. the spread of isys inspired attacks coming to our shores like paris and california. no longer thought of -- more people don't think of isys as the next iraq war. i think they are starting to conceptualize this fight is something that is far more than boots on the ground. host: despite these headlines talking about rolling back isys in certain places, the republican congressman, peter king, the house homeland security committee, was on one of the sunday shows yesterday and talked about isys as being a
stronger operation that was a year ago. [video clip] reaction to get your to the news in the past 24 hours per a purported audiotape recording from the isys leader was released in which he says that neither airstrikes by russia nor by the us-led coalition in syria and iraq has done much damage to his organization. what do you make of that? i would expect him to say that. we have had some impact but unfortunately come overall, he is probably right that after 15 months of air attacks by the u.s., it has had minimal impact on ice is considering how long the attacks have been going on. as far as the russians, they are focusing their attacks on the syrian resistance as opposed to isis. isys is strong and i believe they are stronger than it was six to eight months ago and i have a larger landmass under their control not just in iraq
but also syria and they are making great inroads in afghanistan. they also intended to attack the united states. in the last several month, it has become clear that they want to launch an attack on the u.s. host: any thoughts? guest: there is a lot in their to unpack. the military says isys is not pushing forward on the ground. they are not taking new cities and he never made it into baghdad. that was feared a year ago. that was the big question. that did not happen. 8000 plus been american airstrikes that have had an impact to some degree. lots of fighters have been killed in lots of medications were cut off as well as
supplies. what the congressman represents is the viewpoint of wanting more action on the ground a lot quicker. the romani operation is a good example where there was a asking for tens of thousands of troops thought the u.s. could have led a coalition a long time ago and saved lives and gone into the city. but military commanders in as president felt that would have jah and iter falu would've cost a lot of american lives. there was a political decision made not to do it and 70 outskirts of ramadi and train the forces and tell isys we are coming. america has been saying this for months and months. americans are now saying we have done what we want to get they say we are in control of the place of the fight. in thatressman is right
the nonmilitary on the ground spread of isys influence, the paris attacks, the attack in california, that fight is clearly doing very well in they are recruiting lots of people. there is some inpatients or wrestling in the american electorate of what this country will do about that. -- that is an answer not a problem that requires 10-20,000 troops to solve. host: there is plenty of time for your calls and facebook postings and beats. the phone numbers are on the bottom of your screen. our guest is executive editor of defense one, kevin baron, and has worked for foreign policy magazine is a national security writer as well as the national journal in washington
guest: that's not good news. it sounds familiar if you are following these wars about what happens when americans plowed after a large ground war and after they have and local forces as the americans said they would, what happens next? i was remembering a couple of about a dozen afghan generals came to the the gun and the marines talked to a few of them and they said this is what would happen. they were nervous about when the americans would leave. they say we don't have the logistical support. not about storming and , it was about
sustaining a security force to a country where there is going to be a lot of opposition. while most of us have turned our attention to iraq and syria of all places, and left afghanistan behind, it has been american special operators doing counterterrorism within with the president said they would do and reports are coming out that they are probably doing more than counterterrorism. they are still just fighting the war. they are in provinces where they say the u.s. and afghans were about celebrity areas and they did. host: let's take our first call. fort lauderdale, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? can i go ahead? host: what would you like to ask or say? caller: good morning, gentlemen,
how are you? my question and my thought we are a little behind -- can you your tv on mute? caller: ok. host: that will help. caller: thank you again, sorry. my thinking is that we have three basic enemies right now. we have north korea, syria, and .ussia if we were to capture these people and actually put them on trial under their own people, we would eliminate these three people. we would eliminate basically 95% of all the killing threats we have. we would be able to go against isis with everything we had.
to just capture these people and put them in front of the world court for war crimes or crimes against humanity with their own people, otherre a lot of the rogue factions out there that are trying to kill people for --l for noah can't reason for no apparent reason, we can show up as a force for nato that the world stands united against killing people and show that democracy really works and stands tall. it's a far-fetched idea in concept but we have a lot of special forces. if our allies work together with nato, there only three human
beings on earth that are keeping us from having peace on earth. it's an interesting idea. i'm not sure if you are asking about capturing the leaders of fighters evers or supporters of the country but wanting a a point of much more public demonstration of the consequences of these which youggression are not alone in. many folks have wanted to see people put on trial. the wanted an aggressive tone in international forums. there has not been an issue stomping at the u.n. until just recently after the paris attacks. to yourn exception western leaders coming out with
the kind of language that would demand a change in behavior of global leaders to the kind you're asking for. people, youpturing have to send forces to get them which means you have to invade sovereign nations to get them. complicated wars in complicated times in a mix of all of that. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] mentioned caller: host: the caller mentioned russia. july and it's the senate armed services confirmation in general mumford was asked what the greatest threat to u.s. national security was. [video clip] >> my assessment today senators that russia presents the greatest threat to our national security. would you want to elaborate that? >> and russia, we have a nuclear
power. it not only has the capability to violate the sovereignty and do things that are inconsistent with their national interest but they are in the process of doing so. if you want to talk about a nation that could pose an existential the united states, i would have to point to russia. if you look at their behavior, is nothing short of alarming. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] host: that was several months ago. how do you assess the relationship? the relationship with russia does not good clearly we hear this a lot. somebody asks the top generals what the number one threat is. the intelligence leaders get the same question. many push back and say it's a trap. , the military
leaders would say russia is a threat to the united states. the next part of that sentence for the next conversation is that few of the members who asked them the question, they are talking about nuclear weapons. russia is a nuclear armed country and that's the big threat. the russian involvement and the you can is not the number one threat. the russian involvement in syria is no threat to the united states. as a whole collectively, vladimir putin is what they are talking about instead of the whole of russia. the part of the vladimir putin forces following him, i followed this relationship for a while from a military perspective. it was a couple of years ago before the ukraine that the united states and russia were engaged in more exercises together than ever before.
maritime or staff exercises between officers. as the ukrainian action happened and syria happened, communication stopped between the american military leaders. i asked a general dempsey last summer, do you think this is something the entire russian military is for? at the time, we thought had that's how things work. since then, there is little confidence of what the rich -- of what the russian military would do or wouldn't do. they have just started talking to the russians again to coordinate syria. let's hear from california
, independent caller. caller: thank you, good morning. give me a moment here. concerned about the home front. people in the united states are ideologyeatened by an from outside the united states that comes over here to kill her people, our children. we have a lot of veterans. i of my veteran myself. they need jobs. a lot of them are committing suicide. hundreds. i don't know the numbers but too many, one is too many.
we can match the people who need jobs, veterans to protect ourselves. we have to wake up and protect ourselves from these fanatics go matter what we do. tose people are determined brainwash them from childhood. they want to kill us. there is no doubt about that. we need to defend ourselves and put these people, these marines, protect us.rs to host: thanks for calling. there are lots of concerns about the home front on the california shooting woke people up. there are two different concerns. one concern is those who want to come to the united states from abroad. could have been directed by a group like isis or other
terrorist groups and those that are inspired from sitting at home through the internet. that is the greater worry for homeland security officials. johnson repeated last month oft concern that the idea terrorism inspired individual is incredibly hard to find. they are admitting that they are not going to. this the new agent these attacks will happen in they are asking americans to speak up and say something. out your neighbors but don't think of it as ratting them out. we need to know information because there are some behaviors that are warning signs. if we can get some eyes and these people, maybe we can stop something.
even the california shooters have plenty of signs that could have led to somebody saying something and perhaps stopping them. as for the veterans issue, suicide is still a significant problem in the active duty military and the veteran community. it's not just because of departments and combat experience. there's something more to it. the army spent billions of dollars to get to it to figure out one of the trigger points, using modern technology to find if somebody lost a girlfriend or they own money or they are from a bad family situation. maybe they deployed one too many times. i have written a lot about this as well. you can have the same individual with the same warning signs is the one next to him and one of them does and one doesn't. it's a complicated issue. the good news is, i don't know anybody in america that does not
know that suicide in the military is a problem. it has the full attention of the pentagon. and of the country. question of larger how the country cares for its veterans and how it cares for its troops and everyone who fights abroad in these wars and will change. many people can say i was a veteran of those wars. what do the fighters say now, the ongoing global war on terrorism? there will be thousands that will fight that are deploying at high tempos. there will be more suicides. host: mount sinai, new york, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, i want you to be honest.
is this the result of the united states invasion of iraq? we created a hornets nest of problems for the military as well as the american people. us for ourhey hated freedoms and now we no longer have freedoms in this country as a result of george bush and dick cheney. honest.ask you to be was shot shock them all an act of terror against the iraqi people? they complied with of years of sanctions and saddam hussein was not a good guy but it was not our place to do what we did to that country. our three melted nuclear reactors the greatest threat to the united states off the west coast? i think that's a greater threat to national security than the
dialogue you gentlemen are having. it seems to be motivated by greed, money, and power and the military-industrial complex. i am always honest. if the united states had never invaded iraq and saddam hussein was still in power, perhaps we would not have the global situation we have today. it did happen and lots of events unfolded to get there. i don't know of it does good to blame on the past. there is a situation to deal with now and how it goes forward is what i'm interested in. the american invasion of iraq in l went to theowel
united nations to make that happen and make it a legal military action but ultimately, the united states led a coalition to invade a sovereign nation and engaged a bunch of actions. on nuclearpart was fallout. the caller thought that was a greater than what we were dealing with. there are lots of things that are much greater threats to individuals and the future of this country than a lot of what terrorist activities are doing a broad. that is a big foreign-policy question. echoes back to be original iraq invasion, how much of a threat to the united states are the activities going on the middle east? does the u.s. military need to be involved? does is a subject i am most
fascinated with and i keep my eyes on. it's this president's high bar for military intervention in the middle east. every time there is a major event, there seems to be people in washington thinking we will go and send troops and start all over again. they really have not. it has forced a new way for the region to fight the war for itself whether you like it or not. that is the strategy whether you like it or not. that is what is happening. that goes back to what the caller was concerned about, the legality of the united states getting involved. host: i want to get your take on a piece that's part of a piece we recently read in "christian science monitor." they talked to a former dod intelligence official named michael vickers and this is what he has to say in
in the piece. what's your take? the head ofs intelligence and the pentagon, the undersecretary. i spoke with him a little bit over the years and he is one of several intelligence leaders, military intelligence leaders who have come out of the pentagon is speaking more frankly like this. it goes to what i was saying earlier that the current wars will be for by special operators who are enabled by conventional forces. they will do it across multiple countries, across large regions, and it will be a lot of kill -capture missions but it's not waves of air campaigns are ground forces.
it will not be a naval bombardment the massive degree. the military still organizes .tself for those larger fights special operations is a smaller part of that. it should be a bigger part of that i think you will see some movement to make that happen. i have already reported that this -- that the head of special operations command will likely be the next head of central command and will take over for general austin. that's a general -- that's a big shift. they say this is how the wars will be fought going forward. atkers is also getting looking beyond the military and the rest of the campaign. these guys have worked
hand-in-hand with the state department during the iraq counterinsurgency campaign and during afghanistan. general rodriguez has said similar things. he set up we are going to down a terrorist group and help nigeria, we need a whole government approach. they want help outside the military and i want to know what's the larger campaign. strategically, there is a lot of handwringing about this administration for lacking a about the larger fifty-year picture for the middle east. rou will frequently hea people say you need to start at the end point. . no one is is out there explaining it. flushing, new york, independent caller, good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. asking howtart by
the united states and nato overlook the oil that was being trucked out of syria by isl into turkey and generating the revenue for this organization? it was going on for so long. look somewhat hypocritical. vladimir putin described this action and directed his fighters to stop this oil flow. sudden, we said we have to join in and stop this oil flow to generate revenue for isl as well. it seems duplicitous for us to condemn vladimir putin and realize this oil was being shipped out. attacked iraq which is a sovereign country and condemned vladimir putin for doing the
same in the ukraine. it seems there's a lot of stuff but the american people are being fooled. on that welot going have to answer to. host: thank you for calling. have the oil situation been going on? guest: this has been going on since the beginning of the ice his campaign. that don'tome facts make the evening news. purposely held back. in the beginning of the air campaign, one of the first showed us american strikes on oil refinery. they said you can see the towers on the left and the buildings on the right. we struck that building on the right but we left the tower standing because we did not want to completely destroyed the ability of the locals to make
money. the americans held back and have held back consistently to be surgical. here comes vladimir putin and andrussians with less care started to attack different targets including some of these oil locations being held by different groups. it would help the regime and help assad. the americans recently decided to strike a large amount of oil trucks. they had been telling the truckers that this is coming. the americans were not convinced that these truckers were terrorists. they were likely to be locals trying to make money. the americans were criticized.
if you are trucking oil for isis , they said you are not one of us. that gets to the core of these battles. you have a president and military leaders have really held back on the trigger in many clearecause it's not that from a ground perspective. there are no blue and gray uniforms to get on the ground many cases. in some cases there are and where there is, there is no action. the story about the oil trucks and if the administration when after oil enough is much more complemented -- complicated than what we have heard. it boils down to that the americans waited and were more deliberate about who they went after. the president did an interview last week and was asked about isis and what the
public might be missing about the strategy. >> what's fair is that boost-paris, you had a about the of news horrible attack their. viciousness with very savvy media operations. as a consequence, if you have been watching television for the last month, all you have been seeing and all you been hearing about is these guys with masks or black flags were potentially coming to get you. i understand why people are concerned. but is a serious situation what is important is for people that the power, the strength of the united states and its allies are not
threatened by an organization thatthis in the same way al qaeda was able to carry out one spectacular attack. we ended up making changes to harden homeland defenses. it took a while for us to ultimately snuff out for al qaeda and there are still lingering remnants. at no point was there a sense that it could do catastrophic damage to us. islyou referred to the sophisticated media operation and the american media. are the media being played? the media is pursuing ratings. this is a legitimate news story. up to the media to make a determination about how they want to cover things. there is no doubt that the
actions of isl are designed to amplify their power and the threat they pose. that helps them recruit. adds to the twisted thoughts mighte young person they want to have carry out an action that they are part of a larger movement. i think the american people absorb that an understandably are concerned. on our side, there is a of what i criticism have been doing and the administration has been doing in that on a regular basis, i don't think we have ascribed all the work we have done for more than a year to defeat isl. host: any reaction? you hear a president as
being very deliberate in his words. he is trying to explain maybe for the first time in depth his thinking behind what it will take to stop terrorism. country andget the people watching him in a different mindset, away from what the conversation at the top level has been which is whether or sen ground troops not? it's only in the last month have we seen this. we should expect to see more explaining to americans and asking for patients. this is the era we live in. this is the age of terrorism.
you could wipe out the fighters pretty easily in iraq and syria if you sent over mountain fighters. lives andost american that has been the president's bar french the emmys not willing to go there. host: where do you think the voice of congress will be moving forward? would be surprised if congress had a voice when it comes to the war. there is a much talk about it at all. when the new armed services committee chairman came into the office he your ago, i asked him if he is satisfied at the level of attention iraq is getting from the leadership and he said no. we reporters a cover congress know that congress is not debate the war. whengiven maybe 20 minutes they are debating the defense spending bills. i might have been in the authorization bill as well. it is caps off the floor. you will not see a vote on the
authorization for the use of military force. members are not going to put themselves on record voting for or against the war in they will complain about it and talk about it on air and hit the president try to separate the policy decisions from the generals who support them or are carrying them out. an election year but as far as any legislation or use checkislative power to down anytime of moment, i'll think we will see that. kevin is on the line from albuquerque, democrat, go ahead. hi, i think the threat of isl and al qaeda has been enormously exaggerated. to 2000, since then, the number of casualties
inflicted on the united states by terrorists is fewer than 4000. most of them were on 9/11 when al qaeda got very lucky. we had no security in our airplanes. fact, compared to that 4000, our lack of gun control laws have caused 30,000 gun deaths per year. 2000, thatears since is 450,000 gun deaths because of lax gun control laws. terrorism only counted 4000. it's an insignificant threat by comparison. from tim inhear colorado, independent caller. caller: thank you for taking my call.
a couple of questions and i don't want to blame any any i'm trying to look forward to understand what's a most confounding problem. this is really a war of religion. we have seen what happens when we create vacuums and take out dictators that have forced their countries to stay together. we see what happens now when there is not the separation of church and state. i am asking you to look back and ask if this is like the christian wars? how did they come to an and and how will this work come to an end and do a have a vietnam malaise hanging over us? had we not been fighting, maybe we would be more proactive to take as battle on. is it a religious war? how do you deal with that? is there a malaise hanging over us question mark those are our
questions. guest: the second part first. think it's malaise from vietnam, it's malaise from iraq. wars and, i frequently -- on vacuums and how wars and, frequently the military guys will tell you it is about stability. the stability comes a lot of different ways. one of the ways it comes is through these regimes, these undemocratic folks. long time coming. look at egypt, for example. that was a lot of concern he was going to come in, take , put on aiform
suit, and become the next dictator. and a lot of people in the pentagon said yes, that is right, because he is not isis. there was a partner in the region who was about stability, .nd democracy things he isof bad doing, but look at the region. he is not attacking israel, for example. they are attacking common enemies, there is some traction for the first time. there is something new happening. watch that, if you want to see how these wars are going to end, how the region is going to change, it is going to be in the behaviors of their leaders. will they work together in concert? will they work to the inclusion
of their peoples, sunni, shia, women as well? situationt led to the we are in now. withpulation unsatisfied their lives. -- gun control, this issueted with because of california. california was an example of two different things happening at once. inspiration,rorism but you also had a good old-fashioned american workplace shooting. the president has now set in the
coming year he will make a push our gun-control, and we will see what happens there. if i have to make a prediction, i have to bet that whatever he will propose will be far less than anybody is worried about. those who are worried about our right to bear arms do not need to worry. should there be more control or less control, i think the same -- the same underlying argument that goes on with terrorism is about to change my mindset. the change of ideology. heidi stop isis, how do you stop violent behavior? thing goes with them violence. i am curious to see how the administration approaches it. until the country gets into a , that it comeset from the top down, that it is led by the president, led by their political leaders against gun violence, maybe something
like the just say no campaign against drugs or stopping drunk driving, these are major public health information campaigns to get americans to change their behaviors and that worked. it is different in taking away guns. give upmericans to their guns would be futile, and possibly unconstitutional. instead, a behavior change of some sense will help us to better understand the era we are living in and the threats we are concerned about. when you look at gun violence and terrorism in the same category. host: we have about five minutes left with our guest, kevin baron. south carolina,
republican. go ahead, dennis. caller: i will make it short. i think we should rename our department of defense to the department of offense. host: why do you say that? caller: because we go over to , and ieast and intervene do not think we should be over there at all. if we want to be the department of defense, take the pentagon, and let's defend the u.s. going to takes 50% tax just to support the pentagon. host: thank you for talking. as we wrap up, i wanted to bring up a couple of points that you one.aking and defense reform projects are a big area. the current secretary,
ashton carter, done in his relatively short time in office? been in power for a long time, he was defense deputy secretary, and a top weapons adviser. he has a lot of familiarity with works, and hown they take care of the budget and the building. heart, he was his already working on improving the way the pentagon works in the way that weapons are boss, the acquisitions process, which was a multibillion-dollar, very lengthy, complicated, extremely regulated process. singlehe latest of every secretary of defense who say they will streamline the defense department and make it better
for the american public and for the arms makers. a plan calledhas 0etter buying power, now a 2. version, to make it quicker, more efficient, and more effective to get the right need. that fighters to buying down laptops and ipads like the one in front of you, to bigger purchases. they are also looking at personnel reform. the pentagon has a million people working for it, it is the largest government bureaucracy. it is huge. lling theg from cu
ranks of their staff offices to military, uniform and civ -- civilian. he has come in at a time when there is a growing and acute sense of dollars matter. if the president is cutting defense, how can we make do with e, he is not cutting defense, he is cutting the rate of growth and that is expected. the pentagon still has more money than it has ever had, is comingy, and this down to what the military is asked to do. that goes back to your caller, talking about foreign entanglements. it will not be focused on the
iraq war, but fighting terrorism across the entire middle east. host: i meant ask you about the 2016 presidential race. what will the effect of one be on the other? guest: it is surprisingly that national security is still a fund in central concern for voters -- front and the central .oncern for voters are they really voting for who lead the country on terrorism, or are they voting on what people normally vote on? allegiance, and how the country will feel at the end of the year 2016? will there be a national security crisis?
if there is a national security event, it will help one side more than the other, perhaps. depending on who leads forward. national security is so a high concern for voters, but at the same time donald trump leading republicans is a guy who is -- who has zero national security credibility or background. he came into this disparaging john mccain's pow stance, which did not go over well with republicans or national security workers. he is noninterventionist. --is out there calling for he is not really saying much about national security at all. others are. marco rubio for example. if marco rubio attraction, we will see something. clinton andrd to a
rubio debate. host: one last caller from green wisconsin. caller: good morning. i hear a lot of talk about and fighting terrorists abroad, but i do not hear anything about fighting terrorists here. the only difference between isis, isil for the ku klux klan is the uniform. ,f you want to show the world lead by example. deal with the problem that we have here in america. ku klux klan members to congress. host: final thought on national security in 2016? caller. will answer the
the defense secretary has addressed this as well. extremism of any form, mixed with gun violence, and leads to mass shootings. whatot going to get into newsecome a cable show talking point of what is the worst? i do not care, it is gun deaths, it is the worst by either stripe. the rhetoric coming out after california, and going into the next year, after the chat chattanooga shooting, after paris, after california, we are here, we are a place where these things happen. our political leaders are involved in saying the right things. it be on the rhetoric, and look at what the government is doing
will what the law enforcement agencies are doing to realign themselves, to fund themselves, how they work together with international law enforcement and military's to get a handle on the threat. that goes from the door to door battle in ramadi to what turned somebody into an inspired who will go on a mass shooting in this country. it will keep happening. host: kevin baron is executive editor of defense one. we appreciate your time this morning. moment, wen th a will talk about energy and where in thessues are going coming year. we will talk with green wire reporter manuel
quinones. ♪ three days of featured programming, this new year's weekend on c-span. friday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern, law enforcement officials, activists and examined the prison system and its impact on minorities. >> we have prisons to punish people for social behavior, and to remove that threat from society, presence to keep us safe, whether they will iser future crime secondary. the primary purpose is for to keep society safe from the threats those people pose. saturday, the race relations
town hall. and do their jobs, saying i am protecting the public. their idea of the public is those who give them their marching orders. that is us. we need to look at all of that, we need to look at transparency. those rulesook at to engage with community. >> and a discussion on media coverage of muslims, and how muslims can join the national conversations. at 9:00 p.m., young people from across the united kingdom gather in the house of commons to the skies issues important to them. -- to discuss issues important to them. child i looked forward to two driving.
o driving, riding trains. for our complete schedule, go to c-span.org. you on the road to the white house and into the classroom. cams year our student documentary contest asks you to tell us what issue you want to hear the candidates cover. did all the details on c-span.org. washington journal continues. host: at the table now, manuel for e&e'sa reporter greenwire.
there is one headline at the hill that brings together two the big stories in energy. speaker paul ryan saying the wind energy is usually 100 keystone pipelines. what is he saying? nott: he is saying, we did get the keystone pipeline, but look at what we got. during the spending bill negotiations and a lot of republicans wanted to see a lot of obama administration priorities rolled back. power plants, the paris agreement, a whole host of rules. none of those got into the spending bill because it was not bipartisan negotiation. they had to come up with a compromise. we came up with the base for a ot of lawmakers who were still
not happy with the product. a lot of experts are saying in that short term, it will not mean much. in the recent terms we have seen a big boom in energy prices in the u.s.. oil prices went down. in p will losing oil in the u.s. say we need to go to the international markets. if not we will suffer even more than we already are when it comes to that aspect, those in north an dakota, for example are very happy. but others say it will not make a big difference. host: put the keystone pipeline in the proper context as it relates to his legacy. guest: the president started out , when he first got into office, keen.nmental issues were once the republicans won the house and the senate, there was a lot of pushback. after his reelection, he has
been very resolute. keystone is the very example of where the president wants to go when it comes to energy and the environment, and how resolute he is in climate and energy issues. he said he rejected keystone because of a host of issues, oil price issues, environmental issues, for an oil issues. he would want us to take it in the paradigm of environmental, greenhouse gas issues. energyalking about issues this hour. the phone numbers are on the bottom of the screen, we will get to your calls as soon as they start coming in. we have to talk about gas prices. a major headline saying that drivers are starting 2015 with xhe cheapest gas in si
years. but 2016 will be the cheapest gas in many, many years. why is this happening? guest: there are a lot of theories. some conspiracy theories, some economic theories. we saw a lot of production in the u.s., and a lot of discoveries facilitated by fracking. production in the u.s. went up. a lot of our competitors in the international marketplace in part what to hurt the u.s. production. increasing their output lowers prices come and that means a lot of the production in the u.s. becomes uneconomic. goes, the more the wells have to shut down in the u.s., and they become more competitive in the long run. it is part of a strategy of international oil competition. host: what are the experts saying in terms of how long these low oil prices could
continue? guest: it could last for years. we could see a barrel of oil 2020 $100 a month and by we could reach $80. see relatively low prices compared to what we have seen in the past for the foreseeable future, even if it does go back up. host: with that comes unrest around the world. here is a headline from venezuela. what ihere is mentioned earlier about a conspiracy theory. u.s. competitors have been accusing u.s. of working with like saudi arabia to lower the price of oil and make these countries unstable.
there has not been strong evidence that that has actually happened. the stronger evidence is that opec, saudi arabia and venezuela are part of opec, they wanted to go down to hurt competition. host: our first color, go ahead. caller: good morning. the beginning of this year i believe it was, gas prices were teetering on four dollars a gallon. the trucking industry and the railroad industry put a transportation surcharge of made everything more expensive to buy.
now gas prices at the pump or half of that. why are things still so expensive? prices go down in oil, and at the pumps it goes down a penny when it should go down a lot more. conspiracy,about a the oil companies are charging way too much. lnow gas prices at the pump or half of ong run we will see gas prices reflect the oil prices. seen economists saying that the low oil prices is the reason we do not have high inflation. for the consumer at least, maybe not for the global macroeconomic trends, but for the consumer things are getting better because of the low price of oil. twitter, to connect the oil exports that have been uprooted with budget deal, is there a direct impact o in this country? opposethe democrats who oil exports say that companies here just want to send it abroad and make more money, and prices
at the pump will increase. republicans are making the exact opposite argument. they say by opening it to the international market, that could affect gas prices, but at the gas we use is supported from the rest of the world. it really is an international market. host: ernest from california, independent caller. caller: good morning. i hope you had a blessed christmas. whyquestion for the day is won't we get one of our parties to get our auto manufacturers break tod of tax get away from fossil fuels, and do other forms? we have tremendous natural gas
reserves in our country, that would be a good way to go, a lot cleaner. solar energy, all these things. i don't think the reason they pursue it heavily is because the , if for exploration on it there was a tax break it would be beneficial. everybody appreciates the drop in petroleum products, but we were held hostage for a long time and we all feel that. guest: that has been a major topic of discussion on capitol hill in the last several weeks. the way it works generally, the republicans -- and this is not across the board, but many republican leaders are more skeptical about tax credits and tax intensive -- incentives for renewable energy.
democrats say we should incentivize the fuel sources we need in the future. the deal on capitol hill recently was part of the lobbying of oil exports. contentious.ery but we have a deal that will govern things for the foreseeable future on that. host: washington post talked over the weekend about energy in the last year. beyond oil, they talk about a in thisy from caooal country. other energy sources headed? coal: the turn away from has been extremely significant.
it is really a combination of the administration and the marketplace pushing it out. we have seen new natural gas discoveries, power plants switching to natural gas, and that has hurt coal immensely. can make coal more expensive to burn. else,explain something lower gas prices, lower natural do things like wind and solar get to mature further if those other traditional sources are so cheap? guest: exactly. that is why a lot of energy callrters in congress natural gas a bridge fuel.
they do not want to stop there. the win situation has been a setback for a lot of the boosters. seene same time, we have the penetration of renewables is increasing and they are becoming a lot more cost competitive. in some places it is cost competitive to not use natural gas or coal, but wind and solar. host: charles, democratic caller. caller: good morning. i was wondering how much oil was per barrel, and how much gas cost at the pump the last time it was that price. guest: i do not recall. the perspective i can say, is we had more than $100 a barrel in recent years. we were paying, i remember several years ago, more than five dollars a gallon.
i filled up yesterday at two dollars, and the price per barrel is hovering in the $30 and $40, that is a drastic reduction. host: does that get you what you are asking? caller: no, i think it should be around $1.30 a gallon, for what a barrel used to cost and the gas cost. how do you find that out? journalists are supposed to look out for the people and tell the real story, but they don't ask questions like that. host: he thinks things should be cheaper. guest: that is a good question. throughout my career we have done many stories looking into station costs so much money, and this one cost a completely different amount. it is hard to get to the answer. one time we talked to the ceo of one of the gas station chain about why prices were the way
they are. the closeness to refineries is a factor. is toose a guest nation the big tank farm is another factor. stationseing some gas that are much cheaper than two dollars a gallon. it really depends on where you live but it is a question that any people have had for many years. it is hard to answer. host: democrat line from washington. caller: good morning. we took theis if andic oil out of the ground made gas here with it and it belonged to the public nonprofit. , how much would fuel cost us? guest: that is an interesting
question. there has been a lot of about fuel on public land versus private land. regulation has made it harder to explore and drill on public land. if he made the policies easier, they say it would lead to cheaper gas prices. what we're seeing now is that is coming because of the low prices. a lot of the was production is u.s.ting to receive -- production is starting to recede. it has had an impact on the overall energy landscape. the market is making it harder for them to do so. host: talking with manuel quinones of e&e's greenwire. we have plenty more time for
your calls on various issues. we need to talk about the big climate change agreement that just took place in paris. give us your sense of how significant that will be moving forward. here is the president talking about the climate agreement and the connection to clean energy for years to come. >> the agreement struck in paris, although not legally binding when it comes to the targets that have been set, does create this architecture in which all around the world countries are saying this is where we are going. we're going to be chasing after this clean energy future this is how we're going to meet our goals. we will double down on solar power. we will double down on wind power. we will invest more heavily and biofuels. we will figure out battery technologies. what you saw in this budget,
which i think was very ofnificant, was an extension the solar tax credits and went had helped that we to relieve boost early on in my administration, and when power increased threefold, solar power increasing by 20 fold. those tax credits will now be sevened for five to years. meansonsequence, that the private sector will start investing much more heavily. they know this is coming. it is not just coming here, it is coming around the world. back the president getting to those tax credits we talked about earlier and what they will mean. he is very happy, and the democrats are happy that they were able to get that. tot is why they were able concede on the oil export part,
especially since they can tell their base that the oil exports will not make that much of a difference in the short run. that is even more evidence that in his view all these things are connected to his broader energy and climate legacy. keystone, the tax credits for renewables, and the big paris deal. host: we will hear from george in maryland. caller: good morning. thank you for these great ideas. question is, with oil prices as depressed as they are, and china being such a huge consumer a tradewe have imbalance with china, how is that going to affect both the near and the instant future for the u.s.? guest: a very good question. the answer to that is not only is our issues with oil and china
because china has been leaving the commodities and -- leading the commodities and energy growth in recent years, but we are seeing a slowdown in the chinese economy. they are talking about a change in their economic paradigm. that is also hurting oil prices. china is not expected to buy as much as they were at one point expected to. that is hurting the price of oil. when we talk about coal, that coalnother fuel, companies wanted to sell to china. china is not sucking up as much because they are investing in renewable, natural gas and other sources of energy. you're right, china has been a angeslayer, and the chai
in china are in play. host: our next caller. morning.ood happy new year to everyone. i have a couple of questions i will like to ask for training -- pertaining to our energy and public property. subsidize so much of the command that the land it is , is a minimum amount of money per year, but it is public are pretty. we subsidize everything from the -- exploration to the transportation. i want to know how are the companies able to take the public's energy out of public every part ofdize it to the selling part, and then billion,ome type of $5
$6 billion profit that they make every 90 days. 25%uld see us giving them of the profits, but that is public energy, isn't it? excuse me for being so nervous. host: thank you. guest: he makes a good point, he touches on something that is very hot right now. activists have been pushing the administration into lisa'se way call and oil and natural gas reserves to companies. they have not made a a lot of headway until recently. we are seeing the interior -- interiorwith department, up with valuation .roposals
is that the are now taxpayer community was the administration to go much further. others say there is no need for wide reform because they generate billions of dollars in royalties. that is going to be a hot topic in 2016. host: greta, republican caller. caller: good morning. number one, i believe that the epa as well as many other governmental agencies have way too much power. expensive, much more they make it much more expensive for a business person to operate. they need to be cut back. number two, the climate change ,onference was mostly all talk
and nothing done. as usual. change here, i think --re is so much political much of this is politics, i believe. you may disagree with me, that is what i feel. is for the most part at this time way to expensive. expensive to be pushed onto the public. just to the public, but pushed onto our electric companies, to be using other sources. i think there needs to be much scientific breakthroughs
done before it can be used as a primary source. host: thank you for calling. guest: the epa issue has been very contentious. been the most contentious agency under the obama administration. talking about the recently approved spending bill, the way that the republican majority are selling what they did with the epa saying we could not rollback the major epa regulations, the greenhouse gas rules, but they funded it at the lowest level in recent years. when it comes to the climate talks, some people on the opposition to the president and even support of the president
say it was a lot of talk and no real substance because of the bindinglegally international obligations. this is seenn that as such a historic event is because each country put forward pledges on how much they will reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and there is a global pledge to keep temperatures for rising. when it comes to renewables, that has been another long-standing argument. it a lot of economists are leaning more and more to things that in certain places, where there is a lot of wind and solar availability, they are cost competitive with fossil fuel sources. the fossil fuel industry would not like to see those government incentives, they would like to see them removed for a more
level playing field. you. here is a tweet for in the 1970's, they predicted we would be out of oil in 2010. yet we are not. is it possible the earth produces oil with an endless supply? what happened since those days, since those predictions? when we are predicting how much oil, gold, minerals are there, they are not just talking about how much is there, but how much is economically recoverable. what has happened in recent years is that the hydraulic fracking technology has made it equally recoverable to get at these resources that were trapped underground. fair, we found more of it, and we also found technology, and we used more
technology to get at that oil. that is where the disconnect comes from. host: speaking of technology, one of the major headlines of the year had to do with shell. it is really abandoning arctic drilling. here is the headline, what shells latest move says about arctic drilling permits, a fortune magazine headline. what is the long-term impact? shell,shall, the -- there are several companies that have leases in the arctic, shell was seen as the major company doing it right now. it had shot waste because there
is this major company pulling back. waves because there is this major company pulling back. economyt to, when the gets better, start exploring again. they are currently in a fight with the obama administration to have their lease extended. even though they are pulling out now it does not mean that they don't want to go back. the arctic is a big point of contention. for you.aller caller: good morning. this really touches minor when you talk about energy -- my nerve when you talk about energy. when you have oil, you have gas, you have uranium, i cannot think of the fourth one.
if you live in the desert, where , whenally need water these foreign energy companies come in, and when your own country energy people come in, theyu are in indian tribe do not give ehud about you, they do not give a hoot about your land. they ruin your water. enron kept drilling, kept using the water that they were taking oal from the navajo tribe south in a it slurry. the energy that is taken out of the indian lands usually goes to profit, to the cities, to
thatornia, and they put ,our corners coal burning area and they send it all the way across arizona into california. if you want to the energy, why didn't you put it in your own area? why is it always us? our senators do not look out for us. sold is out with goldwater. mr. reagan, you always glorify him. these people just ruin us. they took most of our land away , and john mccain sold us out again, the arizona
republic. --arizona public. he has invited some company that has been sponsoring him, some foreign company, to dig up that copper. we should have stipulations. we should really have rules when other foreign countries come taking in our land. inthey spoilt the water colorado without spillage that ran all the way to mexico, they should be the ones that should be responsible to take care of what ever they spoilt . host: thank you for calling. many: she went through issues that have been long-standing for several decades. she mentioned uranium, the
navajo nation was a source of uranium during the cold war and then during the early years of the nuclear energy power. there is a dirty legacy there in the navajo nation. the four corners power plant that she mentioned, in northwestern new mexico, , there aren arizona three huge coal firepower plants that are causing a lot of controversy about their pollution and how long they should be there. coppero mentioned the issue. congress recently approved a land swap to facilitate the development of a copper mine in arizona. that has been very contentious come and john mccain got that land swap into the defense bill last year. mentioned a lot of issues that are going to be ongoing. michael onto oil,
twitter wants to know how much the oilraction in industry will affect the economy in 2016. guest: economists are saying that some inflation is good for the economy, and oil prices keep going down, they will come back up. that is going to contribute to inflation targets not being where they want them to be. we heard a lot of this when the federal reserve was talking about whether to raise interest rates and set monetary policy. consumer, it is cause to , a lotte, but in general of economic interest would like to see those oil prices a little bit higher. host: john, glenview, illinois. good morning. morning.ood thank you for being here to
answer these questions. little earlier asked a great question, and i was very intrigued to hear the answer to it. you misunderstood the question, the answer.t hear i will do a better job of wording the question. what was asked before is there was some time ago the price of was aay it is $38, it long time ago that it was that low. what he was asking was the last it was $38, there was a national average for gas prices. right now it is $1.90. oildes ago, the last time was $38, what was the national average of gas? $1.30,ks it was around
back then. when, if that is true, that means that there is almost than higher price for gas the last time oil is the same price it is now. that leads to other questions like if that is because they are making more profit and gouging us, or other regions in the cost of oil. just said different gas stations have different prices and we do not know why. what he was asking to compare apples to apples. there was a national average back then like there was now. what was it? host: we got it. guest: that is a good question. i do not have it off the top of my head, but it would be good to explore. gas retail average,
and what with the providers say? belation might sa what they say, that we would naturally see the product more expensive. it is a very important question, worth looking into more. on break,congress is but they will be back fairly soon. about aalks comprehensive energy bill on the hill. is that going to happen? guest: those who are writing it wanted to happen. whenonventional wisdom is it is an election year congress does not work as hard as they try to avoid controversial issues. at the same time, the energy packages that have passed the committee about the house and
senate have had bipartisan support. a lot of their provisions are not the major controversial .provisions making sure the energy grid is more efficient, commodity research, there are these things that people can agree to. the problem is when these bills get to the floor, that people want to amend them. that is when they have the possibility of getting stuck. we saw with a recent spending bill that a lot of people could not get the amendments they wanted in there, so they are looking for new vehicles. keystone xl supporters are looking for new vehicles bring greenhouse gas activists are vehicles, andw that is when things blow up. there are a lot of lawmakers frustrated we do not have new energy policy. host: many have talked about the
vulnerability of the electric grid. a significant national security matter. is that something they might take up? guest: that is definitely in there. whether they taken up individually or broader package, it is a point of policy for lawmakers on capitol hill. host: let's go to our republican line. caller: good morning. solara problem we have in in florida. in the sunshine state, the sun days a year,st 300 brightly. but florida power and life, seeing that solar was coming onto the scene, and we are not making much use of it in loretta, florida power and light went to how th -- went to tallahassee and their lobbyists, and they passed a
power andflorida light does not have to pay us for any extra energy that we would produce. that discourages you to put in solar, where they would pay you for the extra energy we produce. we could in time, pay for a solar array. i think the people of florida would be putting in solar roofs because the electric would not have to be on during the day. they would only draw electric at night. we would all be getting checks and we can export our energy to the rest of the country through the grid. but they are putting roadblocks and obstacles in the way of that happening. that was more of a statement that a question. you. thank let me add to that. the washington times editorial talks about subsidizing the sun.
solar power burning through billions of tax dollars, sunshine is free, but solar power is not. subsidizingn turning electricity for a decade -- sunlight into electricity for wascade, and just as it getting on life support, they appealed for help. guest: the leadership was happy to get the deal on capitol hill exchanging things like oil exports for the tax credit. a lot of people in the republican base, those in the fossil fuel industry, they thought they should have not made the deal. not thought they should have given the incentives for oil exports and whatever else.
that is expressing a lot of those people's frustrations. that oil exports was not have to justify continuing what they call for subsidies -- the subsidies for renewable development. they say this is the future, and we need to help it take off, to keep our commitments to battling climate change. to the caller's point, what he mentioned is a fight that is going on in numerous states. for consumerstive to get solar power if they can sell it back to the grid. at the same time, that represents a shift in how the utilities have done their business, and a lot of them are not thrilled. there is a fight going on in many states on whether to allow that. host: ronald in florida.
caller: good morning. how are you today? host: we are doing well. that manatman just -- just called from florida, we have many people calling from florida. we have quite a few homes with solar energy, and they are producing their own electric and they have access. power a joke with florida , with not willing to deal with that. duke energy has bought the nuclear plant, and it has fuel sitting there. that is nerve-racking right there. , which the coal plant everybody knows coal is cheaper and everything. to cleaneople who work
the coal, because when the call gets put in, we have lake russo, which was home to the largest bass in the world. but after the coal plants within, they noticed mercury in the past, and nobody likes that. host: question for our guest? that nuclear plant, sitting there with all that spent fuel, it was like we have already been charged -- they're going to build another plant, but nothing has been started on that nuke plant. -- whening to ask you
you start talking about oil and everything, i am a retired thatrcial fisherman, and oil spill, it is still affecting the finish. we have them coming up with lesions on them and it is ridiculous. guest: he mentioned mercury. the epa has a new mercury ru le that is affecting a lot of coal-fired power plants. forcing them to shut down, or operate at a lower rate, or capture more of the pollutants. the never ending story is where to put the waste. they still cannot figure it out on capitol hill. as a go to nevada, somewhere else? that is an ongoing issue. ,ost: mike from north carolina democratic caller. caller: good morning. i have been quite involved in
, and havental work actually been involved with duke energy. i can certainly understand what the caller from florida said. the controlling economic interests of western europe, canada, and north america are using oil -- when gas went high, it caused anything from plastic, rubber, you name up as a result. now, gases down, and you will not see a change, and you won't. they in fact brought the standard of living down. not only that, we subsidize all of these big energy companies
because the lobbyists pay for the campaigns, and they are getting the free ride on public lands and everything. then they go to places that are real rural, and they , andoyed the environment laugh all the way to capitol hill, telling everybody how good of a job. guest: that is interesting, what campaign card to be shipped. i has been something that environmentalists have been pointing out, the fossil fuel toustries' conjuration numerous lawmakers. of course, it is how we say in washington, how we can trace a .awmakers position often times, we can see a correlation with their campaign contributions.
that is something that a lot of people have been focused on. the energyentioned from public lands. that seems to be designating with people. people are seeing lower gas prices, but they want to see other products related to oil go down. say,though many economists gas prices are going down, consumers must be happy, what we're hearing from consumers this morning if they are not low enough. host: our last caller, peter from new york. caller: good morning. the elimination of the oil and or bad is actually a very smart long-term place. right now, even though we have for 40 years, ban
it was irrelevant because we were a net importer of oil. once we start producing more oil than we need, then it would have an effect because the excess supply would keep the cost of oil down in the united states. that is why they want to export the excess production so we have to pay the world price. we have been paying the world price when we were paying five dollars a gallon for gasoline. this is just a way for the oil companies to get ahead of the game. they figure that now prices are low, people will be able to accept it. the republicans talk about -- we buteve in the free market, the really is no free market. it is all based on what saudi arabia does. saudi arabia has been keeping
the oil production at high levels because they don't want to lose market share is, and also they want to depress oil production in the united states. this is the reason why they did it now. in the future, when oil prices go up again with china, india, they will still be paying the world price for oil. guest: very good points. oil companies, even though they are very much affected by the low price of oil, they are playing the long game. we saw the keystone pipeline rejected. a lot of folks saying, that is part of the deathknell of these industries, but they are still seeking pipelines and infrastructure. when the prices go up, they want to get the product out. host: thanks a lot for your time and insight on all of these
energy issues moving forward for 2016. we have about 25 minutes left in this monday edition of "the washington journal." what we will do after the break is returned to the question that we asked you earlier in the program. it played off the time magazine person of the year. who is your person of the year? we want to know who you think had the most influence on the last year. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. .ndependents, (202) 745-8002 outside the u.s., (202) 748-8003 . we will be right back. >> this new year's weekend, booktv brings you three days of nonfiction books and authors. on new year's day, goldcorp
presentations of "in-depth," tom hartman on his life and career and response to viewer calls and questions. his many books include the crash the americanoting dream, and threshold. the author of "american contempt and liberty" on ords," karl rove looks at william mckinley in his book "the triumph of william mckinley." he discusses the political environment of 1896. mr. rove is interviewed by the senior editor for national review magazine. cleveland has come
in to office and mckinley has seen the country dive into a deep depression. .e wants to be the nominee >> directly following, join booktv as we attend a book party thrown for karl rove. ," davidn "in-depth marinus will be taking your calls. booktv, this new year's weekend. three days of nonfiction books and authors on c-span two. television for serious readers. >> as 2015 reps up, c-span
features "congress: year in review. easternthursday at 8:00 as we revisit mitch mcconnell taking his position as senate francis'leader, pope historic address to a joint session of congress, and the election of paul ryan, the debate over the nuclear deal in iran, and reaction to mass shootings at home and abroad. congress: year in review thursday at 8:00 eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. so, who is your person of the year. in made the biggest impact the country and around the world? we have collars come again already. time magazine has named its person of the year, angela
merkel. host: time went on to name the second person of the year, the leader of isis. they say that like other extremists, he has learned from an up-and-down career marked by losses and victories in prison cells and palaces to be a master opportunist. list, donaldon the trump. they write he knows how to read people and he believes his
country is ready for a wartime consiglier. those are the top three from "time." who is your person of the year? wayne is on the line first. who tops your list? easy, a man by the name of george mitchell who was the inventor of hydro fracking which produces the cornucopia of oil we have in the united states. you know, he does a couple of things. vitality oftes the american enterprise. the guy was a greek immigrant,
or he comes from greek emigrants. producegle handedly this thing in east texas, and we enjoy the benefits at this time. maryland. from you are up now on the independent line. who tops your list for person of the year? caller: for me, that would be bernie sanders. host: how come? a very he has taken powerful and courageous stance against the corporate culture that owns washington, capitol exposedd he has really the corruption political system that underlies many of the problems that exist in society. host: how do you think he will do? caller: i have very high hopes
for him. i believe he has a very good chance. host: let's hear from patsy. caller: you know who my person of the year would be, and person of all time would be the spirit of jesus. host: tell us more. caller: the spirit of jesus lives in each and every one of us. i don't see how anyone else can beat that. i think i was a pretty awesome, some of us have just forgot. what do you think? host: i am here to listen to you. if you want to continue on, go right ahead. jesus,: you know what -- he is the light. we have lost our way from that light. we are our brother's keeper.
love is the very essence. god is love. unconditional love. that would include all the creation, not just some creation . i think people need to figure it out. of love, the opposite not hate. her person ofwith the year. who is it, sarah? kerry: i would say john for president. for president.dy sandy berger? i forget his name. formerandy berger -- the . you mean bernie sanders? caller: bernie sanders!
if we get trapped in their, he has already gathered all these all.elicals and got them the next thing they were talking about was hell hitler. gets in -- guy host: ok. list, they "time" put on number four, block lies matter.- black lives back to donald trump who did not make the number one slot, but made the number three slot, he does not like that idea. he has one publication been quoted in saying, they
absolutely picked the wrong person, they should have picked him. here is donald trump talking about this. [video clip] "time" magazine -- they did not give me the person of the year. they should have. that is why it is heading down the tube, so -- they gave it to a woman who has not done -- germany, not doing so well over there. i like her. i better like her. likes me, i want her to like me too. host: donald trump, number three on the list. number five, the iranian sansident, has fon rouhani. we have alan on the line now from ohio. caller: thanks for taking my
call. definitely is not up there, for one thing. i don't liken't -- his style. nothing i can do about it. i'm a republican. barack obama. he is the number one guy, i think your when he first took over office -- what did we have, two wars? afghanistan and iraq were about wrapped up. now we have syria. hillary and obama got together and looked at another terrorist state -- libya. i could go on. germany. iran, don't believe iran. that guy does not deserve number five. that's for sure. people like that don't change. you can tell. if they do, they would be already bending over a little bit.
number one, the number one guy is me. have a good day. host: richard, democratic caller. caller: good morning. i have to go with bernie sanders. he tells it like it should be. he might not make it, but at west he is telling us what should be doing in this country. the next guy would probably be putin. he has the power to annihilate us if he wants to. bernie is a guy that can do a some good. us older people don't know what is going on anymore. i will let you go. host: all right, richard. list, the headhe of uber. with hisvis kalanick
$62.5 billion startup, the founder is changing the nature of work. charles is calling now from new orleans. what would you like to say? caller: antoinette correll. she is not famous, but in the local area, she goes around, helping people living in extreme poverty to eat, get jackets in the wintertime, people being brushed under the rug of society . every time you open the magazine, the top people are always about celebrating someone else's wealth and power. maybe we should start rotating that. it is not to knock anybody. rotated. show some more interesting people in the world. host: how long has she been out there doing her thing? caller: she has been out there
for a while. she does not have a lot of money to do it. .aybe about 15 years she has really been making an impact in people's lives. say,t needed to call and put the spotlight on real humanitarians. politicians are not humanitarians. they are a mouthpiece for whatever politician will buy them. host: thank you for adding that name to the conversation this morning. who is your person of the year? "time" has at number seven, caitlin jenner. a quote from the magazine, telling my story, i can make people think. ato, an interesting look
decades of covers. by inine is standing springfield, massachusetts. caller: good morning. my person of the year is my or.at his name is yahweh. know where in the world this man came from, he is the one who created us. to love and pray for him. he never told you to go get a gun and shoot anyone. he also said that when the righteous rule, the people ruoice, when the weak le, the people are morning.
should about each other. not just use christmas and easter and hit the next day. men.ed for all you, me, women, and child. we should love each other. he was born in the spring time and died in the fall of the year . have a blessed day. thank you very much. host: ted is on the line from pennsylvania, independent color. -- caller. who is your person of the year? caller: it would have to be donald trump your god bless the woman who just called. she sounds like a sweet woman. hello? host: we are listening. caller: donald trump -- whether you like him or not, he has galvanized a nation of voters. people want something to change
in this country. they do not want the same thing. whether you like him or don't, the man has been up in the upper 30's and into the 40's. you are having pundits saying the whole time that people would .ever get where he is if you remember when the first debate happened, a very important question -- this will bring up the hate of what people don't like about politics. , who of you onas the stage would not back and eventual republican candidate? everybody looked at him and were criticizing him. when you are going to make a deal with anybody, you always hold something back so they
don't know what you will get. he said he might run as an independent, keeping people at bay and on guard. he finally said that he was being treated fairly and would run. now look at what is happening with the republicans who all stood up and criticized him. they have a guy that is so high in the polls, they are now taking what they said on the stage and they will back him up down.op him it is saying they were a republican, but any republican but donald trump. host: policy changes evident in the wake of the latest shootings over the weekend. they point out that the family members of two killed in chicago over the weekend -- they are outraged, heartbreak and, calling for sweeping changes of
how officers interact with residents of the city. the story on the other side says that new rules will pull officers off the streets for 30 days, a definitive statement from the chicago police about an officer's fatal shooting of two .eople came saturday night a late evening press release came out and not only announced the major policy shift, but took the unusual step to knowledge that and innocent victim had been hit by an air it -- an errant police bullet. julie, independent caller. who is your person of the year? i nominate brian lam, susan swain, all the staff from c-span. as painful as it is to listen to , youof us who disagree force us to do it, you educate
us. the present series, the first ladies -- the president's series, the first ladies, the landmark cases in the supreme court. you provide us with the context to understand this crazy world that we live in an struggle in. you put the issues out there. i particularly appreciate -- first, some examples. the crisis in the world is better understood through on johnkinzer's book foster dulles and alan dollars. black lives matter is better understood through the context 's michelle alexander book on the new jim crow.
isil and violent extremism has been rampant throughout the islamic world for decades, and systematically, the public closed its eyes to it. c-span has been a wonderful gift to the nation. the incredible insight and adventurism into the newest technologies that are out there -- c-span was a pioneer in iowaer, back with the caucus people in 2008. it is just a remarkable gift to the nation. i do not think that there are very many other organizations that come close. flow thanks for the strong of support for this network. action, everything she mentioned, you can watch online at c-span.org at any time.
that is one of the great things about the network, the website, the archives. -- rain is calling now lorraine is calling now. i guess we will not hear from lorraine. let's try north carolina, independent caller. what is your name? dare.r: my name is t i dominate nikki haley. she might not be number one, by think the way that she handled the charleston shooting was phenomenal. i think she did the right thing, taking down the flag and all. everyone demanded it. host: thank you for calling. thank you to everyone who called this morning. we will be back tomorrow, as we are every day at 7:00 eastern for another edition of
"washington journal," in the meantime, enjoy the rest of your day. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> today, it is "q and a" with author eric larson and his book, "deadweight." s sinkingses these th luthswana. you can watch it today on c-span two. tonight, for airfares correspondents discuss the
dangers of reporting from the middle east. here is more. >> i went to do a story about .hristians in iraq earlier this year, my daughter asked me if she could come with me. she is five. i said, no, you cannot come with me, i'm working. she said, i want to come with you, why can't i come with you. geoeye said, it is not safe for little kids. it is not a nice place for children to go. she said, then, why are you going? i said because there are always good guys -- everywhere there are bad guys, there are good guys, and i will be with the good guys. she said, if you don't come h bad that means that that guy guys got youe. not just going