into the sunset. that does it for us. i'm cenk uygur in for dylan ratigan. dylan will be back tomorrow. and i'll will back for the daily rant. "hardball" starts right now. the afghanistan papers. let's play "hardball." the a. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. leading off tonight, why are we in afghanistan? the war was already losing public support and democratic votes in congress were getting harder to come by. then along comes today's bombshell. the release of classified reports on the war. the afghanistan papers contain evidence that the pakistani intelligence service and military encourage and support attacks on afghan and american

forces. my question will president obama's democratic base rebel against the war he has made his own? also, should affirmative action programs be ended? democratic senator jim webb basically says y because they discriminate, he says, against poor whites. plus the tax debate. democrats will argue that republicans want to protect the rich. republicans will argue that democrats just want to raise taxes. we'll have that one out here. and don't meet the press. remember this bit of video of sharron angle running away from reporters? she's not alone. why are so many republicans, tea party people especially, running away from rorers. they can run, they can hide. can they win. and ken buck in colorado calls birthers dumb asses. and it was recorded. we start with the leak of documents in afghanistan.

congressman pinkry. she is a democrat from maine who sits on the armed service me. congressman jim mcgovern from massachusetts. congresswoman pinkori, where do you stand on afghanistan and our continued war there? >> i oppose the war in afghanistan. i opposed it before we got in there. i oppose continued funding for it. a lot of things we're reading about today we knew before rehear about it. this reinforces how badly things are going, how much information people need to have about the war and how upset we are about the money we continue to spend in what seems to be a failing effort. >> congressman mcgovern, my question here, and this is a nasty question, but i think it's at the heart of the report today. we keep being told we're fighting for afghanistan to save

pakistan. now we find out that pakistan is fighting us and killing our guys in afghanistan. that's a revolting development. >> look, the documents that were released paint a very grim picture. and our men and women who are fighting the battle are doing an incredible job. it's clear they have no reliable partners. they can't trust the government of afghanistan because karzai is corrupt. they can't trust the afghan police or the afghan military because they're corrupt. now we have news that the pakistani intelligence are working to undercut the american men and women we're putting in harm's way. this is an outrage. quite frankly it should cause members of congress to start asking some of the tough questions. >> according to the new york sometimes the documents charge that pakistan's intelligence service, the isi, helped coordinate taliban defenses against american sforss in afghanistan. quote, on june 19 --

this question. we're there to defend iraq. i mean afghanistan in order to prevent the overthrow of the pakistani government. who do we trust in this environment when the pakistani intelligence services are seen here helping to kill american who is are trying to save pakistan? >> well, you're right. we've had a lot of distrust of pakistan all along. but many of these things that we're reading about today only confirm it.

we continue to put soldiers in harm's way. there's no way to trust the people who surround them. i read in the paper and i know from being in the armed services committee we spent a billion dollars a year supporting pakistan. that shopt seem like a month given we're spending $7 billion a month on the whole effort. but the fact is we trust them. we need them in this effort and they're not necessarily on our side and it's costing us a lot of money. i don't understand why more members of congress aren't voting to stop the funding for this war. when i'm back home i hear from constituents they don't think we're winning. they don't understand why we're continuing the effort and they want to see an end to the conflict. >> it's not political. it's policy. should the democratic party, which is generally skeptical about overseas adventures and overextension of the u.s., some may say neo imperial designsen the world in the left, is the democratic party in its heart for the war in afghanistan? congressman mcgovern on the

hill? >> i don't believe it is. i don't believe a majority of democrats are. we had 60% of the democratic caucus vote with me on an amendment calling for the formulation of an exit strategy in afghanistan. the speaker of the house actually voted with us. so the majority of the democratic priority wants us to figure out a way to get out of this thing. we've been there almost ten years. we have lost thousands of brave men and women. we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars supporting a corrupt government and nation building in afghanistan when we should be doing it here in the united states. >> let's take a look at another document before we go back to congresswoman pingree. one document from september 2007, three years ago disclosed afghan officials made brutal assessments to the afghan government to american civil affairs officer. the report says -- the oldest member of the afghan

group told the civil affairs team -- i don't know if i believe that. and a civil affairs officer wrote that people will support the anti-coalition forces. i guess that's the question. but it seems to me that we have a problem. we went over there, according to the neocons to extend democracy. we're defending a defeated government in iraq. we're sport supporting a defeated government in afghanistan. i know they're saying one reason we're over there is to extend democracy. we're backing two people in elections that are accused of being corrupt. do you buy the argument that americans corrupted afghanistan, or they just have a history of it, and we joined it? >> i'm not sure i believe that we corrupted afghanistan. i think you're right. this is a government that was corrupt. we haven't been able to improve it, as you mention. many afghan knees feel safer with the taliban. which is crazy notion when you've given how much time and

money we spent there. if we done have a democracy that we're working with, if we can't succeed with our efforts, we are democracy building over there. we're nation building as well as democracy building. we can't afford that level of investment there when we need it hear. i just don't see any signs that things are improving. and so many of these documents showed how vulnerable our soldiers are. many of us in congress we make the phone calls, we go to the funerals for our soldiers who don't come back. it's hard to keep telling families that this is an effort they should be participating in. the fact is, as you mentioned it, we don't hear from the republicans about the importance of this effort. i think they're backing down because they're hearing the same things. many of us wanted to give the president a chance. he took over a very tough situation and we've done our best to be supportive. but i haven't been able to vote for this. i don't think i can in the future. >> what do you make of the people who charge this is what

we call disloyal to our country to release this report by "the times"? where are you on that? >> well, this information was going to come out. it's generally known. we read some of this stuff in the "rolling stone." the "times" was variful in trying to protect those people. but this is the information you have to have when you're making tough decisions. this is exactly what congress should be debating. >> congressman mcgovern, let me ask you the toughest question in the world. it's bugging me as a person watching this. if we get out of afghanistan, and we may well do it starting next july. we might. what does that say about the chances of al qaeda coming back in there? >> nobody is saying we should take our eyes off al qaeda. to the contrary. what i'm arguing is that us being bogged down in afghanistan, doing nation building there is taking our resources and eyes off the enemy. we want to go after those

responsible for september 11th. they're no longer in afghanistan. we need to go wherever they are. there's nothing wrong with a little sunshine. these documents have exposed the truth and congress needs to deal with them. >> are you afraid of the old tag, who lost afghanistan? if we pull out and afghanistan goes back to the taliban, which it could well do and could offer sanctuary for al qaeda, which they have before. are you willing to take the heat as a democrat for letting that happen? >> absolutely at this point. after the longest war we've been in and no signs oaf success. i would be happy to tell the soldiers you can return home. we'll be safe. we'll go back if we have to. but we need to put our eye dm other possible danger zones. this is not succeeding and this information reinforces that more. we have to do the tough things in congress. that's why we're here.

>> congressman mcgovern, will you take the heat? will the president take the heat from the right? it will come. you democrats cost us afghanistan by pulling the plug on this. >> the taliban are awful rotten people. there are rotten awful people all over the world. we can't occupy every country. if we can set a time line f we can set an exit strategy,that will put pressure on the afghan government to either step up or not. the responsibility lies with the afghan government. we have been there ten years. we have lost thousands of soldiers. are we going to be there forever? we can't afford to do so. we're going bankrupt. >> thank you, congressman and congresswoman pingree of maine. coming up, should this be shut down because they discriminate against whites? that debate is coming up next. senator jim webb of virginia wants to do just that. he's a democrat. ♪

♪ a day once dawned ♪ ♪ and it was beautiful ♪ ♪ so, look, see the sights ♪ that you learned [ male announcer ] at&t covers 97% of all americans. at&t. rethink possible. buy a pantech messaging phone like the impact, and get a pantech messaging phone free after mail-in rebate.

>> well, democrats may have caught a break in colorado. tom tancredo announced he will won for governor there as an independent. that would split the conservative vote and hand the race to the democratic nominee for governor. tancredo says he believes the two scandal ridden republicans running for governor are not strong enough to win november. we'll be right back. the nutrit, plus 10% daily value omega-3 ala, and a delicious honey almond crunch. new total plus omega-3.

back to "hardball." on friday democratic senator jim webb of virginia tackled it in the "wall street journal." those who came to the country in recent decades from ash ya, latin america and africa do not suffer discrimination from our government. the same cannot be said of many hard working white americans,

including those who roots in america go back over 200 years beyond our continuing obligation to assist those in needs. government diversity programs should end -- is senator webb right? eugene rob inson is a columnist for the "washington post." pat buchanan is an msnbc political analyst. pat, let me start with you i'm not sure, since this suggest has only been brought up today, how much is left in affirmative action? i know private schools look for diversity. what is left that bothers you in terms of affirmative action along with jim webb. what is left as a remnant of affirmative action? >> there's an enormous amount of it in the federal government and the workforce.

jim webb's point is important an courageous. he's saying don't treat it as a monolith. those folks never benefitted from boston and new york. they were the victims of that form of discrimination. and they are today the victims of the form of discrimination action, affirmative action, quotas and things like that. what is the morality? what is the justice of discriminating against appalachian white folks whose father fought in vietnam in favor of folks from el salvador or ethiopia. discriminating against them when the new comes never suffered under slavery, never suffered under jim crowe. they happened to be people of color. what is the argue of discriminating in favor of a person from pouerto rico and

against someone from portugal. >> i'll mark you down -- >> i think the original act to rectify the injustices of slavery and jim crowe had a real moral argument behind them. i don't understand the argument for discriminating working class folks who never had a break. >> gene robinson? >> pat and i agree on one thing, affirmative action, that there was a moral argument behind the original intent of affirmative a. to protect fi slavery and jim crowe and hundreds of years of oppression. >> hundreds of years of free labor. >> i think it could come as a surprise to latinos,that senator webb says they're not

discrimina discriminate against in the country. >> but under the law. >> it's different. >> legally held as prisoners. >> absolutely. that's a different category. in fact, i would take it further. i think what's needed now is a concentrated program of affirmative action aimed specifically at the black lower class. specifically at the 33% or 40% who are children and grandchildren of slaves and who have not made it into the middle class, and for whom the gap between those who did not and those who did. >> what do you make of that? pat, i've never noticed this from you, i think we're all growing in this question about where we're headed in this country, do you think it makes sense in the 21st century to do a limited notion of affirmative action. not for everybody who is not white, but for those people who remain, and they are descendents

of slave. still stuck in the cotton south or tobacco south and who have suffered. they're on the other side of the digital divide. they're on the other side. they haven't gotten the good schooling. do they deserve affirmative action? >> i would drop the idea of doing it by race. there are folks in the south. there are folks all over the country who have suffered various kinds of discrimination and impairments and probably need help. why separate it out from race? chris, you and i know frank, ricky and his friends t firefighters are not benefici y beneficiaries of some great affirmative action in the old days. those guys' fathers fought in our war. since your ancestors came from italy we're going to discriminate against you. and some guy who just came here.

never knew jim crowe. we're going to discriminate against him because he's colored. what is the moral argument for that? >> you could have means tested, for example. say the cutoff really is income. however, i do think the national has a special obligation to african-americans. i do. the moral obligation has not been fulfilled. i guess i would differ with pat on that question. i do think, pat, that you could make an argument in this day and age for means testing of affirmative action. for example, the son or daughter of african-american who is have reached the middle class or the upper class or whatever i think is perfectly justifiable to ask. president obama asked. should his daughters get it?

>> let's go to the red hot issues. the working class black against the working kplasz white. the firefighter. the white firefighter who may be italian or whatever. he's been busting his butt, staying up all night. passing the exams. he passed the exam. the african-american guy doesn't. what do we do? by diversity? >> we go by the olympic model if you will. the top ten slots in sprinters are all african-american guys. and in high jump and the guys on the swimming team or on the hockey team are all white guys. let's go with the best. whoever wins in fair and free enequal competition, that is what america is all about. >> i think a lot of nba teams carry white players. do you think so, pat? >> i think they do. >> steve gnash was mvp three years in a row. he's the best point guard in the

lead. let's not disz on white players in the nba. >> larry bird got where he was because he was the best. >> they have to at least be able to shoot. >> i'm trying to shoot. by the way. i'm trying to make pat's point. >> let me make pat's point. let me make pat's point. in the firefighter case, the question was, okay, you have an examine. the question was does the exam, is the exam itself discriminatory against a certain group? if the instrument isn't perfect, then the result isn't perfect. >> if it's a biased exam, i agree. you know what the southern coach was asked how many black players he plays? three at home, four on the road and five in the playoffs.

>> you play the best players. that's very american. >> you are such an american realist. >> charlie scott started winning for unc. all the sudden everybody wanted in on the act. here's senator webb. let's get back to the world decides sports. policymakers ignored such disparities within america's white cultures. when in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a functionable -- now there he is get getting to the point here. if an african-american family is well off, should they get affirmative a, gene? >> at this day and age, i say no. take the aide. take the value f of the aid and redirect it towards low-income

effort. >> pat. where do you think this is taking us? jim webb, from virginia, a conservative state. how will this advance the conversation? you acknowledged there was moral. >> i'm sure there is. >> reporter: for redressing the evils of slavery in jim crowe. where are we going now? >> here's what happened. in three big states. michigan, california, and washington affirmative action was abolished by voter referendum. if it is not abolished by voter referendum, and if the supreme court doesn't overturn it, chris, we're headed for real racial ethnic conflict. the only folks no discriminate against are white males. all the women get preferential treatment, et cetera. they're only one-third of the population. they're diminishing. there's a rising racial conflict here. jim webb is on the cutting edge

of a huge national issue. >> we'll see. thank you. final thought? >> yeah, final thought. there's another question. this nation as pat pointed out is becoming more diverse. the leadership class of the nation better be diverse as well. >> that's one of the things i began to realize in college. particularly for that reason. >> first take a look at the limited diversity you find in the ivy league. the scholar at princeton say no more whites need apply. future farmers of america, junior rotc. read his article. 2,500 words. it's very dramatic. just hit a week ago. >> let's all be positive on this. it is a tricky subject. thank you, eugene robinson. thank you, pat buchanan. hoors a conservative trying to

get the tea party vote by calling all birthers dumb asses. at least he calls one of them that. that's next on side show. you're watching "hardball" on msnbc. a non-challenge. just see specially marked boxes for details. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. from new car replacement and guaranteed repairs to accident forgiveness, we do all we can to help you move on. liberty mutual auto insurance. responsibility. what's your policy?

home of one of the coldest, longest nights on the planet. and asked frequent heartburn sufferers, like carl, to put prilosec otc's 24 hour heartburn protection to the test for two weeks. the results? i can concentrate on everything i'm doing, not even think about it anymore. since i've been taking it, i've been heartburn free, which is a big relief for me. [ male announcer ] take your 14-day challenge. ♪ prilosec otc. heartburn gone. power on.

back to "hardball." time for the side show. first pulling back the turn tan. ken buck, front-runner in next month's republican primary for senator from colorado is counting on the backing of tea party folk. listen to him on this secret tape recording on a june campaign event. he was speaking with a democratic party operative when he offered this less than flattering remark about birthers. the people who challenge that barack obama was born in the u.s. anyway. caught making fun of voters he

needs next month, buck through a smoex man, tried damage control today. he said something about not using appropriate language. he did not retract what he thought of their open and relentless skepticism about obama's americanism. speaking of caterring to the right wing or not. what's with all the succession? talk. he was the latest to join the course when he suggested states could and would succeed from the union over the new health care mandates. quote -- i hope the american people will go back to the ballot box so people are not forced to consider separation from the government. he backtracked a just a day later from the nonsense saying "when i'm governor of tennessee, of course we will not secede from the union, but we will also not have a governor to cave into barack obama. we'll be a proud partner as a member of the united states, but there needs o be a conflict between the states and spral

government. what does that mean? finally, not everyone is a fan of new jersey shore. here's chris christie on abc's this week. >> positive for new jersey or negative? >> negative for new jersey. i mean, because what it does is take a bunch of new yorkers, home of the people on the show are new yorkers. drops them at the jersey shore and tries to make america feel like new jersey. the jersey shore is a beautiful place. some place everybody should come vacation this summer. we have six weeks or so of summer left. >> i spent my summers on the jersey shore and love id. should the bush tax cuts for the wealthiest americans expire this year? o control your blood sugar. you exercise and eat right, but your blood sugar may still be high, and you need extra help. ask your doctor about onglyza, a once daily medicine

used with diet and exercise to control high blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. adding onglyza to your current oral medicine may help reduce after meal blood sugar spikes and may help reduce high morning blood sugar. [ male announcer ] onglyza should not be used to treat type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. tell your doctor if you have a history or risk of diabetic ketoacidosis. onglyza has not been studied with insulin. using onglyza with medicines such as sulfonylureas may cause low blood sugar. some symptoms of low blood sugar are shaking, sweating and rapid heartbeat. call your doctor if you have an allergic reaction like rash, hives or swelling of the face, mouth or throat. ask your doctor if you also take a tzd as swelling in the hands, feet or ankles may worsen. blood tests will check for kidney problems. you may need a lower dose of onglyza if your kidneys are not working well or if you take certain medicines. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor about adding onglyza. extra help. extra control. you may be eligible to pay $10 a month with

the onglyza value card program.

this is your cnbc market wrap. an impressive late day rally pushing the dow back to positive territory for the jear. the dow jones industrial industrial climbing 100 points. the s&p 500 up 12 points. investors looking for glimmers of economic optimism. and finding them. federal express is citing higher than expected volume. the economic bellwether is raising the economics forecast by 20% a share and reinstating 401(k) matching plans beginning in january. all signs of growing confidence in the economy. home builders rallying sharply on that news with baezer shares

soaring more than 6%. apple shares finished flat after losing a bit to make hacking an iphone classified as a crime other than copyright infringement. that's first for-- now back to "hardball." >> the responsible thing for the country now is to make sure we leave in place and preserve tax cuts that go to more than 95% of working americans and compliment those with a set of incentives for businesses to expand. to make that possible and to do that responsibly, i think it is fair and good policy to allow the tax cuts to expire as scheduled. the country with withstand that. the economy can withstand that. it's a good policy. >> that was treasury secretary tim geithner, of course, on "meet the press."

will president obama get what he want, and if he does, can republicans win back power in november by crying the democrats raised taxed or enacted the biggest tax increase in history. with us now is two members of the house of representatives. both in the ways and means economy. democratic congressman -- thank you, gentlemen. let's start with congressman crowley. it seems to me the democratic party, all that i talk to, they think it's been unfair. they think it's the heart of bush. that and going to iraq are the two worst things bush did. will the president end the tax cuts for those making over $250,000 a year? >> i think what mr. geithner said over the weekend makes perfect sense. we wouldn't be where we are today if the tax cuts had not gone through. they can afford a little bit more to live in the best country, the greatest country the world has ever known. we wouldn't be here for but for

these irresponsible tax cuts and i believe the truly irresponsible wars now. >> congressman ryan, is there any tax role from reducing the 1.2 trillion deficit? >> i don't think it's a good idea when we're trying to come out of a jobless recovery and a slow-growth economy. we have employment at almost 10%. the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the economy. the worst thing for deficit reduction is a slow economy. you hit small businesses with these tax rate increases and you'll slow the economy further. 75% of those who will get hit with the tax rates are small businesses. tens of millions of your jobs come from small businesses. if you try to blame them for all the fiscal problems, the numbers don't add up. at best, 14% of the e vvaporati all came from other things.

so what joe earlier said is right which is the taxes will go up. that's a nis tamistake. it's going to hurt the economy. >> it seems every republican on "meet the press" lately saying where will you cut? they won't answer. you won't raise taxes. you won't cut spending. all this bitching about the deficit doesn't mean squat because you won't raise taxes or reduce spending. >> i brought a budget to the floor that cut $4.8 billion of spending out of the budget and paid for the tax cut and debt reduction. two months ago we put out numerous spending cuts. i can show you all the kinds of cuts. >> that's point three of 1%. >> okay. >> and 1.3 trillion is not

peanuts. it's nothing to sneeze at. >> i just don't see any program cuts. you're talking in general terms. the major republicans that come on television will not cut social security, medicare, medica medicaid. they won't cut the military. they won't get rid of a major cost of government. they'll talk about let's freeze discretionary spending or discretionary and domestic in some generalized way. they won't get rid of government. they like government. in fact, they like to talk against it. >> go to american road map dot org and you'll see legislation the cbs has scored as paying off the debt with specific reforms to the entitle ms you mentioned. >> name a major piece of the 1.4 to 7.7 trillion. take a chunk out by getting rid of a good program. >> i would resend all the

t.a.r.p. funds nothing being spent. i would do a federal hiring freeze and pay freeze for the rest of the year. i would cut discretionary spending back to '08 levels and freeze the spending going forward. you can and i can get into a debate. we increased discretionary by 84%. i don't think we shoild continue to build that kind of a base. let's go back and cut it to '08 levels. resend stimulus. resend t.a.r.p. and do a federal hiring and pay freeze. those are a few ideas that add up to $1.3 trillion dl. >> i don't see any cuts in entitlements. >> you asked me discretionary. >> congressman, crowley, what are the democrats going to do about the deficit? anything? >> i did notice, he didn't mention at all his plan to privatize social security. going back to the same bush agenda, the failed bush agenda.

the american people rejected that in the election of barack obama. democrats have taken steps to be more responsible. we're working under a pay-go system. pay as yo go. some items are cut off from that portion of it. we are attempting to get back a system prove on the get our budgets in order. under the clinton administration really bring back more responsible government. it has worked in the past. i think it will work in the future. the president said he wants to cut the deficit in half. >> are you comfortable with a proposal to eliminate the $250,000 and above tax cut. >> in my district, it's very little people. to live in the greatest country the world has ever known, it's a small price to pay.

>> congressman ryan, you have no problems defending tax cuts for people who make over $250,000 a year. >> small companies. 75% of the people are small businesses who file as individuals, not corporations. when you think you're just taxing rich people like bill gates, you're hating successful small businesses. when we tax our employers more than the foreigners tax theirs, they get our jobs. we lose in global competition. that means low tax rates on businesses and small businesses in certainty. we have a whole new tax on certainty that's hurting economic growth. we immediate to give taxpayers certainty they'll not have a huge wave of tax increases in 2011 and 2013. i would argue that's depressing. >> when the debt commission comes back with a two-to-one cut in depending and a $1 increase in taxes you'll oppose? >> i'm a member. >> i know. if the pro poe tool is for $2 in

spending cuts, you're going to oppose the majority position on that? >> i don't think it's good form to do table talk. what on the table or off the table in the debt commission. i'm hoping to put a good dent on the problem. >> i'm with you with that. thank you joe crowley of new york and paul ryan of wisconsin. up knicks, house and tea party politicians are avoiding the media and by that, the public. they don't want to answer questions for the mainstream. and i want to roll over my old 401(k) into a fidelity ira. man: okay, no problem. it's easy to get started. i can help you with the paperwork. um... this green line just appeared on my floor. that's guidance from fidelity. it's the route to your financial goals. could you hold on a second? whatever your destination, fidelity will help you get there. because when it comes to investing, you should never settle. this is gonna be helpful. fidelity investments. turn here.

[ man ] if it was simply about money, every bank loan would be a guarantee of success. at ge capital, loaning money is the start of the relationship, not the end. i work with polaris every day. at ge capital, we succeed only when they do. whoo! awesome! yes! we've got to get you out of the office more often. ♪ my turn to drive. ♪ a committee fund raising event in beverly hills next month. andrew brightbart, yes, the same released the video about shirley sherrod that said she was somehow dischris nating as a federal employee. he's also the guy who put out the pump stuff from the acorn

group. he will speak at the rnc election count down next month in beverly hills. we'll be right back. for some sandwich kicking flavor? are you miracle whip? ♪ no pills, no pain. how can you get pain relief without taking pills around the clock? try thermacare heatwraps, for all day relief without pills. i was surprised, thermacare worked all day. you feel the heat. and it relaxes and unlocks the muscle. you've got to try it. [ man ] thermacare, more effective for back pain than the maximum dose of acetaminophen, the medicine in tylenol. go to thermacare.com today for a $3 off coupon. thermacare. no pills. no pain. just relief. [ male announcer ] when you put everything you've got into it, have the accolades to prove it, and extend a 60-day handshake to honor it,

the only thing left to do is share it. the ram tent event. drive one without a payment for 60 days, and if it doesn't do everything you ask it to do, bring it back. ram.

welcome back to "hardball." lately weave seen politicians, particularly those associated with the tea teart dodging reporters. senator rand paul dodged "meet the press" after decides not to show up. >> by week's end rand paul, son of former presidential candidate

ron paul found the spotlight too hot, canceling his wondered fri his honeymoon was, and later citing exhaustion canceled here. >> sharron angle challenging harry reid, dodged her own press conference last week. keep an eye on her in the background. >> we'll make ourselves available for you as you have individual questions. >> sharron, will you answer some questions really quickly. >> she has to go. i'm sorry. >> sharron, you don't have any -- >> we're running behind.

i'm sorry. >> and there is a written sarah palin interview. she conceded she does not possess a hardy enough constitution to be period. palin said the media became a key reason she decided not to finish out her term as governor. david, let's talk about a couple of these. this is on the right. you're on the left. let's be straight about that. >> yes. >> but this strategy of skipping out on reporters that might ask piercing questions, you know, this is what nixon did in '68, he narrowly beat humphrey. he didn't want to repeat what happened with kennedy. he didn't want to expose himself. >> that was when there was a lot less media. you could freeze out three networks and get away with it for a few months, which he managed to do. sharron angle looks like she's

imitating lindsay lo hahanlohan. it obviously can work in the small pools. republicans and democrats deciding between a few candidates. >> suppose you're rand paul and you made comments about questioning the civil rights act of 1964. do you want someone like you running along beside them, saying, are you still on that civil rights issue you had before? or if you're sharron angle, you believe in second amendment remedies like gun play. you don't want to answer questions like that. >> you can be guaranteed, at least in angle's case, harry reid will be spending $15 million knowing every nevada voter knows what she said about bp being a slush fund and the unemployed loving have the

unemployment insurance. it's if you want to take on these issues like the deficit and afghanistan, hard issues, you're going to run away from local tv reporters and tell the public you can go back to washington and fight for them? it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. >> let's get the point here. what's your current betting on harry reid? i think that race is still up in the air. i think sharron angle, despite her weird behavior and awful comments about guns -- we have a second amendment, but it's not for politics -- lee harvey oswald used it for politics and sirhan sirhan. can she beat him because the climate is so bad if she shuts up? if she completely hides and relies on the economy to get her elected? >> i don't think she can completely hide. i think the thing that has to be done is get rid of the issues

dogging her done. get them dealt with earlier than later. right now, she's looking like a fool. i mean, this is what the tv -- you know, local television stations are showing the nevadan voters. she can't take a punch. she can't take a question. at the end of the day, people will say, she may not be ready for primetime. >> a lot of republicans are backing harry reid. republicans for reid now because of that, i think, her shenanigans. >> even if you don't like harry reid and democrats, you want someone who's up to the job. i think particularly -- >> you think sarah palin's up for the job of being president if she can't be governor of alaska? >> she told united states she's not part of the job because she was worried about bad media attention. >> i don't know that she'd like you that much. when we return, i have some thoughts about the americans fighting for our country in afghanistan based on the new reports in the times. when i grow up,

i want to fix up old houses. ♪ [ woman ] when i grow up, i want to take him on his first flight. i want to run a marathon. i'm going to work with kids. i'm going to own my own restaurant. when i grow up, i'm going to start a band. [ female announcer ] at aarp we believe you're never done growing. thanks, mom. i just want to get my car back. [ female announcer ] together we can discover the best of what's next at aarp.org. [ female announcer ] together we can discover you look beautiful tonight. allow me.

it's tough to get enough servings of vegetables every day if you don't always like the taste of them. i'll be right back, ok? ok. ok. good thing v8 v-fusion juice gives you a serving of vegetables hidden by a serving of fruit. v8. what's your number? get a 1 dollar coupon for v8 v-fusion juice at tryv8.com.

let me finish tonight with that "new york times" story on the afghanistan war. what grabbed me was today's account of the taliban attack on a small american outpost near the pakistan border. the attack on combat post keating occurred last summer as the u.s. was shifting from a strategy of defending outposts like keating to one of key areas. using the urgent messages sent by our forces under attack at

keating, the times article shows what happens when front line gis get dangerously exposed because of a shift in u.s. strategy. in heavy contact came the first word from the outpost that was under attack. then the urgent call went out from coasting that close air support be brought directly to the troops, quote, with we need it now. we have mortars pinned down. we're taking casualties. get something up you. the outpost was under attack from higher ground. quote, we are taking fire from inside the villages. our mortars are still pinned down. multiple enemies running through. fires coming from the mosque. the police station is shooting at us. the enemy was breeching the outpost defensive ring. the post was at the risk of falling. enemy in the wire at keating. enemy in the wire. enemy in the wire. we need support. as the enemy entered the outpost, the american aircraft did arrive just in time. helicopters and f-15s. the outpost was saved. but eight american