congress. stay tuned to fox news channel and this fox station for continuing coverage of this developing story. >> let's bring in our refraction new panel to what the president just said. chris wallace and we welcome fox news political analyst i want williams and fox news contributor steve hayes of "the weekly standard." amazing to see the turnaround of statements from this -- time-sensitive issue that needs to happen. the impassioned push from secretary of state kerry yesterday. what we believed would happen in hours and this waiting for this vote in congress. item very skeptical he will be able to win on that vote. >> mitch mcconnell with the statement today the president advised me that he will seek an authorization for the use of force from the congress prior to initiating any combat operations against syria and in response to the use of chemical weapons. the role is strengthened when he enjoys the express support from congress. that from mitch mcconnell. your thoughts about what we heard?

he may have changed his mind overnight to sit back, wait for congress, but congress at this point has not been called back. immediately for a special session on this. how do you think the mideast is reacting to the president's decision, and what he had to say? >> well, definitely winners and losers considering what the president had to say. and, you know, this is a memo to syria, the iranian regime, hezbollah. while i'm out golfing and enjoying my labor day bbq, you guys have until september 9th to hide all the evidence, plan and plot retaliation toward us and our interests in the region. and we'll think about it, and let you know what congress decides at that point. it's also undercutting kerry's talk yesterday, who said this was time sensitive, and, of course, it is time sensitive. we're thinking out loud here, the president has mentioned for over a week now, that he plans to have military strikes, let's look at this, the micro and macro level, the president is looking at the chemical use of chemical weapons as an isolated issue. where the syrian problem is much larger than that, wh

the resolution that the white house sent to congress that they want congress to vote on. they actually wrote out the language which they rarely do. here is the key point. what they are asking for is as the president telegraphed very limited. it's authorization for the armed forces to be used in connection with chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict of syria in order to prevent and deter the prol proliferation of wmd including cl chemical weapons and protect the united states and it allies of such threats. it's focused on these chemical weapons. it's pretty short. it's two pages plus a couple of lines. this is exactly what's going to go to congress. obviously, congress does have the right and the ability to amend it and try to change it. there's no doubt some people will try to do that. we'll see where this takes us when the congress comes back which is not scheduled to happen until a week from monday. >> explain to us what this letter is and the significance of this letter. >> reporter: the significance is the president made an announcement

this is a divided congress. they have struggled to pass simple things like the farm bill, so i anticipate that this will be quite a difficult thing for them to vote on, and in terms of timing, this certainly draws out any potential military action, and then that certainly races questions about momentum, but that is the headline that president obama is going to consult congress before he takes any action towards syria. craig? >> kristin welker from the white house, thank you. andrea mitchell, our chief foreign affairs correspondent is standing by. you just heard the president's comments as well. how surprised are you, again, just a few hours ago we were all under the impression based on the folks at the white house kpt meetings that the president was planning these classified briefings that he was going to be having with members, top congressional leadership, and then all of a sudden this announcement a few moments ago that he is going to let this debate play out in congress. >> well, i think that the situation r

strike until congress comes back. it doesn't look like they're coming back before september 9, so military action not going to take place this weekend or next week unless congress comes back early. no indication, as i said, they will. but this is a major decision by the president. he is rolling the dice that the house and the senate will support him. if the senate does and the house doesn't, he didn't say what he would do. he just said he would like that authority from congress to strengthen the u.s. resolve. >> reporter: that's right, and i believe one of the reporters there in the rose garden tried to ask that question before he left. he did not answer that question. wolf, this is a president who has had very strained relations with republicans in congress, not only in the house of representatives. he has a few tea party-backed republicans in the senate who have been very, very much against his agenda in recent months, most notably ted cruz, rand paul, marco rubio, so it will be interesting to watch what happens in

president didn't wait for congress or even go to congress on the issue of libya, when the united states joined the air strikes in libya two years ago. the white house says the reason this is different than libya is in libya there was an eminent threat, the towns and villages may have been overrun by a daffy's forces at the time and this time there's no eminent threat. you can act in a week, two weeks, or a month. that's the information that president obama has been given by his military advisers. as a former air force general, do you think that's the case? do you think the timing here is irrelevant? >> john, i don't think it is. i'm an old fighter pilot. i certainly don't want to second-guess a chairman of the central command commander. what i focused on in the president's remarks were he said he wanted to take action to deter future use of chemical weapons and to degrade the capability to use those weapons. i am not at all convinced that a t-lamb strike and a t-lamb strike only will act as a deterrent to future operations and i'm very, veryerned that using cruise missiles only will all

you have to come to congress. so the president is taking a gamble, though, because he thinks he can get this through the house and senate, and you know, harris, not much passes congress. this would be the exception to the rule. >> you know, what is it to say about the relationship? you talk about the urgency. we saw secretary of state john kerry yesterday. i mean, it's going to happen. it's going to happen. then the president today saying, well, i'd like for it to happen but it's not until congress votes and blah, blah, blah. what does that tell you about their relationship? >> well, it is striking. the difference between statements from kerry as well as obama. i mean, kerry's a former chairman of the foreign relations committee. he's going to go his own way. i think that the president trusts him, but the rhetoric from both men has been strikingly different. kerry has been very, very forceful, raised eyebrows on capitol hill. president obama backtracked now and throughout the last couple of days stressed i haven't

maybe we should go to congress. so the president floated it friday night, last night, to his national security team. the national security team all essentially argued against him. talked about the various precedents. it wasn't necessary. this fell well within the war powers act. he had executive authority to do this. they slept on it. this morning, again, the president didn't waiver. he believes this is the right course of action. the national security team all fell in line. and then from there on out, he made the phone calls to members of -- to the four leaders of congress saying this is what he was going to propose, and this is what he was going to do. but it's extraordinary. and it's clear, the one thing that apparently had the biggest impact was what happened to john cameron over in parliament. sorry. david cameron. my apologies. >> david gregory, what happened to david cameron in parliament was after eight hours of debate, he lost. >> right. >> now the president said he will take military action. chuck has been

the idea of going to congress. remember, senator obama would be one of the -- senator obama, and he was, was a big advocate of saying, no, you have to come to congress. >> i think the legal point matters a lot. don't forget, the president come out and says we're a constitutional republic. a constitutional scholar. from the get-go, he and his legal team have been worried about the legal basis for taking action. >> because humanitarian protection of these populations might work for the brits. it didn't in practice but it is a legal argument. it has never been used by the united states. >> without the security council taking action work britain suffering a setback, even with the french. and you had 50 plus democrats in the house. one of them saying you have to come to congress. senator tim cain doing the same. his own words from 2007. >> in fact you've had a lot of negative reaction. some have said from congress, yes, this is a good thing. ted cruz among them which doesn't mean he will vote for the eventual authorizat

you have to deal with congress. congress is a part of our government. they have to fund things and approve things. the president has tried to use executive power to do certain things that, you know, congress wouldn't do. but i don't think the american people like when the president acts unilaterally. goes beyond what his constitutional mandate is and acts without consulting congress. he has to deal with congress and try to come up with a plan. there are things i think that are bipartisan he can do. reform the tax code that makes it less burdensome on businesses. i think there is some bipartisan support for that. that's not what he seems to want to focus and that he has been focusing on. we'll see what happens when congress comes back from vacation and he comes back from vacation. >> jamie, why do you think more isn't getting done? >> i think there's a wide gap between the two sides in congress and the president. i think the president sees what needs to be done differently than what congress does. he's also not known for being one who's very good at reac

the question is will congress bite. will congress say, yeah, that was our red line, too. it's so partisan in washington and it will be very interesting to see where individual legislators fall down on this. >> what do you think christian would do if the house of representatives rejects that authorization? >> i don't know. i'm not in those briefings. i just don't know. he said today he knew he could do this without congressional approval. he would prefer to get congressional approval and put it, you know, before the american people through their elected representatives. i don't know, but i guess what i do know is that a huge case has now been made by the president of the united states, by the secretary of the state of the united states, by presidents of france, by prime minister of england, et cetera, of great britain, why this kind of unacceptable attack cannot be allowed to take place without being punished, without being -- the perpetrators being held accountable. all of these have concluded a chemical attack did take place. a very severe one. it meets the standard that

they want congress to stand still. they don't want congress to function. it's up to the opportunity for us when we go back into our districts to talk to these members and say you're personally hurting my bottom line and hurting my livelihood. until the message gets across they're succeeding what they came to washington to do, it's a matter of getting republican establishment and democrats together and huddle and figuring out, how do you move forward. not having government that doesn't work is basically not necessary fulfilling our duty as a democracy. >> absolutely. maria and professor, thank you both for joining us. coming up, with senior skip day under way and congress heading into the undeserved break, we'll get a progress report from a member of the freshmen class when we come back. hmm...fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. yep, everybody knows that. well, did you know some owls aren't that wise? don't forget i'm having brunch with meghan tomorrow. who? meghan, my coworker. who? seriously? you've met her like three

nancy pelosi christening this congress the make matters worse congress. make matters worse how, exactly? now, i mentioned that this congress did manage to get a few important things accomplished before they skipped town today. but they also left a few things rotting in the refrigerator. during that press conference today nancy pelosi predicted that congress would not be able to pass a farm bill before the current farm bill expires on october 1st. now, you may remember that republican house speaker john boehner failed miserably to pass a farm bill earlier this summer. a farm bill that he supported was defeated by members of his own party. democrats oppose that farm bill at the time because it gutted the food stamps program that low-income families across the country rely on every single day. republicans at that time proposed cutting spending on food stamps by $20 billion. that's right, $20 billion. again, that bill was ultimately defeated. but before republicans left for vacation today, they announced how they're planning to deal with that bill when they g

, people like to talk down congress. obviously their approval rating is very low. very little getting done in congress here of course, the speaker famously saying don't judge us by what we pass but what we block or repeal. that's the standard by which the president walks into this monumental vote of matters that he, himself, has defined as a core national interest. >> mike, david schuster is chomping at the bit to get in here >> i am going to channel my friend, mike viquera who is with me on this. you will note that the republican statement from the house leadership did not mention syria's use of chemical weapons. it's about the united states being involved in syria. >> yeah. >> mike, i wonder if the political -- the way this is sort of breaking down is we are already going to see the president focusing on the moral imperative to react to chemical weapons and the republicans and congress are going to say: are we getting ourselves en tangled in syria? are we launching a war? andoos what's that going to look like? >> right

congress. he talked to his national security team about it. we are told that the majority of them disagreed with him last night, and said that this is not the right direction to go in, that this would slow down the momentum and the process and would lead to an uncertain outcome. but the president felt very strongly that this was in fact the right course to take. we are also told that when the president met with his national security team, his top advisers this morning, that mostly they were all onboard with his decision. so that is how this decision came about. it's fascinating to have those details coming out that we are getting. we know that the white house is currently in the process of writing up a resolution that they will present to congress when they come back. that happens on september 9. the president not calling congress back early because of the jewish holiday, we are told. >> kristen welker, thank you. >>> here with me now, karen finny, host of msnbc's "disrupt." and david road, foreign affairs columnist for reuters. thank you both

congress. election their focus was supposed to be on jobs, but they continue to focus on the health care bill. not focusing on jobs. they is no reason why can't pass the infrastructure thign to get the economy going. the roads are falling apart, the bridges are falling down, so i would like them to focus on jobs. the other thing that really bothers me is the corporations. as we have said from you arerts, corporations making more money than ever before. they are not sharing their wealth appropriately with workers. the money is not going to the common man. that is evident in all of the reporting. over, as well as with the congress. the congress work -- the congress worries about their jobs first. the wall street journal has this to add on the figures yesterday, saying the number of americans working or looking for work fell by 37,000 in july. salt lake city, utah, independent line, good morning. caller: thank you for having me. weind of like the economy have in the united states. i noticed a lot

congress might say no. ivan watson, what if congress does say no? how will that be looked upon by the rest of the world? >> it's a really good question. i mean, i guess it will be an example of an american democracy at work. and probably a striking observation, a striking example for a lot of the regimes in this part of the world that, let's face it, don't exactly have democratic credentials. also, it will probably be seen as some of the syrian opposition voices we're seeing in social networking and media. basically many of them are denouncing obama calling him a coward, saying he's using this a way of getting out of having to take action in syria. it's very important, john, by the way, the point that nick just made about the rebels and makeup of the rebels is very important. the so-called free syrian army, the syrian opposition that we saw growing up two years ago when this whole uprising and conflict began, i don't even recognize it anymore. the rebels we see today, there are defector syrian government soldiers who joined the opposition who were t

just remember the culture of congress didn't change between the 111th and 11 # -- 112th congress, but it's day and night because the context was dominating the republican house making it impossible for anything to happen. i would argue the culture is more a symptom of what -- of what's going on and with it comes a whole set of problematics and consequences, but it's clear what is driving the culture that he's talking about in the book is the e emergence of polarization which came after that great period of the golden senate that chris dodd referred to in which there was no overlap that a leader could work with in the other party because everyone was absolutely apart. secondly, during that period of time, the democrats were in control, big time, large majority. the house and senate democrats had been in control since eisenhower's first term, first congress, and, frankly, republicans were tame. they realized if they were going to get anything done, they had to do business with democrats and a lot of them, a class of problem solving conservatives or moderate senate democrats made a huge

but i feel like this congress in particular, more than the last congress, this congress in particular is not even being competently managed by particularly speaker boehner. yesterday, this week, you have this crazy thing where they're going to do a routine appropriations bill to fund hud and transportation and they had to pull it because it didn't look like they had the votes. it just seems to me like it's almost this king is dead game of thrones feudal warfare on the house side in which there's no actual coherent, unified leadership to push an agenda, were there actually an agenda. >> well, i think, you know, the partisanship aside, i think it's a fair point. you're absolutely right. you and i, as we would see in the house, between republicans and democrats, would have a different prescription for how to solve the problem. that's if we actually got in the room and sat down to try to work out the prescription to solve the problem. they're not doing that. and the concern that i see, particularly for the gop going into next year, is that what is going to be the conversation with the cou

feeling pressure from a skeptical congress. democrat patrick leahy is the chairman of the senate judiciary committee. >> so what's going to be next? when is enough enough? i think congress has to carefully consider the powerful surveillance tools that we grant to the government. >> reporter: to ease some of the fears, the obama administration today declassified three top- secret documents detailing the n.s.a.'s mass collection of u.s. phone records. a surveillance program first revealed by edward snowden. this is the april, 2013, order from the foreign intelligence surveillance court directing a phone company to turn over domestic call data. and these letters from the justice department to congressional intelligence committees claim the n.s.a. follows strict rules safeguarding civil liberties. while heavily redacted, the letters say n.s.a. programs collect in bulk certain dialing, routing, addressing and signaling information but not the content of the calls. the letters also say the data collection efforts are subject to an ex

it's called congress. >> right. >> called the legislative branch. if you want an advisory board, we have one. so you will have to just stop letting a few people know what's going on with the intelligence programs but let everyone know and if you don't, then you're going to find some of these tools are not available anymore. >> sounds reasonable to me. thank you so much. >>> it's becoming a habit. president obama trying to make an end run around congress. yet again. in june, president obama vowed to make climate change a priority of his second term and this week epa chief mccarthy saying that the president plans to bypass congress to get that done. >> they do think that this climate change issue and its impacts are fundamentally an economic challenge. they are fundamentally an economic challenge and i think that the president recognizes that. he said that he wasn't going to wait for congress but that he had administrative authorities and it was time to start utilizing those more effectively in a more concerted way. >> it's not just climate change. pr

so let's see what the congress says first because if the congress votes no as they did in the u.k. and obama then has painted himself into a second quarter. you know israel and saudi arabia have driven this chemical or chemical weapons thing from the get go if people have died from centering gas or if they died from a nuclear attack as they did in hiroshima in one nine hundred forty five they're dead in either way if they die from a conventional bomb they're dead so what is the incredible drama over chemical weapons i'm against all forms of warfare to solve international problems but the you know there's really something hyper emotional about the way this is being pressed up and obama's being pushed into a psychological corner and he's behaving very stupidly in that situation so because many people say there is a moral obligation isn't there from around the world not just the us to still innocent lives being lost particularly to tell it away from such basic humanitarian issue isn't a no no no no this responsibility to protect doctrine is absolute rubbish from the standpoint of inte

go to congress. it's really striking that we're sitting here a day after this kind of remarkable democratic moment in the monarchy where we fought a revolution but we're not going to ask congress whether to authorize war. >> let's be blunt about this. in this scenario what do you want them to do besides go do congress. what would you be in favor of doing? >> what would you be in favor of doing in hungary in 1956. we can't solve all of the world's problems and we can't do it unilaterally which is a method on which barack obama ran against in 2007 and 2008. it's heartbreaking. it's horrifying. every time you see something happening like that you want to reach through the camera. >> you would throw the doctrine of humane intervention out of window? >> it's a doctrine that doesn't have any basis in international law right now currently. yes. you can't intervene into a sovereign country that's doing who are horrible things to its own citizens. it's very frustrating for anyone who hates to see human traged

going to wait, present this to congress, and if congress, these are hypotheticals, like the british parliament, voted against it, would you be okay with that in the wake of chemical weapons being used in syria? >> well, i think that -- the use of chemical weapons is a horrible thing. it is a horrible thing to be killed whether it is by a bomb or by a bullet. you are still dead either way you -- either way you look at it. we have set the standard now that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable. we have used that as the standard. then you have to act when somebody uses them but what -- what i'm saying is that you needing to act with authorization from congress even if -- if xyou don't get it, you suffer the consequences. look, i went to the american people. i went to the congress. i didn't get what i wanted. i still think that this is the correct use of military force. i am the commander in chief. i think you would get a lot of opposition for the president's use of the military that way. because it is not his military. it is the military of the united states of america. he is our

should strike syria, but he wants approval from congress first. >> u.s. ppt barack obama says he will seek support from congress for a military strike against syria. in a nationally televised address on saturday the president said he does not need congressional approval for such action, but would ask for authorization nonetheless. boehm left no doubt that he himself reached the decision that military action should be taken. here's what he had to say -- >> after careful deliberation, i have decided that the united states should take military action against syrian regime targets. this would not be an open-ended intervention. we would not put boots on the ground. instead our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope. but i'm confident we can hold the assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out. our military has positioned assets in the region. the chairman of the joint chiefs has informed me that we are prepared to strike whenever we choose. moreover, t

i am going to go to congress" and he knows congress will say no. what's your reaction to this? >> well, maybe something you and i have no idea happened in the last 24 hours. maybe it is your last guess suggested, there was a new piece of intelligence or information. i think for want of that explanation what is clear is that democracy sort of happened. the president very clearly marks a line in the sand, but he doesn't have the country behind him. the fundamental rule of democracy is a president doesn't need congress behind him, but he needs the country behind him. he didn't have the country behind him. this morning he acknowledged that. you don't see congress rushing back there and they are sleeping well in syria jie. is this a president -- >> is this a president who made a mistake a year ago when he drew the line in the sand and had no intention of backing it up? and what does that say to our adversaries out there, especially iran? >> he did have an intention of backing it up. my son said what is it? i said it is something about chemical weapons. i do believe chemical weapons

it's called congress. >> right. >> called the leg lative branch. if you want an advisory board, we have one. so you will have to just stop letting a few people know what's going on with the intelligence programs but let everyone know and if you don't, then you're going to find some of these tools are not available anymore. >> sounds reasonable to me. thank you so much. >>> it's becoming a habit. president obama trying to make an end run around congress. yet again. in june, president obama vowed to make climate change a priority of his second term and this week epa chief mccarthy saying that the president plans to bypass congress to get that done. >> they do think that this climate change issue and its impacts are fundamentally an economic challenge. they are fundamentally an economic challenge and i think that the president recognizes that. he said that he wasn't going to wait for congress but that he had administrative authorities and it was time to start utilizing those more effectively in a more concerted way. >> it's not just climate change. pr

and because congress has had no ownership, congress -- members of congress, not all people, many people are very responsible on these kinds of issues, but many members are able to make up all kinds of silly debates about our policy. we saw one, i thought, on the senate floor not long ago. so you know, to me, todd, the best thing to do would be to involve congress and cause us to take ownership. look, prime minister cameron is bringing back the uk parliament. >> different form of government. >> very specific. >> different form of government. has to do that. >> look, we're having an intellectual conversation, meaning this is not going to happen, okay? but the fact is, they -- i will say the administration is honoring the responsibilities they have under the war powers act. i appreciate that. i do hope once the president decides which option he's going to take relative to our intervention, i do hope they will circle back around and talk with those of us that i think they feel they need to talk with regarding this. but look, it's going to happen in my opinion. it's a matter of what option t

congress. is there any indication from the military that the strikes are imminent? >> reporter: the two big questions this afternoon are number one, has president obama made the decision yet and number two, when will the strikes occur and quite frankly, we don't have any precise answers to either one of those questions. now, when those u.n. inspectors bugged out of damascus early this morning, about a day early, they clearly have cleared the battlefield to enable the u.s. to launch those strikes, and the u.s. military couldn't be any more ready than they are right now. they've got those five guided missile destroyers in the eastern mediterranean, each loaded with up to 50 tomahawk cruise missiles and we're told that all the targets, almost all the targets, have already been downloaded into those warheads so once the president does give the order, it will be short order before those missiles are in the air. >> okay. mick, when you talk about those that are in the mediterranean, we have the "uss

that they want to present to congress. of course, they are trying to determine what their strategy will be over the snempl days. how they can put this to a swift debate and then ultimately, it would be their hope to a swift vote. as you have been discussing, as we've been discussing all afternoon, karen, this congress doesn't move quickly. so certainly, the momentum has slowed here considerably. i would expect that behind the scenes, you will see a robust outreach from particularly the vice president. i'm sure the president as well will be working the phones as well as senior administration officials and secretary of state john kerry. >> thank you, kristin welker. >>> coming up, more reaction on the president's speech today and how a war weary nation will view this vote. usua l please. usua thank you very much. ok guys, i'm back. i need a template of a template. oh my gosh. i've never even seen this record, i've only read about it in books. yeah we can get some peanut...that is huge. please don't judge the amount of peanut

congress gets itself together. congress proposes amendment to the constitution such as suggested. constitutional amendments arise from the people directly as well as within the hall of congress, so that we go for long periods with a disfunctional congress. the reason i mentioned that the chairman of the joint economic committee of congress distinguished gentleman from texas, kevin brady, and his committee have presented a bill calling for a monetary commission to exam what should be the american monetary standard and examination of history, an examination of the empire call evidence, especially the historical evidence, and what all of those different persuasions, monitorrists, classists, i guess there are many of them. there's many more in the tax on my of economists. to bring forth the opinion and and tempt to get a consensus and there by to go to congress and perhaps then it will do its duty and establish the american monetary system and define it as it was in 1892, at the beginning of the american republican as a certain weight of pressure metal. thank you very, very much. [app

and that congress, and particularly mr. obey's committee, place restraints on your discretion of budget that you had not anticipated? >> well, i'll tell you, being the conservative that i am, it was an interesting period of time. you've got to understand the time and why the department grew like it did to the department the first you i was there, nine months into, 9/11 happened. up until that time the budget office was very much trying to control spending at the department of health and human services. of the truth of the matter was, 9/11 came and everybody was looking for who is going to be able to pick up these pieces. the first thing, the first tremendous emergency was smallpox. it was on at the time that i took over 12 million doses of smallpox vaccine available in order to protect the american public. we were lucky enough. were asked the pharmaceutical comes to look in the reserves to see if there's any chance that they might be able to find some. one company found 62 million doses of smallpox that was in a lockbox thr

congress is not exempted from obamacare. congress and our staff have to go on obamacare. we were booted off our healthcare -- we will be booted off our health care when the new year starts. >> and the president? >> i do not think the president has too. the problem is that we have the white house and their staff and federal employees who do not have to go on to obamacare. they do not have to do the exchanges. but congress members and their staff do have to go on to obamacare. excuse me? >> adjust the subsidies. -- address the subsidies. >> there is a premium payment that members of congress and their staff get, which is the same they have been getting all along currently as part of our benefits from our employer, which is the government. it is just like any other employer might give her man payments to their employees. we are in an unusual situation. we are getting kicked off our employer's healthcare and getting put onto the exchanges. the question is whether you can get premium payments from your employer if you are kicked onto the exchanges. this would not happen to any

he has to go to congress. the people through their directed representatives, if the people in the u.k. can be represented by their parliament and cameron agreed through the will of the people, why can't president obama do the same thing? >> it's a great question. the congress seems awfully passive in the face of this. if we attack syria, we are targeted the assad regime. say we overthrow the regime, which appears to be their aim at some point. what comes next and why aren't we talking about what comes next? is that not important? >> this is the problem again with the obama administration. the president and our secretary of state. we don't know what their plans are. what they're trying to accomplish. the only thing it sounds like they're trying to accomplish is to fire off the few missiles, dust up some dirt over there and then claim victory. all at the same time saying we're not going to have regime change. we're not going to put boots on the ground. the president can't make that promise to the american people

when congress can't get anything done, things do happen. they just happen outside of congress. let me give you an example. no child left behind. in support of conservative republicans many no child left behind technically expired in 2007. it is a zombie bill. no one did anything about it, they didn't reauthorize it or overhaul it. the outdated provisions of this out of touch bill are beginning to strangle the education system. 100% of school districts need to meet the mandate or will they lose money. we've known for years they will not hit those targets. that means they will lose tons of money. we needed to do some, but, you know, congress. the obama administration began giving out waivers, telling almost 40 states they're letting them out of no child left behind as long as they agree to meet other quality targets. today they took another step. after rejecting california's request for a waiver, they said yes to eight individual school districts in california. that's the first time it ever happened. with congress doing nothing this governing by waiver is becoming common. the oba

look, congress doesn't award these congresses. it's up to the pentagon and administration but we can ensure it doesn't happen, again. >> congressman, thank you very much, sir. >> great to be here, thank you. >>> straight ahead, another politician and another tweeted photo. who is it and what's in the picture this time? no, don't worry, it's not anthony weiner this time, but [ male announcer ] could've had a v8. two full servings of vegetables for only 50 delicious calories. vietnam in 1972. [ all ] fort benning, georgia in 1999. [ male announcer ] usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection and because usaa's commitment to serve military members, veterans, and their families is without equal. begin your legacy, get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve. hi. i'm clarence. are we too late to get my wife a camry? no, there's still time at our once-a-year clearance event. you're so stylish. you've got good taste. oh, cammie. mom? yes,

initiated in congress. >> two thirds members of both houses of congress can propose amendments send them to the states. you need three fourths to ratify them to become part of the constitution there is another way. the second way is never actually been tried in an effective matter. it has much authority as other methods and bypasses congress. you need two thirds of the states to inform congress for the purpose of proposing amendments. and at that convention amendments can be debated and discussed and so forth they don't become part of the constitution unless three fourths of the states adopt the amendments. some claim to be conservatives are basically rhinos who like status quo. this is the process the constitution provides for occasions like this. if you support federalism, i mean now is the time to do it if you think states should have more authority now is the time to do it this, federal government is in the opposite direction. states have no say in anything anymore. not because you think the constitution is outdated you belie congress passed a law it didn't have power to pass. the pr

your message to congress? take healtheed to care way from congress. they are making $70 per hour and they will not even raise the minimum wage. most of america are too stupid to realize they're voting against their own interests by not voting health care for themselves. have a nice day. host: sue, your message to congress? caller: i want to be at your health care plan, congress. host: what do you think should be done about the health care law? host: if they vote it in for us, they should be under the same health care. host: do you think should be defunded? caller: yes, i do. host: have you send that message to a member of congress? caller: i have not. host of the to attend a town hall meeting? caller: yes, i have. --t: who is did you go to whose did you go to? caller: ron paul. host: when was that? m, when he was running last time? host: thank you. next caller. caller tell my message to them is -- caller: my message to them is that obama care is coming in with -- medicare was here before obama care. if we take money at of this out of thisot -- program

let congress get fully briefed. let congress pass some sort of resolution before there is action. it's one thing for a republican critic of the president like john cornyn, who's very influential, very important, but when you get carl levin saying something similar, bring congress back, let there be a vote. there you see an aide bringing the president's statement out there. the president's going to be walking out within the next few seconds and making his statement. lots of things we should focus on. how detailed will the president be? will he review all the intelligence that john kerry laid out yesterday? will he go into more detail? will he talk about congressional authorization, the mandate resolution which the russians have repeatedly threatened to veto? is there some new language that could avert a russian veto? will the president go into any specifics on that? will he talk about the lack of support from britain that the british parliament refused to endorse david cameron's vote resolution authorizing to join the united states in some sort of coalition against the syrian regim

instead congress is giving us a headwind. so congress is slowing down a healing, and as a result it makes us more vulnerable and makes the individual consumer and most importantly companies feel less certain, and that's money. >> we spend a lot of time on this last year, where we really lived with this idea of debt ceiling debate and shutdown and fiscal cliff all year, and we know it had an impact on people's sense of confidence in the economy, but most people have chosen to forget about this. is there some danger when this becomes the main story that people will start to retrench, and say i'm just going to hold on to my money until we find out what the government is up to? >> yes, there are two dangers. one is playing out as we speak, which is people are starting to realize that there is a quite bathe of uncertainty facing us in the next few weeks. the budget, and congress, the fed, what is happening in syria, the german elections. so markets are starting to price in more uncertainty. and that has an impact on sentiment. the

go to congress and ask for authorization. and now he's doing just that. >> well, it was a very foolish thing to make the statement about the red line and last august. he did it in the heat of a presidential campaign. but the fact section that the economists say that -- in the -- just because you do one very foolish thing, as you look ahead on your policy, you don't make things better by doinging the second foolish thing. we are going to take a hit for his -- misstatement last august but we don't need to compound it. he now compounded it twice over. he is saying, again, today, that the military strike will be very limited and -- but he is going further in saying that he is in the even sure he is willing to do it. unless he gets authority. i think that this is a mistake twice compounded now. >> last thing, he is leaving tuesday evening for sweden and hen russia. in the midst of this hanging basically in limbo until congress gets back september 9. that in and of itself presents some foreign policy changes. >> no. it is a mistake

he has the authority to carry out a military attack without approval from congress but he feels that going before congress having above public debate debate having a vote would make the country stronger if if there was actually a national conversation taking place about obama's intended military strike against syria now the u.s. leader says that he feels comfortable carrying out an attack against a syrian targets without the approval of the united nations security council u.s. officials believe that any security draft resolution allowing for the use of force against syria would be vetoed by russia and or china now obama says his plan military strike is not time sensitive that means that it could happen one week from now it could happen one month from now but ultimately the u.s. president says the syrian government will pay consequences for allegedly carrying out a chemical weapons attack after careful deliberation i have decided that the united states should take military action against syrian regime targets and should not be an open ended intervention we would not put boots on the g

of course, congress passed the patriot act, the fisa amendments act, but members of congress were not really aware on the whole about what these programs were being used for. the extent to which they were being used. members of the intelligence committee were told, but members who are rank and file members really didn't have the information. >> so you till consider him a whistleblower? >> yes. >> because? >> well, he can -- >> i mean, he had signed a note, said he wasn't going to give up the secrets, and he gave up the secrets. >> as i said, he may be doing things overseas that we would find problematic, that we would find dangerous. we'll find those facts out over time. but as far as congress is concerned, sure, he's a whistleblower. he told us what we wanted to know. >> general hayden, it isn't just congressman amash. according to a new poll, 55% of americans now regard edward snowden as a whistleblower, not as a traitor. a couple of questions. one, are they wrong? secondly, in your mind, how tough should president obama get with russia, get with vladimir putin, now that they've giv

congress reconvenes early next month. has confirmed obama nominee samantha power as the next u.s. ambassador to the united nations. power served as obama senior foreign-policy adviser during his first run for the white house before being forced to resign for calling hillary clinton a monster. she won a pulitzer prize in 2003 for her book "a problem from hell: america and the age of genocide." progressives has accused her of ignoring this bike atrocities will supporting humanitarian intervention abroad. president obama has tapped a former pervert restructuring expert to oversee the irs. john koskinen oversaw the overhaul of mortgage buyer freddie mac during the financial crisis and served as deputy director of the office of management and budget under president clinton. statement, obama called him an expert in reform. the irs has faced scandal over scrutiny of certain political groups to apply for tax-exempt status. in ohio man who held three women captive for a decade while repeatedly raping them has been officially sente

congress is in recess right now, dana. they're not supposed to come back until monday, september 9, and presumably if they stick to that, that's when tlel here wil a debate and a vote. what are you learning? >> the house speaker is saying the house will take a vote the week of september 9, meaning the house will not come back before that. and the reason he gives in this short statement that he just put out is because it gives house members time to learn more information and, more specifically, for the white house and the obama administration to make the case that this authorization is necessary and the military strike would be necessary in theory. we look at the makeup of both the house and the senate, it makes sense. it makes sense not just because the senate is run by democrats, but also because there are more emirates in the senate. you have seen the most conservative on the republican side and the most liberal on the democratic side to be the most reluctant to use military force. it's just the way the makeup of the sen

and it bypasses congress. essentially, you need two-thirds of the states to inform congress that they're going to hold a convention for the purpose of proposing amendments as if congress has a meeting and propose amendments. and at that convention, amendments can be debated and discussed and so forth. they don't become part of the constitution unless 3/4 of the states when presented with them adopt the amendments. and i would just say to some skeptics, not a lot but some skeptics who claim to be conservatives and constitutionalists but are basically rhinos and who like the status quo. this is the process the constitution provides for occasions like this. if you support federalism, now is the time to do it. if you think states should have more authority, now is the time to do it. this is a juggernaut in the opposite direction. and the circle of liberty is getting smaller and smaller and states have no say in anything anymore. >> you said you took on this project, not because you think the constitution is outdat