Transcripts For MSNBC Morning Joe 20100408

joe, from oregon writes, i'm still awake because i heard someone was guest hosting for will yeah. i was hoping it was savannah. damn you, barnicle. >> wait until tomorrow. savannah will be with us tomorrow. and "morning joe" starts right now. you're looking at live pictures from prague. and the president of the united states is going to be starting a press conference very soon. he's supposed to start it a few minutes ago. he's going to, of course, announce the signing of the new strategic arms reduction treaty. he'll have a joint press conference between himself and also the president of russia. john ridley is with us in burbank, california, which, of course, when you think arms reduction talks, you of course go back to the great arms reduction talks that took place right here in this room between reagan and gorbachev. i mean, this is -- so -- >> i was a kid at the time, but you never forget those things, because -- >> beautiful downtown burbank. no, serious. why does it feel like 1988? you say in your room over your bed you have an actual dooms day clock. >> dooms day clock. >> it's been at 11:59 since shares come back. do you move it back a couple of minutes? >> no. i like to keep it where it is so i won't like to be late for dooms day. >> mike barnicle is in new york city. perhaps you can raise the bar here and tell us why america should wake up and care about what's going on today. >> well, i think we should care about what's going on today because anything that reduces the level of international tension or the threat of rogue nuclear weapons in the hands of whomever is a good day for people who enjoy living the lives we lead and the way we lead them. >> yeah. of course, the big concern when you talk about nuclear weapons today, as opposed to -- you know, when you were a teenager in 1947, from -- obviously, we had inspector of nuclear wars from 1940s through christmas day 1991 when soviet union collapsed but you just said it, big concern is nuclear weapons getting in the hands of rogue nations. >> that's an interesting point you just raised. because there are so many people in this country, specifically, i'd say over the age of 50 or 55 years of age, who have had their entire lives framed by the cold war and the threat of nuclear weapons from growing up in grammar school, getting positioned under the desk when they had the civil defense exercises to today when, you know, we have so much opportunity and so much optimism in the air, but perhaps we'll finally learn some lessons about how to handle nuclear weapons and the need not to have as many around. >> obviously, over the past several years, we've had difficult relations with russia. president bush at the beginning of his term, of course, famously said -- or infamously said he had seen into the soul of vladimir putin and he was a good fellow. he found out over the next 7 1/2 years that putin was a very tough person to deal with. barack obama's learning the same thing. every time he meets with him. he's met with him a couple times now. vladimir putin tries to show him as little public respect as possible by slouching in his chair. so in terms of u.s. relations with russia, this is obviously a big moment. and i think most of the globe, willie geist, when willie's in augusta right now, has one question. what is tiger woods' take on this reduction treaty? >> you know, he did not weigh in yesterday when he walked off the 18th green. we didn't hear from tiger greens about arms reduction, not at this point anyway. the thing we were talking about here yesterday, but the ad is this nike commercial where you have tiger staring blankly into the camera, saying nothing for 30 seconds, as the voice of his deceased father offers him advice, asks him, i want to know what you learned? nike won't say where they got the audio for this, but the his father's voice cobbled together from we don't know from where. some people think it's an effective ad. number two, a little offended, perhaps, that he used the voice of his deceased father in his career rehabilitation. we'll play the full ad for our viewers a little later. >> it was a jarring ad. what was your take on it? were you jarred by it? >> reporter: yeah, my first take was, wow, i can't believe he used his dad as the 12th step in his rehab program. but it was very effective, i have to say. the word that came to mind was haunting. you have him in black and white, nothing his face at all. you can't tell what he's feeling and you just hear the recorded voice of his father, who of course, passed away aa few years ago. i found it effective. >> of course, anybody that followed the career of tiger woods from the very beginning knows that his father would probably -- it's not a big stretch. you try not to put words into the mouth of the dead, but it's not a big stretch to say tiger's dad would be the first one saying, use my voice, use my voice, whatever helps you, son, get back out onto the golf course and do wau do best. >> two issues here. one is in terms of advertising, using his father at all, which he's done before. he had some ads for a credit card company that he fronted, or his dad was in the ad as well. the other one is just the timing of the ad. sooner or later we knew that first ad was going to happen. here it is nike, here it is his big return. so, i'm not surprised by it. i certainly never would have thought that would be the ad they would use. but i get it. >> it is effective. it stops you in your tracks, which is the whole idea. mike barnicle, we're looking obviously at -- well, i don't know that you would say that this signing event seems like a relic from a different age, but obviously, again, we focused greatly, the entire world's attention stopped over the past five decades whenever leaders from russia and the united states would get together and sign these type of treaties. now we are more concerned about whether guys from the middle east are smoking cigarettes in bathrooms on airplanes. talk about how -- you know, as you know, mike, i'm a man out of time, and so i have a 287-pound ticker tape that i put in every hotel room and it was tickering across my bed last night. i was looking. you know, if you start looking at the breaking news at about 1 # 1:00 p.m. last night, it's shoe boerm tries to blow up plane. middle eastern man, blah, blah. in the end you see that all of the news media stopped because a guy got up from his seat and tried to smoke a cigarette. our margin of error is so much smaller now than it was when these type of treaties determined with you felt comfortable or my family felt comfortable going to bed at night. >> well, you know, joe, what's interesting about the event taking place right now in prague and the headlines of the day, as you just referenced, is that within russia itself, i pemean, they've been victimized by such a spate of terrorism attacks, you wonder if the focus there is like the focus here. i mean, it's fine that they're there. it's fine they're signing the treaty. but both nations and much of the world is so preoccupied with terrorism. we're lucky, joe, this morning we have with us from new york right here, steven hcohen of russian history. you've got more titles -- everything. >> everything, even golf. >> well, of course, most importantly, mike barnicle, husband. >> husband. >> professor of politics of -- >> yeah, let's break it down, though, steven. first thing's first. let's talk about this historically historically. whenever nixon would meet with breshnev or reagan would meet with gorbachev. let's put this in focus. why should americans be focused on what's happening in the next few minutes? >> you have me at a disadvantage. you said, we can all remember when we were teenagers. i can't remember when i was a teenager but i'll take your word for it that we've all lived with nuclear weapons all our lives. you said something interesting to me, which makes me think you've become an international affairs expert. you said watching -- i'm sorry. was there ever a time, really, when i wasn't an international affairs expert? >> only briefly. >> i mean, when i was playing tee ball i was breaking apart the s.a.l.t. 2 treaty. go ahead our nyu professor. >> you said before with you watched this footage of people getting ready to sign this treaty it seems like a relic from another age. that raises a question. i think you're absolutely right about whether that age has really passed or not. here we are again doing the same thing our leaders did for 40 years, signing something called a strategic nuclear arms agreement. how much is really changed since the end of the cold war and did the cold war really end? the other thing you said was, i think, absolutely right, people don't want to think about it, is that the margin for error regarding survival is much smaller than when we grew up. since we assume the danger was represented by the soviet union and the soviet union no longer exists, does that mean we're now less safe than we were when the soviet union existed? a fairly blasphomist question, but since there are so many dangers in the world that didn't exist before, many released into the soviet state, some will be a little nostalgic. >> steven, not to become too blsphomist, if you look at their angsz, other than going into afghanistan, for the most part, the soviet union was a conservative actor on the world stage as far as where they made their move. certainly you could talk about hungary and czechoslovakia and afghanistan, but there was a big move every -- once a decade, but certainly iran and other states that we want to keep nuclear weapons away from, pakistan much less stable. therefore, again, i think we need to underline this again. much more dangerous. the margin of error smaller from 194 1945 to 1951. >> back then we knew who we had to talk to, the kremlin, the soviet leaders. today, for example, we don't know who to talk with in afghanistan and other places where terrorism gross. >> is there an alliance -- >> well, and iran, steven, we don't even know who's running iran right now. is it the clerics? is it -- you are exactly right. it's getting far more difficult. but let me ask you because you're the expert in russian history. who's running russia right now? >> vladimir putin is running it with the assistance of the man that we're going to see in prague with president obama, the nominal president, medvedev but putin remains the paramount leader. >> joe, i was going to ask professor cohen, is there an alliance to be nurtured here between russia and the united states in terms of the opponents, terrorism around the world? we both confront terrorism. >> all we had to do was look at the bombing in moscow ten days ago, whatever it was, and remember our subways could be bombed, too. they may well be one day. subways in every major capital of the world have been bombed. and realize the only two countries that are absolutely essential in terms of intelligence and reach to learn in advance, for example, about such plots are the united states and russia. now, we're going to be told today as a result, this is the answer to your question, that as a result of this good feeling treaty in prague that we now have such an alliance. the reality is we don't but it's within reach. gigts to require will in washington and the kremlin and to me it's not clear that will exists, at least in washington, a little more in the kremlin, not sure about that, though. >> talking about the cold war era. crimeologist would look at the viewing parade on may day every year and try to figure out, who was in power, who had gone up works had gone down. let me ask you about something we've observed on this show day in and day out whef american leaders go over to meet vladimir putin. if you could explain to us f you've seen the same thing, and exactly what type of message putin is trying to deliver. it seems like every time he's met with american leaders over the past year, he has a contentious look on his face, he's slumping in his chair, he's letting the world know he's disinterested. it's the opposite message barack obama tries to send. can you tell us what's going on right now with vladimir putin and is there -- what is -- what are his main previous answers against the united states? >> if it's true what you say, joe, that he looks like he's got a chip on his shoulder every time he meets an american leader, it's in sharp contrast to when he meets european leaders. among them, he moves easily, openly, casually, as one would expect the leader of the kremlin to move. now f he has a chip on the shored, it has to do with what happened in russia after the end of the soviet union. whether it's true or not, the russian political elite thinks washington, we, the united states, took advantage of russia's weakness during that decade of the 1990s. >> you keep saying if, steven. there is. i mean, resentment frames russia's relationship with the united states right now, does it not? >> it does, but the if doesn't regard to whether they're resentful. the if regards to whether or not we tried to take advantage of them. did washington during the 1990s, this is primarily under clinton, try to take advantage of russia in a way, and here's something that you can answer better than i can, betrayed the promises or the expectations they got from president ronald reagan when they were -- when gorbachev and ronald reagan were winding down the cold war. their view is the conditions that ended the cold war were violated in the '90s by the clinton administration. for a decade they were slapped around, told what to do, had nato shoved up their nostrils, had their neighbor serbia, a fellow slav nation formed by the united states, form elnato, by the time tut putin came to power that chip was enormous. >> let's go to chuck todd in prague with the president. chuck, get us up to date with what's been going on overnight and what we can expect this morning. >> reporter: well, you're going to hear remarks. they'll do the signing and then a press conference, both russian president and president obama and take a couple questions each. i imagine one topic that will come up in addition to this, obviously the all smiles and glad-handling you'll see on the signing of this treaty, has to do with iran. officials on air force one on the way over say that, you know, it would be discussed in the bilateral that they had the private meeting that is going on right now, but that we shouldn't expect any major announcements, but no doubt that will be at least one of the questions that comes up. what's also going to probably come up is this interesting little analysis that the white house put on its own website this morning, just after midnight, and it had to do with trying to explain the russian threat of pulling out of the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. they announced if the u.s. put -- built missile defense shields in europe in a way that seemed to undermine the balance of power, then they could pull out. and the u.s. put up, this the white house, obama administration put up this explanation saying, oh, you know, look, they say these statements before, don't overread it. they're very nervous about that statement being overread. still there are some sticking points having to do with missile defense. >> hey, chuck, this is new york asking you a question. who among president obama's staff is his go-to guy on russia? >> reporter: repeat that question one more time. i'm sorry, mike. >> who is the president's go-to guy within his staff on russia? is it general jones? is it the secretary of state? who is it? >> reporter: well, it's -- probably the day-to-day guy besides general jones, is tom donalin and the other guy working inside the west wing is a guy named gary seymour would you say been doing a lot of these taunglks, negotiations ba and forth as well. when you look at inside of would you say been pushing all these buttons, tom donalif is pushing all the buttons. general jones travels a heck of a lot more than what we've been used to with national security advisers. that means tom donalin is the guy that probably gets more presidential face time than any other key national security figure, mike. >> you know, chuck todd, from new york city to beautiful downtown burbank, john ridley has a question. john? >> chuck, how are you. i do have a question. if you look at this deal, it looks like a complicated accounting deal that actually favors the americans in terms of what missiles are -- what warheads are loaded onto missiles and which ones are in storage. it seems if the americans are getting a good deal here, do you have any idea what the russians are going to be looking for in the next deal or what they're looking for from us? >> reporter: well, look, they wanted a couple things on this. in be one is that they don't want to be -- admit that somehow we got a better deal than they did. one of the interesting facets about this deal is that they needed to -- they need to cut back on their arsenal for budget reasons. they can't financially keep up -- you know, they had technically a bigger active arsenal than the united states. now, after this deal, after seven years, the two countries will have an equal amount of weapons, which hasn't been the case after previous agreements, but the russians quietly, you know, the budget guys, their omd directors happy because they can cut their budget when it comes to maintaining. it seems that when you look back over the history of the cold war and the post-cold war era and relations between these two countries, at the end of the day a lot of times we benefitted from the simple fact that the russians have financial constraints when it comes to trying to keep up with us. >> steven cohen, let's go to you in new york as we wait for the president of the united states to come out with the president of russia. steven, do we get the better end of the deal when it comes to strategic arms reduction or a bigger deal for russia because of the budgetary constraints chuck todd was talking about? >> don't think it's a whole lot of anything. the important thing, and i can answer your question by little reporting, is there's a lot of opposition to this treaty in moscow in the newspapers. on the grounds the opposition thinks russia did not get a good deal. that they made too many concessions to the united states. now, we're going to hear exactly the same argument in washington when the thing comes up for ratification in the senate that a group of senators have already said they don't like it and they don't think we got a good deal. now, you can make two things of that. if the opposition on both sides thinks it's a bad deal, that means it's a pretty good deal for both sides, they compromised it out. the other possibility is it's not a good treat y it's unstable and it isn't going to add up to a whole lot and may not -- here's the extraordinary thing. they haven't even published the darn thing. i mean, what are they hiding? there's a lot of talk about whether or not they made a link to missile defense. washington says they haven't. the kremlin said yesterday they have but they won't let us read the document, so we don't know. >> chuck todd, can you help us out there? oh, i'm sorry, mike, were you -- i walked on mike. mike barnicle, let's go to you first and then mike. >> i was going to ask steven, do you think the russians have any idea where all their nuclear warheads are? >> gosh, i hope so. the big ones, obviously, yes. i hope so. do you have one? i mean, are you -- >> to. no. >> the serious answer is about eight years ago, you know, there's something called tactical nuclear weapons, little nuclear weapons, that are used within ranges of about 300 miles. you don't fire them across the atlantic. about eight years ago, the russian national security advisers said a few were missing from the russian arsenals or warehouses. that was later denied. but the serious answer to your question is, russia has about 10,000 tactical, small nuclear weapons. they aren't entirely portable but semiportable. you don't need a truck, a traen a plane to carry them. do they have a complete comprehensive inventory of all those? they say they do. there's reason to think they don't. >> and it is such a dangerous situation. mike, that's a fascinating question you asked. it's ironic for me because i just remembered, i was here i believe in '98-'99, and we had a briefing, a classified briefing from a guy that used to be in the kgb talking about the possibility of 50 to 60 suitcase bombs that were left in lockers across the united states. and he suggested at the time, the late '90s, that nobody knew where they were or if they had been accounted for or if those nuclear suitcase bombs had gotten into the hands of terrorists. so, obviously, there are a lot of big questions and there have been for some time. chuck todd, let's go to you for you. chuck, you wanted to follow up on something that steven had said. >> reporter: i want to go on this tactical nuclear weapon issue. that's something that didn't get dealt with as much in this treaty as, i think, the u.s. would like. and that -- there's a hope that somehow the -- that this treaty leads to more -- more negotiations and more talks and a possible agreement on dealing with these smaller tactical nuclear weapons, which the russians have been a little more stubborn on dealing with. but i also want to go to something about the ratification issue. you know, finding the -- if you assume all 59 democratic senators are going to ratify this thing with the president, that means he needs eight republicans to side with the ratification. we know he has dick luger and a couple others. but getting the eight isn't going to be easy. i was talking to one senior aide, one republican senator, who said the announcement earlier this week on america's new nuclear posture, this idea we would take off the table the use of nuclear weapons against nonnuclear -- and not refurbish our nuclear arsenal, a couple issues, didn't sit well with a lot of the members of the republican caucus and that that could complicate the debate on ratification. even though the two don't technically have anything to do with one another, the debate over ratification of this treaty will get caught up in the debate over what is the future use of how america's nuclear posture should be when it comes to the use of nuclear weapons. >> all right, chuck todd, thank you so much. we're going to be checking back with you in a few minutes. while we wait for the president of the united states to come out and announce this historic treaty, let's go to politico's play book with mike allen. thanks for being with us. we'll be monitoring, obviously, the situation in prague and may have to break out. while we are waiting, let's talk about american politics. specifically, marco rubio, a rising star in the republican party and the announcement of yesterday of how much money he raised the first quarter, showing fund-raising prowess, is he not? >> yes, he is. going down to your home state of florida, this is by far the most interesting race that's going to occur before november 2nd in august. you have this republican primary. at the moment at least, between this rising star marco rubio and the governor of florida, governor charlie crist of florida. we're hearing two things. one, the st. pete times, and you know adam smith is the david broguer, the chuck todd of florida, he is saying there is a surge of speculation that charlie crist is going to see that he's going to lose that primary and is going to go independein independe independent. there's been talk about it for a long time. but there's now new talk about it. adam smith points out if he ran as an independent, you'd only need 35% of the vote to win. switching to rubio's side, talk about that -- all that money that he raised, how much great press he's getting. more and more people are saying, you know, if he does well in the race in november, if he becomes the u.s. senator from florida, he could well be a very legitimate republican candidate for president in 2012. president obama changed the motto. we no longer assume that our presidential candidates have to wait their turn, have to serve a long time. someone who's young and has great ideas and charismatic can vault to the head of the line. that's what you're looking at with marco rubio. >> for republicans, more importantly, he's hispanic. but before -- there aren't a lot of hispanic republicans in high places in washington, d.c. but before we start playing hail to the chief, let's go back and talk about charlie crist as an independent. marco rubio is known as a very conservative guy. he's certainly embracing the tea party support of his nomination. kendrick meeks known as progressive. the democrat. they're both going to have pretty strong -- pretty strong base. but charlie crist is liked by some moderate republicans, some moderate democrats, some independents in the middle. it seems to me this is a guy that actually could shake things up by running as an independent. mike allen, isn't there some speculation he could actually win if he did that? >> he definitely could. because those -- that coalition that you just mentioned there, that could get you to 35%. and marco rubio has been running ads, showing him embracing president clinton -- president obama when he was down there to make a stimulus announcement. but president obama is popular. he won florida. and so, the coalition you're talking about is very imaginable. i would ask you, you'd know better than anyone, do you think charlie crist would pull the tryinge trigger? if he's really struggling with money, why not? these guys think about -- >> and i can say right now, you never say never in politics, but i can tell you that i just don't think charlie crist can win the republican primary. every single republican i talk to, that i respect across the state of florida says, it's too late. he could try to destroy rubio's character. he could go out there with his 30-second ads. on he's got a lot of money. it's too late. he has lost the republican party. i think if he ran as an independent, i would -- i'd put even money on charlie crist winning. >> you know -- >> only because, again, he's going to be able to paint marco rubio as being too conservative for the i-4 corridor, which for people that don't know, florida, that's the swing part of the state of florida. it's central florida and takes you from pinellis county to cape canaveral. >> the missouri of florida. >> exactly. i think you would have rubio winning north florida and meeks winning parts of south florida. i certainly wouldn't count charlie crist out if he ran as an independent. >> that development would underscore the degree to which this race illuminates how changed the republican party is. charlie crist, the moderate, the sitting governor for goodness sakes, not able to get the nomination of his own party. i think you and i have talked about how in many cases the influence of the tea parties is overstated. but this is a place where we see that faction completely changing a race that otherwise would have been pretty predictable, the sitting governor is going to get the nomination. marco rubio, nice young man, he's going to build his list, build his credibility for the future. instead, he grabbed the job. >> yeah. hillary clinton has just walked into the state, secretary of state over in prague. one other point, mike, before we leave florida politics, the president's going to be coming out we hear in about two minutes, but this really looks like it's a follow-up to what happened to joe lieberman in connecticut where you have the net root types on the far left beating joe lieberman in the primary. so he ran as an independent and he won. now it looks like the shoe may be on the other foot and the same may happen, republican base chases charlie crist out and he runs as an independent and he could well win. >> that's right. later this month there will be a lot of attention to this race. the president will be in florida to do a space summit. this is the month of summit. in south florida he'll do a fund-raiser for the democratic national committee. then later in the month, the president is going to hop out to california, do a fund-raiser for senator boxer out there. so, the president's dealing up his political travels starting if florida, putting the spotlight on your state. >> all right, thank you so much. greatly appreciate it, mike allen with the "politico playbook." we'll continue show pictures out of prague and go back to steven cohen out of new york. professor, let's talk about how focused the russian people are on this event. does it take a backseat to the horrors they spernexperienced o the past couple weeks? are they, like americans, more focused on the possibility of their family members being blown up on a train instead of by a nuclear missile coming from the skies? >> they are. min i mean, obviously, they are. the bombings in the subway got their attention. they are fearful. i was there about two weeks ago. the first thing i thought, is everybody safe whom i know? now we have something else that's distracted the russians, these absolutely extraordinary events, which are not yet reported in the united states of apparent revolution in kyrgyzstan, that used to be part of the soviet union, where there's a big air force that supplies afghanistan. the government has fallen. they're demanding the removal of the american air base there. so this is something these two guys, as we look at them, come out. president obama and president medvedev, they may talk about nuclear weapons today but they're going to be thinking about what's going on right now in russia's backyard. >> of course, the presidents of the united states of america and russia have come out. we are going to be hearing from them on the signing of a new strategic arms reduction treaty. and they're going to be having a joint news conference obviously at the prague castle. >> dmitry medvedev, president, barack obama. [ speaking foreign language ] >> the president of the united states of america, barack obama, and the presidents of the russian federation, dmitry medvedev are signing the treaty between the united states of america and the russian federation on measures for the further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms and the protocol to it. >> steven cohen, obviously you've witnessed many of these events through the years and studied them. what are your thoughts as we watch the presidents of the united states and russia sign the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. >> my thought is maybe it's a little low level. but all these years we've had these treaties. one primary goal has been to make the leaders look good, to look like statesmen. and it's been particularly important for president obama, who has a lot of trouble in the united states, and for president medved medvedev, who's very weak in russia. what we're looking at here has been staged in a way or arranged in a way to make each leader look statesman-like, like an international leader at home. and you can just see the kind of ceremonial aspects that have unfolded. and, you know, this is being shown live in russia as well, so russian people -- though it's eight hours later there -- are reacting in their way much as we are here. >> mike barnicle, i ask you the same thing. what are your thoughts? >> they're actually quite similar to steven's thoughts. i mean, we have seen treaties signed before. we've seen various leaders, ours and theirs, assembled in these ornate rooms around the world. you hope that the signatures mean further steps toward an increasingly peaceful world. and yet we are surrounded by the lower level and much more violent, hideous headlines of the day that involve subways being blown up, involve shoe bombers on airplanes. and you get the feeling, the sinking feeling, that these big treaties and these huge signatures and these pieces of paper don't do as much to make the world safer as finding two or three terrorist in a cell in brooklyn would. >> yeah. which is, obviously, stunning change for this country and what really makes us more secure. john ridley, what does it mean for the president at home? >> yeah, that's a very good question to the professor's point. obviously, the president faces pressures at home, the economy and the like, but you look at what he's been able to do over the last few months with health care, to get it through, to look presidential, as the professor says, to sit down and sign this treaty, no matter where it goes. does this help the president take on the mantle, take on the clothing of the president of the united states and will that change the view of how we view him here in the united states? >> let's listen to the president of the united states, barack obama. >> i am honored to be back here in the czech republic with president medvedev and our czech hosts to mark this historic completion of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. let me begin by saying how happy i am to be back in the beautiful city of prague. the czech republic, of course, is a close friend and ally of the united states. and i have great admiration and affection for the czech people. their bonds with the american people are deep and enduring. czechs have made great contributions to the united states over the decades, including my hometown of chicago. i want to thank the president and all those involved in helping to host this extraordinary event. i want to thank my friend and partner, dmitry medvedev. without his strong leadership we would not be here today. we've met and spoken by phone many times throughout the negotiations of this treaty. as a consequence, we've developed a very effective working relationship built on candor, cooperation and mutual respect. one year ago this week i came here to prague and gave a speech outlining america's comprehensive commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking the ultimate goal of a world without them. i said then, and i'll repeat now, that this is a long-term goal. one that may not even be achieved in my lifetime. but i believed then, as i do now, that the pursuit of that goal will move us further beyond the cold war, strengthen the global nonproliferation regime and make the united states and the world safer and more secure. one of the steps that i called for last year was the realization of this treaty. so it's very gratifying to be back in prague today. i also came to office committed to resetting relations between the united states and russia. and i know that president medvedev shared that commitment. as he said at our first meeting in london, our relationship had started to drift, making it difficult to cooperate on common interests to our people. and when the united states and russia are not able to work together on big issues, it's not good for either of our nations nor is it good for the world. together, we've stopped that drift and proven the benefits of cooperation. today is an important milestone for nuclear security and nonproliferation and for u.s./russia relations. it fulfills our common objective to negotiate a new strategic arms reduction treaty. it includes significant reductions in the nuclear weapons that we will deploy. it cuts our delivery vehicles by roughly half. it includes a comprehensive verification regime which allows us to further build trust. it enables both sides the flexibility to secure our treaty as well as america's unwaivering security of our european allies. i look forward to working with the united states senate to achieve ratification for this important treaty later this year. finally, this day demonstrates the determination of the united states and russia, the two nations that hold over 90% of the world's nuclear weapons, to pursue responsible global leadership. together we are keeping our commitments under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which must be the foundation for global nonproliferation. while the new s.t.a.r.t. stretr is a step forward, it's just one step. the stage will be set for further cuts. we hope to pursue discussions with russia on producing our strategic and tactical weapons, including nondeployed weapons. president medvedev and i have acheed to expand discussions on missile defense. this will include exchange of information about our threat assessments as well as the completion of emerging ballistic missiles. i look forward to launching a serious dialogue about russian/american cooperation on missile defense. but, nuclear weapons are not simply an issue for the united states and russia. they threaten the common security of all nations. a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist is a danger to people everywhere, moscow to new york. next week 47 nations will come together in washington to discuss con treat steps that can secure all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years and the spread of nuclear weapons to more states is also an unacceptable risk to global security. raising the spectre of arms races from the middle east to east asia. earlier this week the united states formally changed our policy to make it clear that those nuclear weapon states that are in compliance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and their nonproliferation obligations will not be threatened by america's nuclear arsenal. this demonstrates, once more, america's commitment to the npt as a cornerstone of our security strategy. those nations that follow the rules will find greater security and opportunity. those nations that refuse to meet their obligations will be isolated and denied the opportunity that comes with international recognition. that includes accountability for those that break the rules. otherwise the ntp is just words on a page. that's why the united states and russia are part of a coalition of nations insists that the islamic republic of iran face consequences because they have continued -- continually failed to meet their obligations. we are working together at the united nations security council to pass strong sanctions on iran. and we will not tolerate actions that flout the ntp, risk an arms race in a vital region and threaten the credibility of the international community and our collective security. while these issues are a top priority, there are only one part of the u.s./russia relationship. today i again expressed my deepest condolences for the terrible loss of russian life in recent terrorist attacks. we will remain steadfast partners in combating violent extremism. we also discussed the potential to expand our cooperation on baffle of economic growth, trade and investment, as well as technological innovation. i look to discuss these issues further when president medvedev visit the united states later this year, because there's much we can do on behalf of our security and prosperity if we continue to work together. when one surveys the many challenges we face around the world, it's easy to grow complacent or to abandon the notion that progress can be shared. but i want to repeat what i said last year in prague. when nations and peoples allow themselves to be defined by their differences, the gulf between them widens. when we fail to pursue peace, then it stays forever beyond our grasp. this majestic city of prague is in many ways a monument to human progress. this ceremony is a testament to the truth that old adversaries can forge new partnerships. i could not be help but be struck by the words of katie birsh who helped bd the first atom bomb. at the age of 92, having lived to see the horrors of a world war and the divisions of a cold war, he said, and i quote, we hope humanity will reach the moment when there's no need for nuclear weapons, when there's peace and calm in the world. it's easy to dismiss those voices. but doing so risks repeating the horrors of the past while ignoring the history of human progress. the pursuit of peace and calm and cooperation among nations is the work of both leaders and peoples in the 21st century. we must be as persistent and passionate in our pursuit of progress as any who would stand in our way. once again, president medvedev, thank you for your extraordinary leadership. >> dear colleagues, dear members of the meeting, i agree with the assessment that has just been made by my colleague president obama concerning the fact that here in this room, a truly historic event took place. a new russia/u.s. treaty has been signed on the limitation of offensive arms. this treaty has a ten-year duration. it will supercede the s.t.a.r.t. treaty which has expired as well as other u.s./russia treaty on strategic capabilities. first of all, i would like to thank my colleague, president of the united states of america, for the successful cooperation in this very complex matter and for the reasonable compromises that have been achieved thanks to the work of our two teams who have already thanked them. let me do it once again in the presence of the media and the public. we thank them for their excellent work and i would also like to thank the leadership of the czech republic, mr. president, you, for the invitation to hold this ceremony hearing in this beautiful city, in this beautiful springtime, thereby creating a beautiful atmosphere for the future. and i believe that this signature will open a new page for cooperation between our two countries, among our countries, and will create safer conditions for life here and throughout the world. we aimed at the quality of treaty. and, indeed, the negotiating process has not been simple but our negotiating teams have been working in a highly professional, constructive way that has been nonstop work and oftentimes they worked 24 hours a die. that that enabled us to do something that looked like mission impossible. within a short span of time we prepared a full-fledged treaty and signed it. we obtained a document that in full measure maintains the united states of america and russia. this is a win-win situation. no one stands to lose from this agreement. i believe that this is typical feature of our cooperation, both parties have take into account this victory of ours, the whole community has won. this strategic treaty enhances stability and at the same time enables us to rise to a higher level for cooperation between russia and the united states. and also the contents of the treaty have been -- let me point out once again what we have achieved because this is a very important thing. 1,550 developed weapons, which is about one-third below the current level. 700 deployed icbms ballistic missiles. and this represents more than two-fold reduction below the current levels. and 800 deployed and nondeployed launchers for such missiles, as well as deployed and nondeployed heavy bombers which represents a two-fold reduction below the level that existed prior to the signature of this treaty. and at the same time, each party can use its own discretion to determine the makeup and structure of its strategic potential. the treaty also includes provisions including data exchange and we are quite experienced now in this two matters with my colleague and we are great experts on this matter, perhaps the greatest experts in the world. and the treaty also includes provisions concerning conversion and elimination, inspection provisions and verification provisions as well as confidence-building measures. the verification mechanism has been significant in simplifying much less costly compared to a previous s.t.a.r.t. treaty but it ensures transparentability of reducing strategic arms. we believe and our american partners are well aware of that -- or this is our ultimate position. we believe the treaty can be viable and can operate only provided. there is no quality for quantitative increase in the apbm capabilities, something that in the final analysis could jeopardy on the russian side. this is the gist of the statement made by the russian federation on this treaty. the post-signature period we regard as the ratification of the treaty as mentioned by my colleague, mr. president of the united states, and it is also important to synchronize the ratification process. our american partners, as i understand, intend to proceed quickly to present this document to the senate for ratification. we'll also be working with our federal assembly to maintain the necessary dynamics of the ratification process. by and large, we are satisfied with the work done. the result we have obtained is good. but today, of course, we have discussed not only the fact of signing this treaty. we have also discussed a whole range of important key issues of concern to all the countries. of course, we could not make the iranian nuclear program. regrettably, iran is not responding to many constructive proposals that have been made. and we cannot turn a blind eye to this. therefore i don't allow the possibility that the security councils of the united nations will have to review this issue once again. our position is well known. let me briefly outline it now. of course, sanctions by themselves seldom obtain some specific results, although it's difficult to do without them in certain situations. in any case, those sanctions should be smart and aim not only at nonproliferation but also to other issues rather than to produce economic ka facatastropr iranian people. [ speaking foreign language ] >> steven cohen, perhaps you would like to translate for us, if that's okay. you earned your pay today. let's get your thoughts on the president's remarks and what you heard from the president of russia. >> well, we were talking about this before, joe. each man went out of his way to build up the role of the other. obama referred to medvedev's extraordinary leadership and called him his friend and partner. so, that enhances medvedev. you can see going on here a strategy -- i think it's unwise, but we'll see what they can do with it in washington -- to play medvedev against putin. they think medvedev's our good guy and putin's the bad guy. medvedev gave back. he applauded obama's role in reaching this agreement, but he was a little more reserved. what's really interesting now, but they deprived us of the words. i can't hear medvedev or the english, is that suddenly medvedev began to talk about sanctions in iran. that's the one thing that obama really, really, really wants to take home from this meeting with me very did he have privamedvedn to sanctions privately. the one thing we heard from me ve medvedev and then we lost it, but they have to be smart sanctions. they can target only nuclear proliferation and do no damage to iranian people. this ought to remind us, and we often forget, that russia has a very different geopolitical relationship with iran. russia itself has 20 million islamic citizens. iran has never done anything to agitate islamic oppositionism or separatism or terrorism inside russia. for that, russia's extremely grateful, but also extremely cautious. and that's why these sanctions are such a big problem for russia. it's easy for us, but for russia, they really are walking on a razor's edge with iran between the sanctions, because they don't like what iran's been doing either, and their unwillingness to alienate iran to the degree that iran may do something very bad to russia inside russia. he's been talking about that kind of indirectly. though we've lost his voice. >> mike barnicle, obviously this is a historic day. i must admit, though, i'm a bit und underwhelmed when i compare this with the president's speech in cairo last year or the president's speech when he accepted the noble prize. two very significant speeches. of course, here, we see the two political leaders shaking hands. but certainly as stephen said, most significantly, it's what russia's going to do to help keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of iran. i'll get you a response to that. but first, let's go back to the czech republic where the president is answering questions. >> reporter: thank you for taking my question, mr. president. how will the two sides get around your differences on missile defense to work on a follow-on treaty since that seems to be the biggest impediment? and can the two sides work out a cooperative agreement on missile defense? thank you. >> you know, one of the things that we discussed when we first met in moscow was the relationship between offensive and defensive capabilities. and what i've made clear was that our missile defense systems were not directed at changing the strategic balance between the united states and russia. but were, instead, directed at protecting the american people from potentially new attacks from missiles launched from third countries. we recognize, however, that russia has a significant interest in this issue. and what we've committed to doing is to engage in a significant discussion, not only bilaterally but also having discussions with our european allies and others about a framework in which we can potentially cooperate on issues of missile defense in a way that preserves u.s., national security interests, preserves russ russia's national security interests and allows us to guard against a rogue missile from any source. so, i'm actually optimistic that having completed this treaty, which signals our strong commitment to a reduction in overall nuclear weapons and that i believe is going to strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation treaty regime, that sends a signal around the world that the united states and russia are prepared to once again take leadership in moving in the direction of reducing reliance on nuclear weapons and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons as well as nuclear materials, that we will have built the kind of trust, not only between presidents but also between governments and between peoples, that allows you to move forward in a constructive way. i've repeatedly said that we will not do anything that endangers or limits my ability as commander in chief to protect the american people. and we think that missile defense can be an important component of that. but we also want to make clear that the approach that we've taken in no way is intended to change the strategic balance between the united states and russia. and i'm actually confident that moving forward, as we have these discussions, it will be part of a broader set of discussions, for example, about how we can take tactical nuclear weapons out of theater, the possibilities of us making more significant cuts, not only in deployed but also nondeployed missiles. there are a whole range of issues that i think that we can make significant progress on. i'm confident that this is an important first step in that direction. >> translator: it's on the is e issue, interrelation between missile defense and s.t.a.r.t. was one of the most difficult topics to discuss. no one tries to reject it, but at present the language that has been in the treaty we signed satisfies both parties and we'll proceed from the fact that on that basis we will implement the newly signed treaty. it matters to us what will happen to tactile defense. we will watch how these processes develop and the preamble as a language that doesn't extend, replicate a legal principle of the unchangeability of circumstances that -- a basis for the treaty. flexible process and we are interested in close cooperation with our american partner. we have appreciated the steps by the current administration in terms of their decisions in the area of antimissile defense. and this has led to progress. it doesn't mean we have no digressions and understanding, but it means we'll have ways to address these issues. we help the united states in global missile defense system and we should think about this gwynn the vulnerability of our world, the terrorist challenges and the possibility of using nuclear arms by terrorists existing in this world. and i am an optimist as well as my american colleague. i believe that we will be able to reach compromise on this issue. >> translator: i have two questions. two ea to each of the questions. first to president obama. the first time you agree on reduction of strategic missile arms but as you have mentioned, russia and the united states are not the only countries having nuclear weapons. so how specifically can the document be similar to today's document on the limitation of nuclear weapons, how soon will we see others sign these documents and will you move along this trek and work together with russia a? you have mentioned the fact that moscow is you be able to agree on anything else but mutual reduction of arms. so will we see any -- any things that will come to such a statement and that will the agreements be? >> well, first of all, as i mentioned in my opening remarks, the united states and russia account for 90% of the world's nuclear weapons. and given this legacy of the cold war, it is critical for us to show significant leadership. that, i think, is what we've begun to do with this follow-on s.t.a.r.t. treaty. other countries are going to have to be making a series of decisions of how they approach the issue of their nuclear weapon stockpiles. and as i've repeatedly said, and i'm sure dmitry feels the same way with respect to his country, we are going to preserve our nuclear deer is ent, as long as other countries have nuclear weapons, and we'll make sure that stockpile and safe, secure and effective. but i do believe that as we look out into the 21st century, that more and more countries will come to recognize that the most important factors in providing security and peace to their citizens will depend on their economic growth, will depend on the capacity of the international community to resolve conflicts. it will depend on having a strong conventional military that can protect a nation's borders. and that nuclear weapons increasingly in an interdependent world will make less and less sense as the cornerstone of security policy. but that's going to take some time. and i think each country is going to have to make its own determinings. the key is for the united states and russia to show leadership on this front because we are so far ahead of every nation with respect to possession of nuclear weapons. the primary concerns we identified in recent nuclear posture review, essentially a declaratory statement, a u.s. policy with respect to nuclear weapons, said that our biggest concerns right now are actually the issue of nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation. more countries obtaining nuclear weapons, those weapons being less controllable, less secure, nuclear materials flowing around the world, and that will be a major topic of the discussion we have in washington on monday. the united states and russia have a history already, a decade li decade-long history of locking down nuclear weapons. i believe our ability to move forward on sanction with respect to north korea, the intense discussions that we're having with respect to iran, will increasingly send a signal to countries not abiding by their nuclear nonproliferation treaty obligations, that they will be isolated. all those things will go towards sending a general message that we need to move in a new direction. and i think leadership on that front is important. last point i'll make, i will just anticipate or poach the question about other areas of cooperation. our respective foreign minister, secretary of state hillary clinton and foreign minister lavrov have been heading a bilateral commission that has been working intensively on a whole range of issue. and president medvedev and myself identified a series of key areas on the economic front, in trade relations, the potential for joint cooperation on various industries, how we can work on innovation and sparking economic growth. we've already worked together closely in the g-20. i think we can build on that bilaterally. there are issues of counterterrorism that are absolutely critical to both of us. i just want to repeat how horrified all of america was as the recent attacks in moscow. we recognize that that's a problem that can happen anywhere at any time. and it's important for russia and the united states to work closely on those issues. and then there are people-to-people contexts and figure out how we can make sure there's nor interaction and exchange between our two countries on a whole range of issues within civil society. so, i'm very optimistic that we're going to continue to make progress on all of these fronts, but i think that we should take pride in this particular accomplishment because it speaks not only to the security of our two nations but also to the security of the world as a whole. >> all right. stephen cohen, let me ask you a couple quick questions as we wrap this. first, are these two leaders overselling what has been accomplished today or is today truly a historic moment? >> i wouldn't use the word historic. if i had to make a movie about this treaty, i think i would call it the good, the small and the unstable. it's good because any effort by the two nuclear super powers to control and reduce are good. it's small, joe, because when you think back what's been done by other presidents, it doesn't amount to much. after all, president reagan and president gorbachev, the entire range of nuclear weapons. we have a historical amnesia in this country. it's unstable because embedded in this treaty is a ticking time boc bomb. that's the disagreement whether united states will be able to continue to put missile defense installations in europe, near russia. president obama says he will. medvedev says, we don't want you to do it. they papered this over. but this is going to disrupt this treaty if they won't resolve it. so it's an unstable treaty, i think. >> and obviously when the united states tried to put such an installation in poland about 18 months ago, it caused considerable problems between the two nations. mike barnicle, while this may, as i said at the beginning of this process, strike some of us as -- this event as a relic from a different age, i thought barack obama's answer to the last question was very insightful. and it is that not only is this treaty important for what it does today but also this may bring the two countries together on issues from counterterrorism to trade. >> joe, i would like to ask professor cohen about the edge of that point. i sit here wondering whether we missed the biggest news here when the translation stopped, when the russian president was talking about russia and iran. russia geographically lives on the cutting edge of terrorism geographically, far more than we do. what is -- what is the role of russia and iran -- iran within russ russia? >> put it differently, what's russia's problem with iran? why won't they sign on to these tough sanctions? again, i made the point before, russia is bee leagleaguered, be by islamic terrorists. ru iran sa-s an islamic country. since the troubles began if russia with islamic terrorism, going back to the chechen war in the 1990s, more than 50 15 years a ago, iran has never done anything to abet, aid or help terrorists in russia against the kremlin. they could easily do so. so from russia's point of view, iran is an exceedingly friendly country, right on their border. on the other hand, iran is closer to russia, so an iranian nuclear war is more capable. they could built a short one that could hit russia. russia as a complicated situation here. we heard that in medvedev's words. >> stephen cohen, author of -- go ahead, mika. >> thank you, barnicle. stephen, i just wanted to say, thank you for coming in. author of -- >> he's becoming a foreign policy expert. >> is he there yet? >> he'll get there, if he keeps coming on "morning joe." one of these days. >> i was a very good student. i paid very attention to her father and mika. >> we spent some long nights together at krcbs, up to the minute. coming up, suze orman is joining us here. also the new cover of "time" magazine. "morning joe" has exclusive first look. >> i love this. >> have you seen it in. >> yes. >> first, bill karins with a check of the forecast. >> good morning, mika. you missed it, yesterday. central park, new york city, first week of april, it was 92 degrees. earliiest it's ever hit 90 degrees in a calendar year. today will be different, 10 degrees cooler in most of the big cities. d.c., thunderstorms later this afternoon into this evening. as far as tomorrow goes, back to reality. high temperatures back in the 60s, lows in the 40s. don't put away those winter clothes quite yet. we'll watch the masters today. tiger woods playing this afternoon. thunderstorms likely. could have some delays down there weatherwise with lightning as we go throughout the late afternoon. the rest of the west and midwest looking pretty good with the exception of the pacific northwest. that's a look at your thursday forecast. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. [ male announcer ] there are 16 chevy models with a five star frontal crash safety rating. that's peace of mind for every size family. chevy... may the best car win. it's another thing to back it up. the chevy 5-year/100,000 mile transferable powertrain warranty. with roadside assistance and courtesy transportation, it's the best coverage in america. he hasn't been able quite yet to quiet this thing down. it seems like every day there's something new and big to cover. >> i should let you know we're having a bit of a fire alarm behind me. ignore it if you hear it on air. it's just a drill, we've been assured. excellent for live tv. >> we'll endure. go ahead. >> sorry. the bottom line is, for a long time -- >> look, look at that. thank you. >> the news room. that's pretty funny. >> a fire alarm went off, too. >> yes, in our washington bureau. >> bob samuelsson, real pro, kept talking. >> unflappable. here with us, deputy eding manager of "time" manager, michael elliott, here to reveal the latest cover. i can't wait to see it. joe loves it already. go ahead. >> we have a fantastic story this week on whether it makes sense to bribe your kids. we have an exclusive access to extraordinary research done by a brilliant harvard professor on whether it makes sense to pay kids for performance in schools. the answer is, sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't, depending on how well you design the exercise. absolutely fas fating piece by amanda ripley. other stuff in the magazine. but that cover story on whether you should pay your kids for performance in school will get lots and lots of parents, teachers and i suspect kids talking. >> it's a cash -- >> it's a cash bribe. the interesting thing about this program, mike, is that roland fryer, the harvard professor who set it up, did it in four different schools at four different cities so you can gauge on different ages for performance, reading books, whatever. i reread it last night at midnight and i was absolutely gripped by it. >> michael, were there negative effects to bribing kids? i mean, what makes this a controversy? >> there are -- >> to the extent that -- go ahead. >> in some programs there were no positive effects. in other words, you couldn't measure any improvement of academic performance. i don't think he came out with any absolutely negative effects, but some programs didn't seem to perform. some programs, on the other hand, performed extraordinarily well. it's really good stuff. >> interesting. john ridley has a question for you. >> i do have a question. i think he said it was this experiment or study was conducted in four different cities. how were the kids broken down? were there socioeconomic factors? does that make a difference, where kids come from and how they view money -- >> no, there's a lot of interesting detail in the various studies. the studies are fully released today or in the next day or so. they were all in -- how can i put it -- challenged school districts. districts that had a lot of obvious challenges in terms of raising the performance of their kids. for me, the interesting thing about it, was the realization depended on how you designed the program. some worked, some didn't. >> let me ask you, mike barnicle, you've had, like me, 73 kids at last count. did you bribe your kids when they went to school? did you say, hey, listen, if you study harder, i'll -- we'll buy you some baseball cards? >> no, you know, joe, i actually didn't. i tried to bribe them more about sports than i did about school. but the interesting thing -- >> that's not surprising. >> the interesting thing about your question, and it occurs to me whenever we talk about kids in school, whether it's about bullying or about academic performance, so many of these studies and so many of these news stories leave out the role of parents. what about parents in this thing? >> well, actually, i think that's an extremely interesting point. i mean, obviously parents want their children to succeed. one of the -- i think one of the underlying points of interest in this whole study is educators, like michelle, the superintendent of the skoolgzchn washington, saying, it is really difficult to find educational reform programs you can put your finger on saying, it really, really has an impact on school performance. parents come in and they have conversations with teachers and school administrators and they want to know, what is it that's really, really going to change the performance of my children? if the answer is a little cash here and there, parents will, extremely interested. >> you know, joe, it gets to the role of parents at have level of a child's life. so many single-parent households and public schools in this country today, you know, i fear for public education. >> let me ask you, mika. i certainly know your parent did not bribe you. >> if they did but a different type. >> a belt, a hair brush. have you ever bribed your kid? >> in our household, our kids love their sport. they can do their sports and extracurricular activities if their grades are up. >> i don't consider that a bribe. i consider that more a stick. i think we're talking more about carrots than sticks. john ridley, you have two boys. do you bribe your kids? >> no, we don't. i think there are times when you've done everything, you've done your homework, you get to play video games. you get to do things with your friends. but if your grades fall behind, then, no, you don't go to go out and play basketball. you don't go to play on the football team. >> i know -- i know this won't surprise anybody, but i'll do whatever it takes. it's very interesting. john ridley, you asked the question about different backgrounds, socioeconomic backgrounds. even in the same family, every child -- anybody that has more than one kid knows, every child is different. there's one child i say, you're smart. you're smarter than anybody in there. if you don't make straight as, i've got issues. there's another child a little less focused, i have no problem saying, yeah, you can have that dvd but i want an "a" on your next math test. so it's -- you have to take it -- but anyway, this is a fascinating topic. i think it's important, only because a lot of times people have hard-set rules know. no, i would never reward my children for an "a" in school. there will be an argument that says, look at your children and see what works best in the end. >> "time" magazine's michael elliott, good to see you again. we have "the washington post's" david ignatius recently back from afghanistan. what he says the u.s. needs to do to plot a strategy and exit. next, suze orman joins us on the set of "joe." ethan allen always well made always well designed now with extraordinary savings come in to save or log on now ethan allen. extraordinary savings. limited time ethan allen redefines traditional with modern comfort and timeless design the new traditional at ethan allen now with extraordinary savings come in to save or log on now. i have missed you. pollen in the air kept hunter cooped up itching his eyes and sneezing. but now i found zyrtec®. it's #1 allergist recommended. with children's zyrtec® he can get 24-hour allergy relief indoors and outdoors. ♪ now he can run wild... with the rest of the pack. with children's zyrtec®, he can love the air®. and now try children's zyrtec® perfect measure®. a premeasured spoon. just twist squeeze and go™. can sometimes get out of hand in a hurry. [ screaming ] hey. pbht! [ luke ] unless, of course, you've got at&t, the nation's fastest 3g network, which means you can surf the web and download videos in a snap. there you go, dad. hey. ♪ thanks. ha, this is good. [ male announcer ] at&t. a better 3g experience. get 50% off all messaging phones after mail-in rebate like the pantech reveal. only from at&t. like the pantech reveal. band now we're insuring overts do18 million drivers. gecko: quite impressive, yeah. boss: come a long way, that's for sure. and so have you since you started working here way back when. gecko: ah, i still have nightmares. anncr: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. let's wind 'em with precision. open our throttle to even more selection. and turn that savings swagger up full tilt. ♪ so when the time comes to bust open a can of doing... we've got all the tools for all the things we need to make 'em happen. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. we've made a special buy on spectracide weed stop. your choice for just $5.00 each. we're innocent poland anymore, we're in the united states of america and i'm going to drink what i want to drink. >> take him away. my point is -- my point is -- >> lewis, lewis -- >> -- you didn't even know about this. >> look straight at the camera. >> nice. >> now you've got to join. >> please go. i'm just doing news right now. excuse me, everyone. for our suze orman segment, there will be no joe and you'll understand why. right now we'll get to the news. let's get a quick look at today's top stories. rescue workers are searching for four missing miners from the worst u.s. mining disaster in more than a quarter century, hoping to reach the area where they might find the missing miners sometime before noon. after efforts to drill holes and ventilate the mine, that resulted in lower levels of dangerous gases. although they are still treating this as a rescue mission, west virginia governor says there's only a sliver of hope survivors will be found. despite that, rescuers are determined to finish their mission. >> it is what it is. this is what we're doing with right now. it's nothing compared to what the families are going through. i always try to keep that in mind. we'll do whatever it takes to bring this to some type of a conclusion. in the czech capital of prague, president obama and russian president dmitry medvedev have signed a landmark nuclear deal. the treaty was agreed to last month and replaces the 1991 treaty committing the u.s. and russia to significant cuts in their nuclear arsenals. the strengthens the u.s. relationship with russia and is a step toward obama's goal of a world without nuclear weapons. >> one year ago this week, i came here to prague and gave a speech outlining america's comprehensive commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking the ultimate goal of a world without them. i said then, and i'll repeat now, that this is a long-term goal. one that may not even be achieved in my lifetime. but i believed then, as i do now, that the pursuit of that goal will move us further beyond the cold war, strengthen the global nonproliferation regime, and make the united states and the world safer and more secure. >> and an incident aboard a united flight from d.c. to denver caused a bomb scare last night after a diplomat allegedly tried to smoke in the plane's bathroom. fighter jets were scrambled and law enforcement officials were placed on high alert. the diplomat was pursued by federal air marshals flying undercover. initial reports is he was trying to light a shoe bomb. it's unclear if he was joking or a possible language barrier. no explosives were found and officials say there will be no criminal charges. when we come back, she is a force in the world of personal finance. suze orman when we return on "morning joe." it always happens. i buy plants, i bring them home, and then...i water too little... too much... or i just forget. but look. this is doing fine. why? it's planted in miracle-gro moisture control potting mix. it holds 33% more water... than ordinary potting soil, releasing it as plants need it, not when i get around to it. and there's miracle-gro plant food mixed in. so you get miracle-gro results... i like that. [ female announcer ] new and improved miracle-gro moisture control potting mix. success starts with the soil. my subaru saved my life. i won't ever forget that. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. right now, walmart has rolled back prices on top lawn care brands like poulan pro, brute by briggs & stratton, pennington, scotts and spectracide. along with thousands of others all over the store. it's rollback time! save money. live better. walmart. my experience has been in the business i was in, i was right 70% of the time, but i was wrong 30% of the time. and there are an awful lot of tim mistakes in 2 # 1 years. >> welcome back to "morning joe." it is 38 past the hour. with us now, finance expert and host of cnbc's "the suze orman show," suze orman. also the author of "suze orman's action plans" and "women and money: owning the power to control your destiny." it's so good to have you back on the show. suze, tell us, first of all, why a healthier you and a wealthier you and what's your deal with total? >> yeah. so, here's the thing, everybody. you can't have true health if you're worried about your money. if you're worried about your money, somehow it is going to show up in your health. and also, if you have wealth, all the money in the world isn't going to do you any good if you don't have your health. so, these two things really, really have to go together. and i wanted to find a way of how could i talk to america while helping them become healthier as well as wealthier, how could i talk to them every day? where do people go every day? what do they do every day? what they do every day throughout america is they eat cereal. so, literally we went to general mills, they did not approach us, we approached them, because i had done research and total, believe it or not, is one of the, if not, the healthiest cereal out there. it has absolutely 100% nutrition. i'm not being paid to do this. this is not an endorsement deal. i went to them and said, can we start to put financial information on the total box? and if we did that, could you also just give people a chance to win $10,000? you can win $10,000 whether you buy the cereal or you don't buy the cereal. so it's like -- so there's a way to do that. it was as simple as that and here we are, a year later. look, we're there. we did it. >> i love it. that's really -- that's incredible, interesting campaign. that serial i would think more adults buy than kids, so you're getting right to them. what's the $10,000 prize thing? how does someone win that? >> you win it by -- if you happen to buy the box of total, on the inside there's a little number of some kind. you go to total.com or whatever it is, it tells you on the box, and if that's your number, you win $10,000 in cash. also coming up on "the suze orman show" shortly, you'll have another way to win $10,000 supplied by total where you simply answer four questions, you're entered view a sweepstakes. if your name is picked, you win. i don't have it offhand but there's a website you can go to, it's probably total.com, but it says so on the box, but if you just enter your name can also be selected to win $10,000. i would never bring you something that you had to buy just to win. >> now, suze, you have mike barnicle there with you. he's not a great example of this campaign. if you're talking about health and wealth together. he may be wealthy, but look at him. how can this help mike? >> well, i've got news. i walked on the set today and his feet were up, he had these great colored socks and shoes. i wish we had a picture of this. and he looks really great today. i looked at him and i said, look at this colored shirt. i hate to say it, he looks hot today, mika. >> see, mika. >> he's looking pretty good today to me. >> mika, i have a question for suze. and it is off of what you were saying about -- this is the healthiest cereal you can eat. you did research on it. >> yes. >> what did you do? what kind of research? >> there are places you can go where -- obviously, it says everything and then what's in it. do they have chemicals in it? do they have corn in it? do they have this in it? what's in the cereal? it's not that hard. if you take g in the cereal and put it next to one another, you go, oh, this one has -- or how much nutrition does it give you? how much does one bowl give you of something? it's incredible, it really does. i don't want to sound like a pitch person for total, because i'm not. but it really does give you 100% nutrition. mike, i didn't want to be on a cereal box where, you know, we have skeptics out there. suze orman does something and it's like, oh, how much money is she making for that? i knew they'd say, she's on a box of cereal poisoning our kid. i knew if i it did this, and my campaign of a healthier, wealthier you was a true campaign, i needed to be on a box of cereal that was the healthiest out there. >> mika, you should have the cereal instead of the oatmeal you have every day. do you have your oat peel out there? >> no, i don't. i'm drinking water because we're on the west coast and we don't sleep here so that's all i can do. john ridley is here, suze, and he has a question for you as well. >> hey, suze, how are you? >> great, thank you. >> i have a question for you. have you found any -- i don't know if done any research but people with dietary responsibility and fiscal responsibility? i think it's great what you're doing, trying to get people to pay attention to both. do you find people who understand the need to be restrictive in their diets, also very good about managing their money as well? >> yes, i have to tell you. it first starts with wealth and then health. recently, i was on "the biggest loser" for last season and i was able to pick the winner of "the biggest loser" because he, danny at the time, and this is in the beginning of this, he had the highest fico score but he was the only one who had literally gotten control of his money. he had gotten out of $45,000 of debt. and i knew if he could take control of his money, so now he's been responsible to his money, he has what it takes, then, to lose the most weight. in fact, he did. all the time on "the suze orman show" we find if you're hiding debt, for of -- believe it or not. this is what we found over nine years of doing this. for every $1,000 to $2,000 of debt that you hide from somebody, your spouse, you'll be that much overeight. so if you're hiding $10,000 you'll be 20 pounds overweight. they go together like this. i can't even begin to tell you. you cannot take them apart, which is why i started this healthier, wealthier you campaign. >> that's fascinating. let me switch gears here a little bit. we bumped into this segment with a sound bite from alan greenspan, who is getting a grilling from the financial crisis inquiry commission about his role in the financial crisis yesterday. how much blame do you think should be placed on the former fed chair? >> well, some blame should be placed on him. i was telling one of your producers, and i'm not sure i have this date exactly right, but i'll never forget around the year 2004, i think it was february 23rd, to be exact, something like that. i was watching television and he goes on tv and he says, everybody, if you had gotten an adjustable rate mortgage ten years ago, which would have made it 1994, you would have made so much more money on your mortgage and your home than if you had gotten a fixed rate mortgage. and i'm sitting there, going, no! no! don't do that! don't do that! everybody's going to start getting an adjustable rate mortgage at the exact time they shouldn't. sure enough, that's right around when you started to see mortgage companies come out with these negative amortization loans, no money down loans, opt in, opt out. all these different things that the fed chairman said. loans like that, even though he didn't say loans like that, but he u.s. said adjustable rate. what do people know? right around then thing turned around. i came on television and said to everybody, what was he thinking? why did he do that? to this day, i'll never understand it. bottom line is, he's not the one to blame for this. maybe he had some responsibility, but, oh, give me a break. you had lehman brothers that had very sketchy accounting methods. you had goldman sachs that was betting against both sides of the market. they were betting on real estate going down, by insuring everything with aig, at the same time selling instruments. they had a fortune to make. believe me, it was far more than what alan greenspan did. you can blame wall street and the bankers for this one. >> interesting. suze orman, great to see you. you can catch suze on cnbc's "the suze orman show" saturday nights at 9:00 and midnight eastern. that website, suze s totalcereal.com. when we come back, a look at nike's controversial new tiger woods ad. is it effective or offensive? we'll go to augusta with willie geist live from the masters next on "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. ethan allen always well made always well designed now with extraordinary savings come in to save or log on now ethan allen. extraordinary savings. limited time ethan allen redefines traditional with modern comfort and timeless design the new traditional at ethan allen now with extraordinary savings come in to save or log on now. ever wish you knew a retirement expert? let's meet some. retirement's a journey and, we know the territory. we're chartered retirement planning counselors at td ameritrade. we're trained. we're seasoned. experienced. we'll help you with rollovers. consolidating old accounts. opening new ones. guiding you through paperwork. we're like retirement co-pilots. call us soon. when you're ready, we're here. time for fresh thinking. time for td ameritrade. you stood in the basement gathering dust while i, sneezing, itching eyes kept you from our favorite stream. the one that runs through a field where pollen floats through the air. but now, with the strength of 24-hour zyrtec® to relieve my worst allergy symptoms, indoors and outdoors... let's go before the fish stop biting. they won't wait for us. but that's okay. zyrtec® is the fastest 24-hour allergy medicine. today, we battle wits with the trout. with zyrtec® i can love the air®. ♪ in this. one day, i'll park this in a spot reserved for me. it's got 26,000 miles on it now, but i'm gonna take it to a thousand million. [ male announcer ] when you own a certified pre-owned mercedes-benz, chances are they'll own it one day, too. which is why it undergoes such a rigorous inspection to meet our uncompromising standards. one day, i'm gonna drive this to vegas. [ male announcer ] hurry in to your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for 1.99% financing during our certified pre-owned sales event through april 30th. during our certified pre-owned with expedia, i've got of a perfect girls' weekend. it all starts with having more hotels to choose from. so i can find someplace familiar... or somewhere more unique. nice. then expedia lets me compare dates to find out when i can save the most cash. done and done. we should do this more often. where you book matters. expedia. for some reason this morning, i don't know why, they had animals on every though show -- the "today" show, "the early show," local morning shows and every one of these clips you're about to see happened this morning. >> we have to move along so we're going to skip over the next one -- whoa. >> somebody call a -- >> whoa. >> you okay? >> you can't eat the microphone. >> he's got my -- wait, wait, wait. >> this is "today" on nbc. >> ow! >> are you all right, there? [ applause ] >> oh, wow. willie, i don't know whether you saw that down there in augusta, but the only thing that they could have added to that is the picture of you in your winnebago with all the cats that travel with you. >> reporter: i do. i only travel by winnebago, and yes, my baker's dozen cats are always with me, mike barnicle. down here in augusta, georgia, i want to get your take on this tiger ad in just a second, but the gates are open here and the first players have just teed off. we're finally playing golf here after all the weeks of talk of tiger woods' return after he announced he would be back here playing competitively for the first time in about five months at augusta. jack nicklaus and arnold palmer were the honorary starters, kicking the tournament off a few moments ago, and the first golfers are off the tee so, we're finally playing golf at augusta national. the big talk last night was this new tiger woods' nike ad, staring blankly, expressionless, black and white shot of him for 30 seconds as he wear the voice of his deceased father. some say it's offensive, a little crass, to use your dead dad, frankly, for career rehabilitation. let's take a watch and see what you think. >> tiger, i am more propose to be inquisitive, to promote discussion. i want to find out what your thinking was. i want to find out what your feelings are. and did you learn anything. >> reporter: mike, some people saying this morning the things tiger woods learned, it's time to start selling shoes again based on that ad. what's your take? >> well, you know, willie, truthfully, i have tiger fatigue. i don't care what he thinks, i don't care how he feels, just go play golf. i'm kind of tired of tiger. >> reporter: fair enough. can i go home, then, in that case, mike? >> yeah. >> reporter: we'll get off the subject of tiger for a minute. augusta national, this famous cathedral of golf of course the most fay mos golf course here in augusta, georgia, but it's not the only one. the muni, all the hackers among us can relate to that. you go down to the local municipal course, hack around a little bit. we went over there yesterday to see how that place, just down the street here, compares to the fabled augusta national. just like at augusta national, here at the awe gus that municipal course, we wait off the 18th green to talk to the players after they're finished putting and completing their rounds. do i mind if i ask you how the course looks? >> oh, i like it. it's a much better than last year. >> reporter: how is it playing this week, gentlemen? >> it's very dry. >> very, very dry. >> very dry. >> it's a city course. and if they do a little work on the greens, it could be -- it could be as good as any course here. >> reporter: arthur, tell me what you're cooking here on the grill. >> well, we have just hamburgers and hot dogs and i made some of my special barbecue sauce. >> reporter: i'd take one of your burgers over pimento cheese sandwich any day. any interest because of the whole tiger deal? >> no. >> reporter: you weren't surprised at all? >> well, tiger was 3 years old and started playing golf. when did he ever have time to have fun with girls, go to dances, parties? his dad taught him golf. >> reporter: do the events of the last four months diminish him in your mind? >> not to me personally. >> it's his own personal life. >> when he found out up if was fun, can you blame the man for wanting to eat the apple? >> i don't have nothing to do with that. >> you know, go from it, two separate issues. >> golf is one thing. >> men are men, women are women. it's been going on for, what, 10,000 years? he did wrong, treated his wife wrong. what she did was a good idea, but she should have used a baseball bat. >> reporter: give a guy a bag of apples, can you blame a guy for taking a bite? when we come back, david ignatius joins the conversation. he's back from overseas with his take on afghanistan and our partner, i guess we're calling him still, president karzai. (announcer) roundup extended control does two jobs... at once. one: kills weeds to the root. two: forms a barrier, preventing new ones for up to four months. roundup extended control. [ buzz! ] 1... 2... 3...lift! ha-ha ha ha ha! [ slam! ] [ ding! ] [ chirp! ] [ stomp! stomp! stomp! stomp! ] [ beep! crank! ] [ pop! pop! pop! ] [ ding! ] [ crunch! ] [ girl ] ha-ha ha ha ha! [ clank! fizz! clink! ] it's... time! [ click! click! click! click! ] [ indistinct conversations ] shh! [ girl ] it's on! [ female announcer ] walmart presents "secrets of the mountain." friday, april 16th, 8/7 central on nbc. family movie night is back. with thousands of rollback prices on everything you need. save money. live better. walmart. black one! where? [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! where? [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! ow! where? [ male announcer ] the volkswagen tiguan. the only compact suv with a turbocharged engine, standard. [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! where? there. [ male announcer ] starting at $23,200. it's a whole new volkswagen, and a whole new game. you can label as "different." like janice. uh-huh. yeah. fashion deficient. and tom... copy incapable. it's open kimono time. looking good, dan. oh, we want to make sure all our ducks in a row. yeah. volume control syndrome. but we focus on the talent and skill that each person... brings to the team. i mean, no one's really concerned about labels. not even mine. labels get in the way. disabilities rarely do. visit thinkbeyondthelabel.com to evolve your work force. those nations that follow the rules will find greater security and opportunity. those nations that refuse to meet their obligations will be isolated and denied the opportunity that comes with international recognition. that includes accountability for those that break the rules. otherwise, the mbt is just words on a page. when nations and peoples allow themselves to be defined by their differences, the gulf between them widens. when we fail to pursue peace, then it stays forever beyond our grasp. this majestic city of prague is in many ways a monument to human progress and old adversaries can forge new partnerships. >> welcome to "morning joe." we are in burbank, california, with mika brzezinski and john ridley in new york, we've got mike barnicle in augusta, georgia, somewhere in a parking lot we've got willie geist. and mika, i heard the president talking about this in grand terms. obviously, the pomp and circumstance was out there. it looked like a really, truthfully, a rel fricke a different age. it was fascinating. certainly the president did what the president needed to do. i'm certainly not knocking that. i'm just saying that what a contrast between what we saw today where you had two superpowers that were talking about getting rid of these advanced weapons systems, but most of america today, there will be a collective yawn about that. that's not a knock on the president. it's just we're not in 1985. we are in 2010. but contrast that to the story that people will be talking about more, and that is, of course, if you were awake overnight, you saw the breaking news about a hijacked plane over america. >> right. >> and then you found out it wasn't a hijacked plane. it was a diverted plane because there was a shoe bomber on the plane. and then you found out that there wasn't a shoe bomber on the plane. there was an unruly middle eastern diplomat on the plane. and then you found out it was a guy that just got up to smoke a cigarette in the bathroom. >> well, there's that. >> so, we need to understand, and there we have the incident coming out of the "denver post," we have to understand that -- where we are right now and that when you talk about the debates that shape elections, it is the debate about how the kentucky, h cia, the fbi, how we get intel. >> counterterrorism. >> this is what terrorizes us, not nuclear weapons from above anymore but attacks from terror groups. >> both those stories are news, and coming up we have david ignatius joining us, another element related to what you're talking about is dealing with afghanistan and hamid karzai. we'll get to that with him. but first, some of today's top stories. we'll start in prague. president obama and russian president dmitry medvedev have signed the strategic arms reduction agreement in the czech capital of prague. the new start treaty replaces the 1991 treaty and commits the nations to slashing strategic nuclear warheads by one-third. the new deal also cuts the number of missiles, submarines and bombers carrying nuclear weapons in half. the treaty is a major step toward obama's goal of abolishing nuclear weapons and strengthens the u.s. relationship with russia. >> when the united states and russia are not able to work together on big issues, it's not good for either of our nations, nor is it good for the world. together, we've stopped that drift and proven the benefits of cooperation. >> hey, john ridley, let's talk about the strategic impact of what happened this morning. i suggest there wasn't a great strategic impact, but perhaps there is. and more importantly for this discussion, the political impact here at home. could this be a big plus for the president? >> i think it's a big plus for the president. we talked about this earlier, just looking presidential and getting on a roll, doing health care, signing treaties, whether it gets ratified here or not. that's another issue. when you look at the president's remarks, here's the interesting thing to me, he was kind of blunt and forth right talking about resetting the relationship with russia and talking about earlier this year when they met that he felt like that relationship was drifting. so i think to your point, is this the biggest treaty, the most important thing that americans are facing right now, no, but is solidifying and improving that relationship with russia and dealing with iraq and dealing with tactical nukes in the future, are those the more important things and is it about sitting down and saying, hey, we've got shared goals, let's go through this formality so that we can focus on those shared goals down the road. >> and mike barnicle, we talked about that last hour, that while the practical import of this treaty itself may not be significant, anything that moves russia and the united states closer on terrorism, on trade, on other issues, especially iran right now, that's good news for this country. >> no doubt, joe. i mean, the stage craft that we saw this morning, both presidents speaking in this large, ornate room in prague, that was out of an earlier, easier time, 15, 20 years ago, at the edge and the end of the cold war. this morning you had the feeling that if there was an opening here for these two countries to come closer together on issues like terrorism, which particularly affects the old soviet union, russia, with the subway l bombing just a few days ago, this is -- this is a good thing. this is a very good thing. >> all right. and now to that incident aboard a united flight from d.c. to denver, which caused a bomb scare last night after a qatari diplomat allegedly tried to smoke in a plane's bathroom. fighter jets were scrambled and law enforcement officials were placed on high alert. the diplomat was apry hended by federal air marshals who were flying under cover. initial reports said the man was trying to light a shoe bomb, but it's unclear whether or not he was joking or if there was a possible language barrier. >> by the way, that's an unfortunate language barrier if, in fact, that was the case. >> even more unfortunate. no explosives were found, and officials say there will be no criminal charges. a new quinnipiac poll surveyed pennsylvania voters on the upcoming senate race. voters preferred republican pat toomey over democrat arlen specter by a margin of 46% to 41%. the poll also asked democratic governor ed rendell, asked about him, his job approval split at 45%, up from a negative of 43% to 49% last month. president obama didn't fare as well. pennsylvania voters disapprove of the job he is doing by a margin of 45% to 49%. interesting poll numbers. >> yeah, it really is. and john ridley, we've had poll numbers roll out the last couple tays from traditionally democratic states, states the president did very well in, pennsylvania, illinois, and -- what was the other state we did yesterday? anyway, it doesn't matter. it was a very blue state. it was one of 50 states we did. it was a bluer state. but we see again the trend being a bit downward for the president. michael barone, who does the almanac of american politics, the bible of politics, said yesterday that this was the worst environment that he had seen for democrats in 50 years. do you believe barone? is it that bad for them? have things gotten worse since health care? >> i don't know that things have gotten worse since health care, and i know that president obama's approval ratings are above what president reagan's were at a similar point. i think his dropped down to about 35%. things are bad all over, and the discussion, where the narrative went during health care, certainly didn't help the democrats. i really fault them in a way for allowing it to get so bad and so ugly. i think with democrats sometimes they intellectualize. they think the right idea is going to carry the day. >> is that the democrats' problem, that they intellectualize and the american people are just too dumb to follow along? >> people respond -- i will say this. i think that people respond to very gut feeling, instincts, and very plain spoken kind of things. people said love that about george bush, plain spoken, love that about sarah palin, plain spoken. i think there is a level of anti-intellectualism in america where people say those people are too political. would you say that about a doctor? he's too medical. i don't want that guy. >> no, you don't. let's ask our next guest about some of these poll numbers. >> ridley is so hollywood. >> he is. joining us from chicago, republican represent frif illinois, congressman eric shock. good to have you back. >> good morning, joe and mika. >> congressman -- we had -- showed some polls yesterday that mark kirk was ahead, the republican ahead in the senate race to replace barack obama. what what's happening in president obama's home state right now? >> well, i think you're seeing in illinois what's happening across the country. if we can win a senate seat in massachusetts, we can certainly win a senate seat here in illinois. and what you have in addition to the national tide turning, you also have your own political storm in the state of illinois. you remember rod blagojevich, who was thrown out of office for allegations of corruption, whose trial is scheduled to go up this summer. you have basically total one-party control in the house, the senate, and every constitutional office. so while people are nationally wanting some balance here in the state of illinois especially they're wanting some balance and a mark kirk as a u.s. senator would provide one statewide office that we don't have with an "r" behind it. >> yeah. and, mike barnicle, i think the congressman brings up a great point, that democrats have done extraordinarily well in 2006 and 2008. part of this realignment is just a natural realignment, but you take a state like illinois, a very blue democratic state. you've got a republican candidate ahead in the race for governor and in the race for the senate. the same thing happening in massachusetts right now. >> that's right, joe. and i think probably people in illinois are no different than people in massachusetts. there's a great sense of anxiety out there among voters, and i think it's going to be reflected at the polls, at the ballot box in november and primary states earlier than that. their anxiety against all incumbents. they're wondering, you know, what is going on? you know, the economy is down, i've lost my job or i'm on the verge of losing my job. health care costs are soaring. the anxiety out there is thick. you can cut it. >> congressman, let's talk about the republicans' message as they move forward. it seems to me when a lot of us ran in 1994 we had the contract with america, very specific things we were going to do if we took control of the house of representatives. you have people like michael barone, charlie cook, the real respected names suggesting that republicans may win big this fall. there still, though, were a lot of conservatives i talked to that still don't know whether the republicans learned their lesson from the past eight years. have they? >> yeah. well, i think we have. first of all, to your point about contract with america, you'll remember back in '94, much of that came out late summer, early fall of that year. and so kevin mccarthy, who's leading the effort on the republican side to come up with what we're calling the commitment with america, i think you're going to see a similar platform and a similar set of goals, obviously relevant to today's issues, come out at the end of this summer, early fall, that many of our candidates will be running on. but as far as whether or not we've learned from our mistakes, i can tell you as a new member of congress, i can tell you what i heard last cycle is is what i'm hearing this cycle, which is, look, if we put you guys back in control, be the fiscal conservatives that you're running as, you know, control the national debt, bring down all of this domestic spending, and i think if we win back control of congress, that will be the mandate. and i think that's good for the party because unlike some of the social issues which divide us, the economic issues unite us. >> well, so, let me ask you a question. you actually -- you touched on the topics that as a conservative i want to hear from republicans, which is bringing down spending, balancing the budget, reducing the debt. so my question is this -- as you get to the specifics, what would you specifically cut to move us toward a balanced budget? >> what's the bad news? >> well, the bad news is you can't pass legislation like the health care bill that was just passed if you're going to reduce the deficit. we did it here in the state of illinois with expanding medicate under a program called all kids. it e it's spiraling in debt and out of control. i understand the -- >> so -- all right, hold on a second. congressman, great. so before health care was passed, we already had a debt that was crippling this country's long-term rating with moody's. so -- >> sure. >> forget health care. say you repeal health care. that's the first thing you do, day one. what do you do day two to move towards a balanced budget? what do you cut? >> well, there's two things you do. first of all, you cut. second, though, you grow the economy. the first thing -- >> what do you cut? >> what do you cut? >> what do you cut? >> you don't increase spending. my first year in the congress, every one of the appropriations bills that has come before me on the average was about 12% increase over the previous year. so why don't we start by cutting, by bringing them back to pre-2008 levels of spending. and you don't continue to drive up domestic discretionary spending. >> so let me stop you there, and i know we've got a delay so forgive me for this. so will you come out and propose? do you say here's the deal, i'm not going to give you specific cuts, but i will tell you this, i am going to support a budge thaet will take us back to how much money we spent in 2008 and not support a dime on top of that? would you do something like that, like a five-year or a ten-year spending freeze? >> i think that has to be the focal point of our discussion. obviously, there are some spending increases in defense that are necessary with efforts in afghanistan and iraq. but the fact of the matter is we have to manage our budget similar to the folks who are managing their individual budgets, and that's a message i know you heard when you ran for office is, look, when i don't have the money, i don't spend it. and you guys need to tighten your belt just like every common, ordinary american is having to do as well. but the other critical point here is we have to have pro growth policies, targeted tax cuts, trade agreements with columbia, panama, and south korea, which will open up new markets to employers like caterpillar, which is headquartered in my hometown. that will put a lot of folks back to work by increasing our -- >> all right. congressman, i agree with you, but with all due respect that's what all politicians say. they talk about growing the economy. and understand, i probably agree with you on how you best grow the economy, you give caterpillar tax cuts. we agree there. but no politician ever wants to talk about where do the cuts come from. >> the price to pay. >> you brought up defense spending in afghanistan. congressman, can we really afford to continue fighting a war? afghanistan for the next five, ten years? >> well, i think our president answered that question. i don't know what the length of time is in afghanistan, but certainly this was a president who came in, the easy solution, of course, would have been to -- for him to immediately withdraw our troops or draw down, rather, but rather he's doubled down and he's continued much of the bush policy there in afghanistan. so you have to ask your question why. well, clearly, after careful analysis with his foreign policy team, his defense team, he is recognized as a majority in the house and the senate have recognized that it is in our long-term national security interests for us to do so. >> all right. congressman shock, thank you very much. >> thanks a lot, congressman. greatly appreciate it. >> i wonder on that last -- >> good to be with you. >> thanks. >> good to have you on. it is hard to say what would go, what would go, what would have to go, where can we make this work in terms of the math. so whether it be on afghanistan or anything else, what would go. >> they're going to have to come up with a map, though. and barack obama had a spending freeze but it only accounted for about 19% of the budget. if republicans are going to sell the message that they're going to actually be serious about protecting taxpayers' dollars, they're going to have to come up with something that is -- maybe it's not specific, but maybe it's something like this, it says we are going to go back to 2008 spending levels and we are going to have a freeze of the federal budget, for 100% of the federal budget, in the discretionary spending, until such time as we balance the budget. if that's seven years, if that's ten years, if that's 15 years, that's what we're going to do. here's the deal, too -- republicans will have no excuse if they take control of the house of representatives, and even if they don't take the senate, because the one thing we learned when we got to congress, the house has the checkbook. and nothing passes unless the house funds it. so i think republicans are going to have a chance to put up or shut up. i'm just not hearing a lot of specifics. and if they go out there and just talk about growing the economy instead of cutting the federal government's -- the expansion, after criticizing barack obama for being a socialist -- >> exactly. >> -- then they have no credibility. republicans, if this president's the biggest spending p ever, if he is a socialist, if he has expanded the federal government by record levels over the past 18 months, isn't it just easy to say everything he's passed we're going to cut and we're going to go back to 2008 levels and do a flat spending freeze? again, it's time for this party to put up or shut up. >> i agree completely. coming up next, first quarter cash. senate candidate marco rubio makes a huge splash in fund raising down in florida. one of the top stories next in the political playbook. also, can the u.s. work with karzai? we'll bring in "the washington post's" david ignatius, who just returned from afghanistan. plus, willie geist joins us live from augusta for the opening round of the masters. first bill karins. they have teed off in augusta, but later this afternoon they may have to deal with rain and thunderstorms. first off, yesterday, an incredible, historic day throughout much of the eastern half of the country with record high temperatures. that's gone. temperatures are coming back down. airports are doing okay, no big delays in our major hub. temperatures are much cooler, though. look at atlanta. 62 degrees right now. forecast in the northeast, yesterday in the 90s in boston, today 56 degrees. cold air blowing in off the water. 82 in new york and 84 in d.c. still above average but not like yesterday. did i mention airport delays? watch out in atlanta. strong storms are about to head right over the top of hartsfield airport. national car rental knows i'm picky. so, at national, i go right past the counter... and you get to choose any car in the aisle. choose any car? you cannot be serious! okay. seriously, you choose. go national. go like a pro. all right. nice pretty shot of new york city as the sun comes up this morning. time to take a look at the morning papers. "washington post." fed chief sounds deficit warning. ben bernanke said wednesday that americans may have to accept higher taxes or changes in entitlements such as medicare and social security. the front-page photo riots a plunge in kyrgyzstan. >> bernanke is telling the truth, at least. somebody is telling the truth about the deficit. t"the wall street journal," us airways, united in talks. a merger that would create the nation's second largest airline behind delta. >> "usa today," back on the trail, this year's lexs are going to produce the most new governors in 50 years. five former governors try to get their jobs back. >> and the "washington times," rnc chairman michael steele can't seem to catch a break these days. on the day the rnc revealed a record fund-raising, the democratic national committee revealed it collected even more money. >> joe and mika? in "the new york times," they're wondering what america's leaders are doing this morning and here's what they're doing. look at that. >> oh, wow, look at that. >> that's a good-looking guy in the middle. >> that's our guy. >> that's in "the times"? >> that's in "the times." >> very good. i love it. where is a picture of barnicle? >> right here. >> i want a clark shot. oh, that's right. it's in the police blotter. >> central park. >> i'll have to get a couple copies for my mom. and your mom. is your mom watching? >> my mom watches, seriously, every morning. >> god bless her. she's in milwaukee, right? >> just outside of milwaukee, very good memory. she watches every morning whether i'm on or not. loves the show. but she's one of the leaders in milwaukee. >> she is, and where america's leaders start their day and moms, leaders and moms. i know a website they call to. >> it's called politico. let's go to the "political playbook" with chief political correspondent mike allen. we'll start with republican candidate for florida's senate seat, marco rubio. apparently showed off his real star power by revealing his first quarter fund-raising numbers, $3.6 million. huh. are republicans seeing any potential in that? >> well, they sure are, mika, and 95% of that is money for the primaries, so if he wins in august in the general election he eel be able to go back to all of those people again. he's raised a million dollars online, showing amazing strength for someone who once was an underdog. so now republicans are wondering, wow, could marco rubio be our barack obama? a young, attractive candidate who's elected to the senate and then is able to run for president quickly after that. now, amazing change in this race just in the last few days. there's a new deadline, april 30th. that's the day that the current governor, charlie crist, would have to decide if he doesn't want that head to head battle, primary battle with marco rubio and instead to go as an independent. yesterday for the first time he allowed for that possibility, he wouldn't rule it out. he said he'd think about it after the legislative session. so this led to coverage on every single newscast last night of crist dabbling with being an independent, annoying the republican base, so friends of rubio sitting around youtube of all those stories might bolt the party. >> well, i mean, i can think of our last interview with charlie crist here on "morning joe." yeah, it was the last one where he said i'm in this race as a republican. i am a republican. he couldn't have made it more clear. so -- >> backing away. >> that could end up being thrown back in his face if he made that move. >> he would, but all those news stories are pointing out that this might be very smart, that in a three-way race with a relatively weak democrat, k kendrick meeks, you'd only need 35% of the vote to win. joe has pointed to an independent coalition of obama voters that just might be enough to give crist -- to make it at the very least extremely tempting. because if he's -- i'm sorry. go ahead. >> on the hill today we're going to be hearing from robert ruben. this is after greenspan's performance yesterday. what can we expect there? >> well, the committee to stave world is getting a little audit from this congressional committee that's looking into basically the history of the meltdown. robert ruben, the clinton treasury secretary, he's banished from public site as an executive at citigroup, but it turns out behind the scenes he's also advising the obama administration. four meetings with secretary geithner at the time they were putting together the wall street bailout. so not only can you expect him to be asked about how the meltdown came about, for the first time we'll have his testimony about what advice he's giving the obama administration, what behind-the-scenes role this very famous financial figure has been playing. >> all right. mike allen, politico, thank you very much. >> have a great day. coming up, the labor department -- you, too -- will give us a snapshot of the employment situation with the reekly jobs report. we'll check in with erin burnett after the break. compare a well equipped lexus es, to a well-equipped buick lacrosse. get inside each. and see what you find. if perfection is what you pursue, this just might change your course. meet the new class of world class. the twenty-ten lacrosse, from buick. may the best car win. another heart attack could be lurking, waiting to strike. a heart attack caused by a clot, one that could be fatal. but plavix helps save lives. plavix, taken with other heart medicines, goes beyond what other heart medicines do alone, to provide greater protection against heart attack or stroke and even death, by helping to keep blood platelets from sticking together and forming clots. ask your doctor about plavix, protection that helps save lives. [ female announcer ] people with stomach ulcers or other conditions that cause bleeding should not use plavix. taking plavix alone or with some other medicines, including aspirin, may increase bleeding risk, so tell your doctor when planning surgery. certain genetic factors and some medicines, such as prilosec, may affect how plavix works. tell your doctor all the medicines you take, including aspirin, especially if you've had a stroke. if fever, unexplained weakness or confusion develops, tell your doctor promptly. these may be signs of ttp, a rare but potentially life-threatening condition, reported sometimes less than 2 weeks after starting plavix. other rare but serious side effects may occur. increase in 6 months. pete, back it up! ( marker squeaking ) when business travel leaves you drained, re-charge with comfort suites. spacious rooms, free hi-speed internet, and free hot breakfast. comfort suites. power up. now stay two separate times with comfort suites... or any choice hotel and earn a free night. book at choicehotels.com. 33 past the hour. live shots, top of the rock for you, new york city. let's get a check on business before the bell with cnbc's erin burnett live at the new york stock exchange. erin, those unemployment, employment numbers out yet? >> unemployment numbers are out, continued claims, actually falling, if you look at the four-week average, which is the best way to look at it. still, though, futures are lower. we're lower across the board. there's concern on interest rates. there's just general malaise. there is yet again concern on what's happening in europe and whether the greece situation is going to be resolved or not. the market can be a bit schizophrenic, as you know. they don't care about greece, then they care, and don't care again. it's all coming in context of that dow 11,000 that pat buchanan wanted to know if it was overvalued. we still can't get there. 10,897 is where we'll open, so we'll see where it goes through the day. another thing to think about is just the implication of some of the -- just call it the nervousness and the jitters. you have an economy just starting to recover, headlines like the flight to denver last night don't help in terms of people's interest in traveling and willingness. it could seem small, but these are things that matter. obvious obviously, the big headline for the market today is an airline story, actually. us airways and united in talks. you were talking about that, front page of "the journal." david faber has been doing some work on that, too. this is a deal that's sort of been in talks for a decade, let's be honest. usually antitrust issues cause these things to break it apart, and unions, but it might be nice to have a merger because the u.s. carriers are truly abysmal in terms of their quality compared to the overseas carriers. that's the big story of the day in terms of mergers. one thing on that airline story last night, guys, this is interesting, did you know that in -- obviously the suspect was middle eastern, which is again going to spark all the conversations about racial profiling, and yes, it appears to be a false alarm. but did you know that in certain middle eastern countries right now it is still legal to give money to terrorists as in if you were caught money to doing it, giving money to al qaeda, you would not go to jail? did you know that? >> i did not. >> kuwait, one example, it is still legal to do so. obviously countries like saudi arabia have gotten a lot more scrutiny for that, but still they are known to have many people there who do fund terrorist organizations. the state department just a month ago was saying al qaeda and the peninsula focused in saudi arabia has the ability and wherewithal to strike the american homeland. these are all big issues coming out of a region which is strategically important to the united states and also financially important. that is why i hope tonight you watch two of biggest billionaires in the region, talking about the terrorist issue, why the american government still looks the other way. 8:00 eastern. hope you guys will watch. >> all right. look forward to that. looks look it's going to be great. erin burnett, thank you so much. >> thank you guys. see you tomorrow. up next, "the washington post's" david ignatius. [ female announcer ] grass stains, believe it or not, i have missed you. pollen in the air kept hunter cooped up itching his eyes and sneezing. but now i found zyrtec®. it's #1 allergist recommended. with children's zyrtec® he can get 24-hour allergy relief indoors and outdoors. ♪ now he can run wild... with the rest of the pack. with children's zyrtec®, he can love the air®. and now try children's zyrtec® perfect measure®. a premeasured spoon. just twist squeeze and go™. all right. live look at los angeles. that's where we are today. kind of a nice week here. >> nice out there. >> with us now from washington, associate editor and columnist for "the washington post," david ignatius, who just returned from a trip to afghanistan, where he spoke to military leaders on u.s. progress there. he is the best-selling author of "the increment," as well, a great book. so, david, i want to read -- we've been talking obviously about the comments made by hamid karzai of late, and you wrote this recently in "the washington post." "it's not surprising that he's bristling against u.s. pressure to reform or dickering with his iranian neighbor. politics in this part of the world is a contact sport and we shouldn't be afraid of afghan expressions of sovereignty." are we overreacting to karzai's comments? are they being taken out of context in any way? or -- because at this point, you know, the contention here on the set is that cancel the visit to the u.s. and let's start dealing with this guy in a tougher way. >> the comments have been bizarre. karzai's a very erratic leader. i do think we ought to stand back just a little bit and look at this in context. two things are happening. we're pushing him hard. we're pushing him to reform. we're pushing him to open up his government, we're reducing his leverage. you travel to kabul and you're looking at almost 100,000 u.s. military personnel in the country. and, you know, he's sort of saying what happened to my afghanistan. so he's pushing back. the second thing that's happening is he's beginning to get ready for the post-american rather. we said we're going to begin leaving in july of next year so, he doesn't want to be the last man to declare himself an afghan patriot. i think that's something to remember. basically, they need to put this back in the box, both sides, and get on with it. karzai says i may join the taliban. that's ridiculous. he is totally dependent on the u.s. he knows it. i think a little quieter tone on both sides and they'll find a way to work this through. >> is he ever bit as erratic as mr. galgert suggested the other day? >> he is an erratic person. joe, i'll tell you that the white house felt that the meeting they had just over a week ago with karzai in kabul went really well. on the plane back they were saying, gee, this is in much better shape, you know, patting each other on the back. and then a couple days later he blows up with these incendiary comments. the white house view is that he's really a prisoner of the last person he's talked to. he's a very volatile person, very much influenced by his advisers. peter galbraith adds certain other juicy lifestyle details that i don't know enough to comment on. but karzai is certainly a mercurial person, and that's one of the things that the u.s. would like to have the last person he talked to be somebody on the american team, basically. >> david, what's our exit strategy in afghanistan? >> the simple way i would describe it is it's a replication of what i saw when i was there, joe. i saw in two different contexts the traditional afghan way of solving disputes, people getting together, talking with their former enemies. here i am in marjah with a bunch of people who a month ago supported the taliban, sitting down with admiral mullen, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, and the provincial governors talking about handing out goodies for roads, schools, hospitals. everybody smiling and pocketing the money. and then they're going to go about their business. and, you know, historically, that is how conflicts end there. and we're trying to replicate that strategy. the central government in afghanistan is hopeless. it's just not happening. we're trying to build these local structures that can get things done, that can solve disputes, that can provide justice for the people. that's the strategy. will it work? we'll watch. it's a long, tough road, i've got to say. >> john ridley. >> yeah. david, to that point, you talk about in your piece the u.s., military and civilian officials will pay the bills and i think of the al anbar awakening, where it was basically throwing money at the problem. is that really going to solve the issue? i mean, i don't want to joemp simplify it, but it's just, you know, money talk, pay these folks, and they respond to that. >> money, to be polite, is efficacious in that part of the world. the british found that -- we've found that. so obviously it has its uses. but it's money combined with a subtle strategy. you need to know which tribe is on the outs, which tribe is angry and joining the taliban because it hasn't gotten its share of the spoils from the provincial governors, from a different tribe. and that's the kind of more subtle, nuanced intelligence that we're beginning to gather. i was at the pentagon yesterday with a senior official who had a detailed tribal map of the region around kand hahakandahars where the next big bat will take place and you could literally go kilometer by kilometer which tribal leader was upset at which other clan. that's the kind of understanding you'll need, and you combine that with money, with development projects and maybe you get some traction. this is such a poor country, it needs all kind of help. but we do need to know what we're going in -- we're stumbling in as we did many the beginning in iraq and as we did in the beginning in afghanistan. got us deep in a hole. >> mike barnicle in new york. >> david, i don't want to overwork this theme, but age and bad experience preface the question i'm about to ask you. after hearing that 21st century version of the strategic hamlet program being laid out. 47 years ago, we had a particularly unreliable ally and his brother, president ziem in saigon and his brother, mr. nu. we were at the edge of a catastrophic episode in american history. calm me down, if you could. are we, again, at the edge of perhaps another tragic episode? >> well, mike, i think everyone is haunted by the vietnam analogy starting with the president, president obama. you and i remember those days better than the president does, but he's certainly learned the less sons. i think one important difference is that bordering afghanistan, the contemporary version of vietnam with its very erratic, unreliable leader, is a big, powerful country that is becoming slowly a more reliable u.s. ally, and that's pakistan. the progress in the u.s./pakistan relationship that i've watched over the last year is pretty striking, that they had finally awakened the seriousness of their own internal terrorism problem and are taking action to deal with it. if in the next year the pakistanis will decisively close down the safe havens from which the taliban operate in the tribal areas, then the oxygen goes out of that movement. then this becomes a makable p putt, let's say. if the pakistanis don't do this, we're finished. that simply. that's the difference. >> on that note, david ignatius, thank you very much. it's good to have you back on the show again. >> thank you guys. great to be here. >> and willie, what do you have coming up next? shoo. >> reporter: well, mika, i'm outside the gates of augusta national, where the masters tournament is under way. we took a little trip up the road a mile or so to the augusta municipal golf course. different scene out there. we'll show you when "morning joe" comes right back. - woman #1: hey. - woman #2: hey. i was just in town for a few days and i was wondering if i could say hi to the doctor. - is he in? - he's in copenhagen. - oh, well, that's nice. - but you can still see him. - you just said he was in-- - copenhagen. - come on. - that's pretty far. - doc, look who's in town. - ellen! - copenhagen? - cool, right? vacation. - but still seeing patients. ( whispers ) workaholic. - i heard that. - she said it. - i-- cisco-- introducing healthpresence. black one! where? [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! where? [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! ow! where? [ male announcer ] the volkswagen tiguan. the only compact suv with a turbocharged engine, standard. [ vrrroooooomm! ] black one! where? there. [ male announcer ] starting at $23,200. it's a whole new volkswagen, and a whole new game. somewhere in america... there's a home by the sea powered by the wind on the plains. there's a hospital where technology has a healing touch. there's a factory giving old industries new life. and there's a train that got a whole city moving again. somewhere in america, the toughest questions are answered every day. because somewhere in america, more than sixty thousand people spend every day answering them. siemens. answers. willie geist is down in augusta, georgia, site of the masters, and scene of a huge, huge tv audience this coming weekend for the return of tiger woods. willie? >> reporter: well, mike, the tournament is in fact under way. fans still coming in behind me. a few of the groups are off the tee. tiger woods plays at 1:42 eastern. it's perhaps the most beautiful course in the world. but it's not one you and i can really relate to. hackers like us go to the local muni course, so we headed down the street about a mile right here to the augusta municipal course for a look at real golf. just like at augusta national, here at the augusta municipal course, we wait off the 18th green to talk to the players after they're finished putting and completing their rounds. do i mind if i ask you how the course looks? >> the course is beautiful. i like it. it's a much better than last year. >> reporter: how is it playing this week, gentlemen? >> it's very dry. >> very, very dry. >> very dry. >> it's a city course. and if they do a little work on the greens, it could be -- it could be as good as any course here. >> reporter: arthur, tell me what you're cooking here on the grill. >> well, we have just hamburgers and hot dogs, and i made some of my special barbecue sauce. >> reporter: i'd take one of your burgers over a pimento cheese sandwich any day. >> i'm sure you will. >> reporter: any interest because of the whole tiger deal? >> no. >> reporter: you weren't surprised at all? >> well, tiger was 3 years old and started playing golf. when did he ever have time to have fun with girls, go to dances, parties? his dad taught him golf. >> reporter: do the events of the last four months diminish him at all, in your mind? >> not to me personally. >> it's his own personal life. >> when he found out what was fun, can you blame the man for wanting to eat the apple? >> that's his personal business. i don't have nothing to do with that. >> you know, go from it, two separate issues. >> golf is one thing. >> men are men, women are women. it's been going on for, what, 10,000 years? he did wrong. he treated his wife wrong. her taking a club to him was a good idea, but she should have used the baseball bat. >> reporter: at the augusta golf course, they do not blame the man for eating the apple. time to talk about what we learned today. mika, what did you learn? >> i learned it is morning joe's birthday tomorrow. >> it is? three years. john ridley -- >> your birthday. >> oh, my birthday. >> okay. you were there at the very beginning. >> yeah, actually. >> happy birthday, brother. >> thank you very much. >>

Related Keywords

United States ,Prague ,Praha ,Hlavníesto ,Czech Republic ,Poland ,Russia ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,Afghanistan ,Denver ,Colorado ,West Virginia ,Russian ,Czech ,America ,Ethan Allen ,John Ridley ,Subaru A ,Suze Orman ,Pennington Scotts ,Dmitry Medvedev ,Michael Elliott ,Joe Ethan Allen ,David Ignatius ,Bob Samuelsson ,Amanda Ripley ,