Disagree with the treaty. We have a very very lengthy treaty and a complex 1994 agreement and then we have the behavior of the Member States themselves. Theres the argument based on the reagan. I have been looking for an opportunity to drive the stake through for some time. That will trump his statement from the secretary of state and fatly to the opposite. They came out with an official view of the reagan administration. I refer here Ronald Reagan may be because i had four president ial appointments. I live here this man and it is important that we not ascribe used to him that would be problematic to the United States. His opinion that is the fee met those six red conditions, we got the treaty, we would be able to move forward. Let me indicate what i suspect what the actual meaning was. If you look at the time line in terms of wind that was actually a decision being made by reagan that he is writing about, the decision is entirely different from what steve is talking about. This is a
that because you had republicans win a seat that is something as a rhode islander i did not think i would see in my lifetime. when you have a party without much power, they can actually push back a little bit. 60 seats might solve the problem solve some problems, but create a bunch of others. host: we have run out of time. thank you all for being here this morning and kicking off our summer series. all this week we are looking at politics. thank you for coming on. we need to go now to the national press club. there is an event happening this morning, looking at threats to judges. thanks for watching the washington journal . [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . . first of all, you have to remember or you have to get a physical picture in your mind of what our courtrooms are like. our hearings hearing rooms are approximately three square feet or less. that is slightly the average than the a
those that are hoping for cameras in the supreme court to stop open because the same thing would happen. . . that was his view. when you are sitting on a bench, if there is anyone if you who would be extremely discomfited by the notion of having cameras in the courtroom, you would defer to that cali. colleague. i think the chief justice told a bunch of us that he did not think that this is a soon to the proposition and the united states supreme court. a that this would be a soon to be proposition anin the united states supreme court. i think every country is different. i am sensitive to the concerns that she raises. we decided to do this on a trial basis 21 years ago. we are still running the trial. we were very wary. we have some stationary cameras. we are oblivious to them. i never think about them. they tracke the council. they are unobtrusive. the broadcast those who do goes to our public broadcast. it is not a run at prime time. if you are an insomniac, you pro