that your optimism is well founded to think there is still something left to be done with joe manchin? i would make a couple points about that. first, he hasn t just been talking to the white house. he has been talking to a number of us on the house democratic side. number two, if you look at his top-line figure, take for example the document he actually signed with senator schumer back in the summer. and you look at the bill that i voted for and that we passed out of the house. the top-line figure is almost identical. i think that if we go back to senator manchin now and we attempt to address even though i don t agree with it, we attempt to address his chief complaint, which seems to be that a significant number of provisions in the bill are not funded over ten years now, i can explain why that is, but senator manchin for some reason has really zeroed in on this point as causing him heartburn. if we go back and ensure that they are funded over ten years, then i think we can actu
how could we have done this? reporter: but lindsey graham s best senate friend and well-known military vet disagrees, effectively asking how could we not? in the words of former secretary of defense mr. gates, said that these entitlements in the military are eating us alive. reporter: john mccain says this gives him heartburn, but noted military pensions cost $52 billion last year and skyrocketed 49% over a ten-year period. we re going to have to look at this whole issue of the pay, benefits and retirement and all of that of members in the military in a prospective fashion. reporter: norv bryant of the milita mill officers association. a bucket of coal for this christmas. reporter: graham up for re-election in military rich south carolina admits they ll probably lose this battle but
months and they ve done that for ten years pay agenormous price up front. this is really, really a disgrace. as part of their budget, rule ryan and patty murray decided to reduce by 1% the cost offing adjustment for retirees who retire after 20 years of service. it would go back up at age 62. it saves $6.2 billion. right savings, wrong targets say some republicans. of all the people we could have picked on to screw, be how could we arrived here? how could we have done this? but lindsey graham s best senate friend and well-known military vet disagrees, effectively asking how could we not. in the words of former secretary of defense mr. gates said that these entitlements in the military are eating us alive. john mccain says this gives him heartburn, but noted military pensions cost $52
vitriol in the statement that came out, which was an angry statement. netanyahu had a choice. he could have cherry picked those parts of the speech he likes. particularly the parts that challenged fatah and hamas. how are you a credible negotiating partner? you ve got to answer that question because hamas rejected the existence of the state of israel. why don t you try to answer that? so netanyahu could have answered that and chose not to. instead, essentially went through the speech with all the things that gave him heartburn. it s hard to imagine a worse lead-in. i ve got to say, governor, when you start at what most people would consider the finishing point, and you you tell the palestinians, we re going to give you back everything you lost in 1967 when
a choice, could have cherry picked those parts of the speech he liked, particularly the parts that challenged fatah and the palestinians, how are you a credible negotiating partner because hamas rejects the existence of the state of israel so israelis raise the question how you re a legitimate partner. he could have emphasized that and in his response chose not to and went through the speech of all the things that gave him heartburn. it s hard to imagine a worse meeting to today s meeting. i have to say, governor, when you start at what most people would consider the finishing point and you tell the palestinians we re going to give you back everything you lost in 1967, when israel was attacked, i just don t see the upside for israel here. it s not a very good negotiating strategy.