tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News November 24, 2013 3:00pm-4:01pm PST
>> thanks. >> i'm chris wallace. breaking news the u.s. and its allies reach a nuclear deal with iran. >> for the first time in nearly a decade we have halted the progress of the iranian nuclear program. >> the world powers have recognized iran's nuclear rights. >> what do israel and skeptics in congress think of the agreement? we'll get first reaction from two key members of the senate foreign relations committee, bob corker and ben cardin. then, washington gridlock intensifies with a power grab in the united states senate as republicans accuse democrats of trying to divert attention from
iran agrees to cap its yew rain yam enrichment well below weapons-grade level. in return the west is easing some economic sanctions. the agreement is for six months but our friends in the middle east and some on capitol hill are not happy. we'll get reaction from two leaders senators in a moment, but first amy cole kellog lays out the deal and the reaction. >> i spoke to a top nonproliferation expert who thinks this is as good a deal the u.s. and its allies could have gotten because iran is not going to give up uranium enrichment altogether. this one at least puts caps on every aspect of iran's program. president obama was pleased with the agreement. >> for the first time in nearly a decade we have halted the progress of the iranian nuclear program and
key parts of the program will be rolled back. iran has committed to halting certain levels of enrichment and neutralizing parts of its stockpile. iran cannot use its next-generation centrifuges used for enriching uranium. >> construction of the plutonium producing reactor. critical is arena will allow -- critical is iran will allow inspectors into production facilities which will alleviate fears that iran is stocking hidden enrichment facilities and there will be inspections every single day at the two main facilities. iran can no longer enrich to 20% and cannot add new centrifuges nor increase its stockpile of lower grade uranium without converting to several material. the two sides see what the agreement says about that quite differently. >> the right to nuclear
technology for peaceful purposes, including enrichment within the context of the m.p.t. is an inalienable rhode island what is required is -- inalienable right. what is required for other countries to recognize and respect the implementation of this right. >> this first step does not say that iran has a right to enrichment. no matter what interpretive comments are made, it is not in this document. there is no right to enrich within the four corners of the m.p.t., and this document does not do that. >> it has been suggested by an expert that what the document does if in fact iran sticks to it is double the breakout time, the time it would take iran to build a bomb before being detected. if iran continued with its progress unchecked, that time would have been cut in half. still israel opposes the
deal. >> what was concluded in geneva last night is not an historic agreement. it's an historic mistake. this agreement has made the world a much more dangerous place. >> meanwhile iranians of most stripes are positive about the agreement with the local press touting it as an achievement for iran. here is what president hassan rouhani had to say about the interim deal that will apply for six months. >> there's a long way ahead in order to obtain full trust, but the initial steps have been taken. >> what iran gets in return for these concessions is the unfreezing of some of its assets, some of its funds that are in foreign banks. and it will be allowed to do some trade in chemicals and gold that is about $7
billion. but the main sanctions, architecture does remain in place. senator kerry left geneva this morning and is in london for meetings. he'll be talking about syria, libya and again iran >> now the president must convince skeptics on capitol hill this is a good deal. we bring in two key members of the senate foreign relations committee. top republican bob corker of tennessee. and democrat ben cardin of maryland. senator corker, in recent weeks i think it is fair to say you have been very skeptical of these negotiations. now that you have seen the outlines of this deal, what do you think? >> chris, we just got the details this morning, about 20 minutes ago. look, i mean, iran consolidated their gains and had some sanctions released. i think all of us want to see a diplomatic solution here. i think it's now time for congress to weigh in because i think people are
very concerned that the interim deal becomes the norm. that's why i crafted legislation. by the way, there's bipartisan skepticism here. i crafted legislation to hold the administration and the international community's feet to the fire over the next six months to ensure this interim deal is not the norm. i think we all greet it with sket seufpl. this morning -- skep seufpl. we see in the prable there will be a mutually defined enrichment program. the u.n. security council stated iran would not have the right to enrich but it looks like we tacitly agreed they will be enriching for commercial purposes down the road. i think you're going to see on capitol hill again a bipartisan effort to try to make sure that this is not the final agreement because people know that the administration is strong on announcements, long on
announcements but very short on follow-through and i think there's a lot of concern. i think you'll see senator cardin joining in in those efforts. >> senator corker, one question before we bring in senator cardin. i understand what you're talking about is a set of guidelines that this deal only last for six months, that if the iranian renege the u.s. must react in a short paoefrd time and two -- short speeder of time and the two sides only have six months to come up with a final deal. the question i have is you've also talked about imposing new sanctions. the foreign minister of iran zarif said if there are new sanctions this whole deal is off. are you going to still go for tougher sanctions or give this deal time to see how it works out? >> my greatest concern throughout this whole situation is that the north koreans issue. and that is you begin relieving sanctions, you end up basically with no
deal. my greatest concern is seeing follow-through here. again, this administration is big on announcements, very short on substance. we see that time and time again. the american people are seeing that right now all across our country. my effort, the effort we put forth in our office is to hold their feet to the fire, to make sure they actually do the things par part of the u.n. security council agreement. we're very concerned that that is not going to be the case. and if you see the reaction in iran right now, they're spiking the football in the end zone saying we've consolidated our gains, relieved sanctions. we're going to have the right to enrich. i want to make sure we go on to the end zone here. i think there are going to be some people that want to impose additional sanctions. that's another effort we may well take part in. again, i just want to see this all the way through. we've seen what's happened in north korea. they now have nuclear weapons.
and i don't want to see that happen in iran. >> senator cardin, your reaction to the deal and to the reservations you just heard from senator corker. >> chris, first, it's clear to i think everyone but for the u.s. leadership and tough series of sanctions that were imposed by congress we would have never gotten serious negotiations in iran. we are very concerned whether iran will live up to these commitments. during the next six months we expect there will be negotiations to eliminate the infrastructure in iran that would be able to produce a nuclear weapon. congress needs to be prepared, as the administration has said, to make sure that this interim step is enforced, that there is no deviation whatsoever. and during this period of time there is a border agreement reached -- broader agreement reached with iran that eliminates their ability to produce a nuclear weapon.
the sanctions that have been released can be reimposed at any time. congress will want to make it clear that if iran does not live up to these commitments we will not only insist that the sanctions be reapplied but we will have stronger sanctions against iran. >> let me ask you about the concern expressed by skeptics, and that is that this deal -- the concern is that this interim deal becomes the final deal and it leaves iran just short, a few months short of its breakout ability to dash and create a nuclear weapon. >> that would not be acceptable to the congress nor the american people. and i hope the international community. the agreement by its terms indicates the progress must be made during the next six months to have a more permanent elimination of iran's capacity to produce a nuclear weapon. if not, the sanctions are reimposed. and i think congress will be watching this very closely. we will not stand by and
just let this be the final deal. >> senator corker, what about the argument that there is a window of opportunity right now that the moderates are at least leading the conversation and that if you don't reach out and you don't make this deal, that you only empower the hard-liners? >> the deal's been made, so i understand the argument. but lets face it. this is a deal that the president discussed with us this week at the white house. there are a few changes. but this is in essence it, and the deal has been made. i think the thing that is interesting, i think from their perspective, they do view this administration as weak. and i think from their standpoint, they see this as their of opportunity to negotiate with an administration that has shown that it really doesn't have a lot of the intest mall fortitude other
administrations have had. they have seen that in syria and that has been a learning experience for them. i think there are different perceptions depending on where you sit. we've now reached this interim agreement. we signed it. i think it's congress's role because congress is what brought us here. the administration was kicking and screaming all the way with these sanctions being put in place. i think we know we brought us to this place. we thank them for entering into negotiations. i wish they had been stronger. but now it's up to congress to make sure we follow through because, again, we're the ones that brought us to this point. we need to help make sure we see this through and they don't end up in a situation where they are a threat to the world as they will be if this interim deal continues to be, or ends up being the norm. >> senator cardin, in amy kellog's piece, you heard the critical comments by israeli prime minister netanyahu. how do you justify this administration making a deal with one of our
biggest enemies in the world over the very strenuous objections of our two strongest allies in the middle east: israel and saudi arabia? >> well, our objections are the same. we made it very clear we will not tolerate iran having a nuclear weapon. that's israel's objective. that's the saudis' objective. >> they think that is the wrong way to go about it, sir. >> it's too early to make that judgment. we'll see what happens during the next six months. i disagree with what senator corker said about this administration. we got chemical weapons coming out of syria. we were able to achieve that. we are tough with north korea and have gotten an international coalition. we have to work with the international community. are we concerned iran may try to circumvent this agreement? you bet we're concerned about it and we'll watch to make sure we do everything we can to make sure that doesn't happen. >> finally, there is a remarkable news story today from associated press. it turns out the top u.s.
diplomats had been meeting face-to-face in secret talks in oman with top iranian diplomats for the last year even before the so-called moderate president rouhani came into office, under president ahmadinejad. senator cardin, you first. what do you make of that? >> i don't think we're surprised. we knew there were communications taking place. i think the united states made it very clear that the only way to reach an agreement with the united states on sanctions was to dismantle their nuclear weapon program. >> and senator corker, brief, your reaction to the idea that there were these secret negotiations going on for the last year. >> you know, i don't know how to react. this news has just come out. i think there has been statements of overtures that have been made for some time, so i don't have much reaction to it. again, i want to see what
we accomplish over this next six months. i know the administration has been trying to set the framework for these discussions for some time. and i guess i'm not really particularly shocked that this has occurred. >> it sounds like a change in the old reagan proverb of distrust but verify. gentlemen, thank you both very much. senator corker, senator cardin, thanks for coming in today. we will have more on all of this with our panel. tell us what you think about the deal with iran? share your thoughts with fellow "fox news sunday" viewers. up next governor sarah palin responds to those hateful comments from msnbc's martin bashir in msnbc's martin bashir in our executive interview. check it out. i can't believe your mom has a mom cave! today i have new campbell's chuy spicy chicken quesadilla soup. she gives me chunky before every game. i'm very souperstitious. haha, that's a good one! haha! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup.
more dysfunction in the nation's capital this week as the problems and finger pointing over obamacare continue. with partisanship at new levels, can anything get done in washington? i talked with former alaska governor sarah palin who has written "good tidings and great joy: protecting the heart of christmas." governor palin, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> an honor to be with you, chris. thanks. >> when you look at all the troubles with obamacare, all the problems with the website, the millions of cancellations, a lot of other things, what's your takeaway in a macro sense, what's the problem? >> certainly the rollout itself and a malfunctioning website isn't the problem. obamacare itself is the problem.
a road towards socialized medicine that is unaffordable, unasked for, not workable, that is the problem. people want obamacare scrapped. i think at this point we don't even care if the website gets up and running. it's just going to prove to be an invitation to find out, to more problems as to obamacare as a whole. >> the president came into office -- and i want to talk about this big picture -- vowing to transform america with big-government solutions like obamacare, like cap and trade. do you think all the debacle and kathleen sebelius called it that, the debacle with obamacare is a tipping point for that approach to government? >> i do. thank goodness people are awakened from their slumber thinking that it's okay for government to deceive us in thinking that they can -- they can give us free stuff. there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. and people have opened their eyes now
understanding tea party patriots, they were right when they said this big-government policy crammed down our throat called obamacare, it's not good for america. people have awakened and realized tea party was right then. they may be right on a couple of other issues too. it is a tipping point. people are awake now. >> governor, on the other hand, obamacare does, and there is nobody questioning this, he is going to extend coverage to 30 million americans who are now uninsured, according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office, the last comprehensive republican approach would only cover 3 million. isn't that a problem? don't you guys have to come up with a better answer? >> i am one to question those numbers, that 30 million more people will receive health care coverage under obamacare? i question it. i don't believe a doggone thing coming out of washington, d.c. anymore. and isn't that a sad state of affairs where a normal american has to be so cynical of what government and government reports are telling us, even if it is a
nonpartisan report. chris, no, once that employer mandate kicks in after the new year begins, next year employer mandate, that's going to kick more and more people off private-sector health care coverage that they had at least up till now been able to enjoy and been able to afford. there will be fewer people being covered under a sensible doctor-patient relationship centered health care program under obamacare than what we see today. i guarantee you that. >> let me switch subjects on you. you talk about dysfunction in washington. senate democrats this week changed the rules so that to confirm a presidential nominee, except for the supreme court, it will now take a simple majority of 51 votes instead of a super majority of 60 votes. it turns out that 79 obama nominees faced at least one vote to end debate, have faced the possibility of a
filibuster. 79, more than double the 38 bush nominees during his eight full years in office. question: doesn't any president, gwen or democrat -- any president, republican or democrat have the right to be able to name his team unless the nominee is wildly outside the mainstream? >> there are a lot of wildly outside the mainstream nominees and pals of barack obama that he wants to see help him transform america. that's one thing congress has done right and that is oppose some of these nominees. as for this rules change that some people are calling the nuclear option under senate rules, i guarantee this week, thanksgiving dinner, people sitting around their tables, we're not going to be talking about the president blessing the thwarting of a balance of power in congress with new senate rules called the nuclear option. people are going to be talking about our failed big-government policies that will bankrupt this country. so this distraction, this new talking point in the
media and with congress, with senators and with the president blessing this action, it's a distraction and is a lot of double standard and democrat hypocrisy because just a few years ago they were so anti, antinuclear option. they were against any thought of republicans ever considering changing these rules. yet now it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. american people don't care about distractions like that. they're not in that inside baseball senate rules stuff. they want government to be back on our side. they want it to get out of our lives. in order to do that, we need those who will not fundamentally transform america but will fundamentally restore what's right about america. we do that by having good judicial nominees and nominees in these regulatory agencies and elsewhere. this new rules change, it stinks. >> all right. let me ask you about something that when we told people you were going to be
on this show a lot of us wanted to ask you about it. it isn't pleasant but you know where i'm headed. martin bashir, msnbc anchor, has had ugly things to say about you. a couple of weeks ago you made, frankly, inunobjectionable remarks saying comparing our debt to slavery and saying even well we're going to be holden to our foreign masters. mr. bashir took great exception to that. he called you a, quote, world-class idiot. his words. then he talked about a slave owner named thistlewood who used to punish his slaves by having someone defecate -- unbelievable -- defecate in their mouths. then he said this. >> when mrs. palin invokes slavery she doesn't just prove her rank ignorance. she confirms if anyone truly qualified for a dose of discipline from thomas thistlewood, she would be the outstanding candidate.
>> governor, your reaction? >> that's funny because bashir has invoked the analogy of slavery also. the definition of slavery is to be beholden to a master and we will be beholden when that note is due when we have taken from our children and our grandchildren and borrowed from china and other foreign countries in order to pay for our wants today. we will be beholden to another master at some point when that note is due. as for the networks condoning those type of statements because there has been no punishment of the fellow who said these words, that's hypocrisy. that's a given when a conservative woman says something that they take offense. they usually just kind of pooh-pooh it, laugh it all, no big deal. as for personally taking shots like that, chris, everybody in life takes shots. you have a decision to make when you take a shot. are you going to become bitter or better? in a case like this i don't
have to accept his words, his vile, evil comments, so they don't have to affect me. i move on and i charge forth. however, if mr. bashir or anybody else in this media elite bubble they put themselves in were to attack someone who is defenseless like a vulnerable child who does not have that podium, that microphone that god has blessed me to be able to express my opinion, if they don't have that type of platform to defend themselves, if you want to see a mama grizzly get riled up and slap that person down, you come after a vulnerable child. in this case he didn't come after a vulnerable child. i can defend myself and i can take it. >> a few days later bashir offered his apology. here that is. >> i made some comments which were deeply offensive and directed at governor sarah palin. i wanted to take this opportunity to say sorry to mrs. palin. were words were wholly
unacceptable. >> first, do you accept his apology? secondly, i want to go back to something you brought up. nbc, for instance, put alec baldwin off the air for a homophobic slur. they have taken no public action for what bashir said about you. >> that's the executive hypocrisy that is so prevalent in that media elite bubble where it depends on the target of the vile rants. it doesn't depend on what the rant itself actually is. and conservative women are a target for them. as for the apology, obviously, you know, who am i to not accept an apology? everyone must humble themselves and accept that offer to -- of apology. after the apologize, the next time they want to say such a thing and get the attention they were seeking after they said it and then they want to call and
apologize to me in private, i'd like them to go through, say, todd first or one of my children first. leave a message with them. hear what they have to say about it. and then they can come to me. >> finally on a happier note, you have a new book out. it's called "good tidings and great joy: protecting the heart of christmas." governor, you say there is a link between faith and freedom. explain what you mean. >> it's an inherent link in our founders knew that. they said our government -- our constitution for our government is written for a religious and moral people meaning you have to have a strong foundation of faith believing in something greater than self and not be so selfish. otherwise our constitution isn't going to do any good. there is no need to follow a constitution or a rule of law if you don't have that foundation. it's very, very important we protect the heart of christmas, which then will protect the heart of america. and it's been a wonderful book tour.
21 cities thus far. it is all about goodd great joyd amazing, inspiring energetic people we met along the trail. love them. it's a good book. >> finally, what's wrong with the idea of a business or a government at some level in an effort to be inclusive to people of all faiths saying happy holidays instead of merry christmas? >> there's not a doggone thing wrong with saying happy holidays. in fact, i say before christmas happy hanukkah. after christmas you can say happy kwanzaa. but as for christmas it is, jesus is the reason for the season. and christ is the foundation of christmas. so to have a double standard, try to be applied to say where you can't say merry christmas or invoke god or bethlehem or an angel or anything spiritual when it comes to actually that day -- december 25, christmas -- otherwise somebody may take offense. it is a double standard. more hypocrisy. more nonsense. i'm just saying we're going to protect the heart of
christmas because christ is what it's all about. >> governor palin, happy thanksgiving and merry christmas to you and to all of the palin family this year. >> thank you so much. to you also. >> you can go to our facebook page for more on today's interview and governor palin's new book. next, it turns out the u.s. and iran were secretly talking for the last year in the lead up to this weekend's new deal. we have that exclusive we have that exclusive report next. when you have diabetes like i do,
getting the right nutrition isn't always easy. first, i want a way to help minimize my blood sugar spikes. then, a way to support heart health. ♪ and let's not forget immune support. ♪ but now i have new glucerna advance with three benefits in one. including carbsteady ultra to help minimize blood sugar spikes. it's the best from glucerna. [ male announcer ] new glucerna advance. from the brand doctors recommend most. advancing nutrition for diabetes. and our giant idaho potato truck is still missing. so my dog and i we're going to go find it. it's out there somewhere spreading the good word about idaho potatoes and raising money for meals on wheels. but we'd really like our truck back, so if you see it, let us know, would you? thanks. what?
will be exclusively for peaceful purposes. >> what was concluded in geneva last night is not an historic agreement. it's an historic mistake. >> israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu criticizing the deal the u.s. and other world powers sealed with iran overnight. it's time for our sunday group. syndicated columnist george will. julie pace who covers the white house. nina easton of fox magazine and syndicated columnist juan williams. you have fascinating stories on the wire today. you report that the u.s. and iran have been involved in the last year in secret high-level talks. one, what was going on? two, how big a role did those talks play in the agreement? >> march is when we were first tipped off the u.s. and iran had been having a high-level meeting in oman.
that meeting happened critically before rouhani, the more moderate cleric, was elected. we learned there were four other meetings after rouhani was elected. those were the meetings that laid the groundwork for this agreement we saw last night. it was in these meetings that some of the details were discussed between the u.s. and iran. and that's the deal that actually was then brought to the p-5 talks. a lot of allies were surprised in some way this deal seemed to come together more quickly than they expected that. 's in large part because these meetings already happened. >> let's get to the deal. president obama says it's an interim step to test iran's intentions. they agree not to stop but to cap their enrichment well below weapons-grade levels. we agree to open the spigot and ease some of their sanctions. they end up with about $7 billion in extra money. what do you think? >> in his statement last night, there's a sentence that's absolutely surreal.
>> he, the president? >> the president. he said for the first time in nearly a decade we have halted the progress of the uranium nuclear program. that implies it has been halted for a decade whereas we know it has been racing forward. the question is will this small easing of sanctions remain small. "new york times" deep in its story this morning, robert inford says the following in defense of this deal. he says i think the sanctions won't erode as fast as some fear. he seems to be conceding the fact that they will indeed erode. i think first there will be no u.s. attack on our negotiating partner, the iranians. that's off the table. second, the president has said he is not going to contain a nuclear iran. i think that will be our policy is containing them because i think they're going to get the -- the big
question, third, is what will israel, abetted by saudi arabia, do at this point? and fourth, will the final reaction be the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the middle east and the saudis seek their own arsenal. >> juan, were you as supportive of this deal as george will is? >> i have a totally different view which is we've been estranged from the iranians since 1979 in which we have not spoken with them. to me, just the fact that we are able to sit, to talk, to at least get going is a tremendous breakthrough for the united states and for our allies in the region. you have an opportunity here, i think, to quiet the drums of war. nobody wants this war. and that's where we were headed. if we did not enter into some sort of opportunity to sit down and talk. though what you have here it seems to me is an opportunity to avert a war. and you have to put it in those stark terms because israel and the united
states literally were going back and forth recently. remember benjamin netanyahu, the prime minister, in front of the u.n. with his charge that bomb. well, for the moment, george, they have not stopped enrichment of uranium totally but what they have done in the short term is to say we're not going to enrich it fully. that means what they call dash time has been pulled by a month or a few more in terms of the iranians being able to actually produce a nuclear weapon. >> nina, there are clearly risks on both sides. the risk for this deal is that iran is able to continue enriching and remains just shy of but on the path towards creation of a nuclear weapon. on the other side there was the risk that this was going to end up in a war, and there is certainly down sides to that. huge economic dislocation, a new wave of terrorism. how do you balance that?
>> the level of suspicion and mistrust of this white house cannot be underestimated. that said, i have to say if your end game is to limit iran's ability to actually get a nuclear weapon and to do so without a military strike -- and we don't know -- the problem is we don't know what that can do -- at least this is an amount of progress. it is taking a very painful sanctions regime. they came to the table because of this sanctions regime. it takes some of those sanctions off, most of them on. we often say the devil's in the details of an agreement. i think the devil is in what comes next and watching it and making sure there is follow-through and no more sanctions come off until there's more progress. >> let me ask you one question. you say you were in saudi arabia. one of the concerns that george raises is that saudi
arabia will now feel it can't allow iran to have a nuclear weapon. it's going to have to start a nuclear program. any talk about that? >> no. obviously that is always the prospect out there. the concern, the immediate concern of the saudis was these overtures that the white house made towards iran. we now know they go back even before this so-called more moderate regime. again, you have to look at the options. there aren't any good options in this. what you have to do is see what you can do short of a military strike to keep iran from getting its hand on a nuclear weapon. france was a skeptic of an earlier iteration of this and they're on board now. >> george, we have less than a minute left. what about the argument that to whatever degree the moderates are if not in charge, they are the ones at the table at this point and that if you don't deal with them, all you do is empower the hard-liners and things get worse? >> this is a dance we went
through during the cold war. we were constantly negotiating with ourselves in order to supposedly encourage the doves against the hawks in the kremlin. a moderate in iran is a very relative term at this point. i see no reason to believe that after 30 years and intense sacrifices seeking nuclear weapons, iran has suddenly decided that sanctions are too high a price to pay for this. let me be clear to juan, i'm very opposed to an attack on iran, but i think it's time we face the fact they are going to be a nuclear weapon. >> on that happy note, we have to take a break here. up next, a new delay in the implementation of obamacare. push it past the next election. but the white house says it but the white house says it has nothing to do wi so you're telling me your mom has a mom cave?
it is a cynical political ploy by the administration to hide the additional sticker shock, the increased cost of insurance that are going to come next year. >> we're doing it because it makes sense for insurers to have as clear a sense of the pool of insurers they gain in the market this year before setting rates for next year. >> republican senator john barraso and white house spokesman jay carney clark over the -- clashing over the latest delay in obamacare and whether it has anything or everything to do with politics. we're back with the panel. george, let's start with this delay. this is about signing up for the second year of obamacare. the enrollment was originally set to start next october 15, a couple of weeks before the election. the white house announced on friday it is going to be delayed until november 15, a couple of weeks after the election. do you believe -- that is i guess a rhetorical question.
look at that skeptical look. the white house argument this is just to give the insurance companies more time to go over the rates and figure out what their premiums should be. >> to give them that crucial 30 days that would make all the difference. it's transparent and it's silly on their part. it's bad politics. if the aim of this is to keep from voters information that they might have on october 15 as opposed to november 15, the information is going to be given by the insurance companies to state insurance regulators by that summer. journalists are going to come around and say share with us this. there are some people who say governors in democratic states are going to suppress this. i don't think so. there is going to be a big row either way. if this is intended to tamp down the fire, it is actually kerosene. >> julie, i'm sure you were all over this story on friday. when you go to white house officials behind the scenes and go really?
before the election until after the election. what do they say? secondly, we got a new deadline and the new deadline is next saturday, november 30, the healthcare.gov website will be up and running. will be? >> on the 2015 delays, what they say this is something insurers have been asking for because they feel like given the problems already had with the website they are not going to have the full picture of the pool for this year in order to calculate their new figure. >> completely coincidental? >> completely coincidental depending on who you ask. on the website issue, they feel fairly confident that by november 30 this website will be up and running for the vast majority of users. this isn't going to be some new grand unveiling of the website on november 30. this is something they say is gradually improving. they have a lot of statistics saying more people are getting through the website. their big fear is that you are going to have on
november 30 and through the enrollment period in december is a huge influx of people, a lot of traffic on the website. we all remember in early october it was traffic that initially crashed the site and revealed these other problems. >> at least that's what they said it >> it apparently was the initial problem and revealed the later problem. >> more than 500 people on it would have crashed the site. nina, let's assume because at i some point the website will ons start working, but we still have millions with canceled policiest it turns out this week we're finding out that doctors are no being included in a lot of thesl plans. so the promise if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor is not true. from your reporting, as the nexo few months go on, will the experience with obama care be be better or worse fortt people? >> i think george put his fingen on it with that word "kerosene." this was supposed to be a safety net program. this was supposed to make people feel more secure.ke the what it's doing is making peopl feel less secure. y beyond the website problems, you've got stories of
cancelations, the stage four cancer victim who suddenly doesn't have coverage to go to o her own doctors.r own you've got the child, the chronically sick child who can't go to the seattle children's ho hospital because the cost of that hospital is so high and they're not included.in you've got stories after storiee coming out now. and then you've got aei coming out this week saying, well -- >> american enterprise -- >> the conservative think tank k that says, is predicting s o millions, tens of millions more cancelations by small businessed coming around next fall, th deciding that they got in underi the line, it's complicated. but they got in under the wire this time with their policies. now they're going to have to gon have obama standard policies. and there's going to be ll cancelations coming out there. there's this sense, this deep nf sense of insecurity that i thint has infused the body politic ano will affect the elections. >> i got to talk with the s president and senior officials at the white house this week.ho this topic came up. to anpid i mean, their position is, look, obama care inherits all of
the problems of health care generally. but no one was promising that everyone was going to the executive suite at the mayo clinic. the idea is that you had peoples who were uninsured, people who were underinsured. and what the affordable care aca does is it sets minimum standards to networks to make k sure people have someplace to e go. and there were so many people who had no place to go, and anya that's what they're addressing in trying to put in place this u program. and yet, i mean, the attacks -- i think this is just, again, more attacks coming from who do republicans whon' don't like th plan.s guess what, i'vewh gotten that . message, i think the president and the white house has gotten it. they don't like it.yhat it's what the white house callsg the original sin. they cannot work and expect republicans to work with them to fix the plan.>> 2 >> 20 seconds, george. po >> famously said all politics is local. in 2014, no politics will be local. this has thoroughly already nationalized the 2014 elections which will be about the chaos
this week marks the this week marks the start of serious holiday cooking. ann romney has written a beautiful cookbook called "the romney family table," with lots of helpful tips about how to bring your family together. here's our power player of the week. mrs. romney, does your family have any traditions when it comes to thanksgiving dinner? >> like most americans, we look ford thanksgiving pie, pecan, apple, pumpkin, those pies. i will say, chris, that with
traditions, it takes a lot of plan, lot of preparation. but the one thing i like to do in my book is remind people that no matter how well you plan, there's always a disaster. and you know, there's always someone crying and always frustration. so you roll with it, and you have as much fun as you go along with it. >> the book is called "the romney family table." you say home is where good things happen, and the heart of the home is the kitchen. >> i don't think there's anything more fun in the world than having them all under one roof. it's the heart. it is where the love comes from. and it's where good things and good conversations happen, where warm feelings, all those associations we make with home and hearth. and you know, it's interesting, through home we celebrate through the kitchen and through eating. >> you collect family recipes. and you say that when each of your boys married, you would give each of your new daughters-in-law a copy of the family recipes and informal cookbook, if you will. is that where the idea for this book came from? >> yeah. and i thought how easy because i've already sort of got the
press piece put together and how easy would it be. obviously you know because your wife has done it, how much work it is to put a publishable cookbook together. but it developed into something much more than just recipes. it was storytelling, and it was how you raised children. and some successes, some failures with -- with raising kids. but the most important ingredient for all of it is love. >> you talk about how you used to cook with your grandmother, and your grandmother with her hands on top of yours helping to roll out the dough, and how loved you felt. is that what cooking brings to you? >> that really is. it's those associations, those good feelings of -- of being loved, of being cherished, of being safe. go ahead, dump it in. and all of those things we can have by -- by having a wonderful home life and a wonderful place where we share that love, and it's just important to remember to establish those traditions. >> you and your husband suffered a crushing political defeat just
about a year ago. was writing this book in a sense therapy, getting as far away from that as you could? >> well, it is about as far away from politics. cooking, a cookbook is from politics as it can be. so for me, you know, it was therapeutic in that way. >> when we talked last march, you said that you were mostly over it but not completely. give us the state of ann romney now. >> i'm mostly over it, but not completely. i will say that. it's frustrating for me now to see all that's going on in washington. it's frustrating for me to see obama care being so poorly implemented. i know that my husband is such an extraordinary executive, i think he -- he along with a lot of other people warned this would happen. this is not something that would go well. and here we are. >> finally, do you have a thanksgiving message for all of our viewers? >> i think it's, again, one of
gratitude. even though it is frustrating what's going on in this country right now, i think we should be reminded that what politics should be all about is making people's lives better. having a harmonious platform from where to do that. we have to remember that we are one nation under god, and that we need to especially at times at thanksgiving, like thanksgiving time, to remember and rejoice in the great blessings that this country has afforded us, and to remember to be civil to one another and come together and solve problems together. >> mrs. romney, i know i speak for all of our viewers when i wish you and your husband and the entire romney family a very happy thanksgiving. >> thank you. all to you, too, chris. >> all proceeds from ann romney's cookbook will go to fund research into multiple sclerosis. she was diagnosed with m.s. 15 years ago. that's it for today. have a great week and a happy
thanksgiving. we'll see you next "fox news sunday." this is a fox report. tonight we know israel is dead set against any deal over iran's nuclear program. now word president obama has called benjamin netanyahu. wonder what that phone call was like. >> what was concluded in geneva last night is not a historic agreement. it's a historic mistake. >> strong words from our strongest ally in the middle east. israel wants war, specifically an end to uranium enrichment in iran. one topic not negotiated -- the fate of an american