you know, it s ridiculous to think that they re a threat to our national security. rand paul is wrong and dangerous. governor, is rand paul too soft on national security? well, we re going to get a better chance to see exactly where rand paul is on these issues. he wasn t a senator ten years ago. he is now a united states senator. he is experiencing what s happening in the world and i think as he gets greater perspective, he will be very clear on where he stands on foreign policy issues and we ll give him the benefit of the doubt, take what he says today and that will be the platform he runs with as a candidate for president if he gets into this race. well, no, he s in the race. he got in last week. i know it s hard i m sorry. i haven t kept my score card up as to who is actually officially in and who is just kind of in. so, let me ask you a foreign policy question because you ve been quite critical of president obama s negotiation with iran. what i want to ask you is,
it s on fire right now. you have americans getting their heads chopped off on television and the sense of isis is spreading around the world and there will be more of a discomfort with where are we in the world in a year and a half, and she s got to be able to thread that needle. i think benghazi is something that is red meat for republicans, but i do think how she handles the foreign policy question will be more important than perhaps she thought it might be. she s more vulnerable than benghazi, there are more vulnerabilities she didn t have an accomplishment as secretary of state and this is something that the media caught on to and they would ask people, what did she do than fly around the world on taxpayer-funded jets. and with benghazi, i would have to say that the buck does stop with her. she is the one that is responsible for the head of the state department for what happened there. it was a failure of security and it was a failure of handling those hours and to this day the
but i would say if you had to choose one candidate that fits this narrative best that will be best able to handle the foreign policy questions of the top tier candidates i think marco rubio is that guy. marco rubio has based a large part of his senate career on studying foreign policy issues, traveling around the world, trying to become very flunt on those issues, he s on the foreign relations committee in the senate. so i think he will be most able to handle these questions with fluidity. you won t be able to get him, you know, off base by asking him a tough foreign policy question. he ll know what you re talking about. he ll be able to answer it in detail. i think if any of the candidates it benefits the most it would be marco rubio. you would know he would know the answers in the debate format when you put two candidates together and foreign policy being lobbed at them and questioned about how they would handle certain crises, but you believe a focus on foreign policy could actual
about. it is because of a huge american troop presence in the middle east & insertion of american power that never existed before. this is a political and foreign policy question we could talk about. i want to keep the principle of freedom of expression separate. there is a sense that did didn t exist 20 years ago. and presence that shows little sign of abating. we have to leave it there. we could dedicate hours of programming to this. i m sorry we have no more time in this segment. great to see you both eric bates and rick macarthur from har per s. we will look at america s response just ahead. my car . all-wheel drive is amazing. i felt so secure. you can do it, emmie! ecoboost is when you can take a four
go. yes, there will be sometimes need for internal debate in congress that the public can t see or might even be limited to the intelligence community. we are dealing with china, russia, very sophisticated intelligence operations, as well as al qaeda. there is certain stuff the american public won t be able to see. but i think that debate post-snowden, for better is better because we ve had we ve been able to have i think a more robust debate. it just happened the wrong way and it could have happened the right way. let me ask another foreign policy question that does not relate directly to terrorism, which is that, the snowden disclosures came within days of the first summit meeting in california between president xi of china and president obama. president obama had been planning to raise a major issue of sign her attacks from china. his whole talking point was completely destroyed by the snowden revelations. then came angela merkel and