you for taking my call. host: thank you for the call, angel. a lot of editorials this morning following the president's speech in cairo, including "the guardian," and we will read excerpts from those editorials and focus in the next hour and a half from two different perspectives. david makovsky is joining us in just a few minutes. and abderrahim foukara is going to be joining us as well from algeciras arabic -- from al jazeera arabic. john mercurialo, the battle lins are drawn in the democratic primary.

guest: polls show the race is tightening. there is a new poll out this morning showing that one of the candidates, a state senator, is now in the lead. two of the three candidates are running -- one of them, former dnc chairman terry mcauliffe, is bringing in some big guns in the final days, big guns from outside virginia, to make his case. bill clinton is returning to virginia this weekend to campaign for mcauliffe. he will attend a fund-raiser at mcauliffe's house in mclean, virginia. it is at least the third visit that clinton has made on behalf of mcauliffe in this race. also yesterday, and this is interesting, mcauliffe announced the support of montana governor bryan schweitzer, who also -- announcing the support, schweitzer made clear he is supporting mcauliffe because they are friends. he is doing it on a personal level, not as chairman of the

rg&e a. regardless, it is not entirely clear how many -- of the rga. republicans did not seem too concerned. the republican governors association responded yesterday with a simple one line statement that said, "who is brian schweitzer?" to a lot of virginia voters, they hope that is the questionnaire asking. brian moran, one of terry mcauliffe's opponents, did not seem to concern. he said this -- "the guide rumored to be running for governor of new york and when it -- the guy rumored to be on running for governor of new york is one to tell us who is running for governor in virginia." the virginia secretary of state yesterday said that what could be a piece of bad news,

mcauliffe relying on high turnout around the state to boost his prospects. the secretary of state yesterday said that she expects, based on absentee voting applications so far, expects the voter turnout on tuesday to be relatively low. again, that could be bad news for mcauliffe. moving on to california, where there is the governor's race going on, not for tuesday but for next year. there's a new poll that in the democratic and republican primaries, a top tier of candidates, relatively well- known democrats. first, leading the race by a slim margin, san francisco mayor gavin knew some trailing by 18%. there are other candidates in the race making up the difference. in the republican race, a lot of undecided voters, but former

congressman tom campbell, a moderate from these entrances go area, leads with 13%. former ebay ceo meg whitman, who recently got the endorsement of john mccain, trails with 10%. insurance commissioner john praisner has 11% in that race. a lot will change between now and that primary. finally today, and connecticut, the new haven register and other papers reported today that chris dodd, who had been rebounding, i think, from a tough series of developments in his reelection campaign for 2010, now looks like he is set to endure another round of bad press over a lingering controversy to which he has been linked over the past year. the federal government yesterday charged countrywide financial ceo and two other executives with civil fraud, which ensured that chris dodd, who had been getting a -- who is accused of

getting a sweetheart financial deal from countrywide -- he himself has not been accused of any wrongdoing, but shortly after reports emerged last year of the sweetheart deal, he was forced to ignore the comments are a lot of questions about it, and shortly after that, former congressman rob simmons was going to run against him. simmons now, according to polls, is in the lead in that race. that is what we have for you, steve. host: john mercurio, before i let you go, for anyone watching the first hour of "morning joe," the illinois senate race. a look at senator burris and whether or not he is going to reelect -- to seek reelection. he said probably not, but you never know.

guest: i think he will probably not seek reelection, but i probably will have to agree with jim. roland burris has really defined -- has really defied expectations. he fought democratic leaders in the span it -- in the senate, to gain leadership in the senate. he has refused to rule out the possibility that he will run. you look at the tea leaves, a couple of indicators -- during the first three months of 2009, he raised barely any money, barely any money, which is ridiculous to consider anybody running in an expensive media states like illinois. there are democrats seriously talking about running the state treasury. democrats at this point are strongly urging roland burris to get out, but we have no indication that he is doing so. host: john mercurio, thanks as

always. david makovsky is author of this new book, "myths, illusions, and peace." guest: good to be with you, steve. host: the call it the cairo speech, pointing out that words are important. mr. obama was right when he urged leaders privately speak of moderation and compromise to dare to say those words in public, but the words are not enough. mr. obama, who had been in office less than six months, has a lot to do to fulfil this mission, and so do others. guest: i mean, clearly what depressed and it is trying to do is turn the page in the muslim world, began a new dialogue, try to transcend old divisions, search for some common ground, and he is trying to open a conversation with them. at the same time, as he said himself, everything does not change with one speech. but i think one of his prime objectives is to get a lot of

people in different muslim communities around the world to reevaluate their attitudes toward the united states and to create a wider distance between some of these muslim communities and some of the extremist forces, and he says one of the ways to do that, for example, is to engage in a peace process. he hit about seven key themes in that speech. host: let me share with you another editorial. "the wall street journal" called him "barack hussain bush." "mr. obama missed a chance to remind his audience that no country has done more than the u.s. to libri muslims from a question -- from oppression. his insistence on calling iraq "a war of choice" is a needless insult to mr. bush that diminishes because for which

over 4000 americans have died. guest: well, i have seen that, and the case could be made that as the editorial points out, america has done a lot to help muslim nations that have been under attack. something that he could have brought in. he was basically not trying to challenge. i think some of the narrative that is out there, but to urge them toward action. but there was another missed moment, frankly, even though i think on the whole it was a remarkable speech. he was also in cairo on the 30th anniversary of the egypt-israel peace treaty, anwar sadat electrified the world on his trip to jerusalem. it may have been good to make that point as well. we can do a lot of second- guessing on what could have been there, but i think for the most part he wanted to engage the muslim communities on their terms, so he did not challenge a lot of their narratives.

host: let me go to one of your premises in your book. which we should point out is available next week. guest: you can order it online now, pre order. host: going back to dwight eisenhower, you said that he failed to intern -- to recognize internal rivalries, and his policies were costly and ineffectual as a result you could take president eisenhower's name out of that iand putting any president who succeeded facing the same problems. guest: we use what is called linkage, which is, do the arab nations make decisions on any kind of a collective sense, or based on their own sense of inter-arab rivalries, on their own national interest? we found more often than not it was the national interest that shape their responses more than anything else.

host: i want to ask you about a specific part of the president's speech in which he talked about the right for israel and palestine to coexist. what did you take away from what he said? guest: i think what he was trying to do was engaging truth telling in many ways, and he tried in dealing with the arab states to say, look, israel is here to stay, the u.s.-israel relationship is solid. the holocaust happened. it is crazy to deny it, it is crazy to engage in anti- semitism. arab leaders should not exploit this conflict for domestic purposes as they have done in the past. at the same time he said things that a lot of muslims wanted to hear, specifically the need for a two-state solution, to stop settlement activity, the need to imagine a better future for muslim youth all over the world. i think that was one of his main

audience, was to reach out to young muslims', as he said, to a rematch in their future. he had multiple audiences, was trying to hit multiple seams. he did not really break a lot of policy ground. the purpose was to open a conversation, and i think he, clearly judging from reaction, did that. host: another perspective on the president house speech yesterday -- he concludes his piece by saying this. "obama said he came to cairo to tell the truth, but he entered not aware of that. instead he issued one country declaration. "united states is not accept the legitimacy of continued israeli settlements," thus reinforcing the myth that palestinian misery and state business are the fault of israel and the settlements. blaming israel and picking a fight over natural growth make

curry favor with the muslim street, but it will only introduce the arab states to do like of babbas, to deliver isral on a platter, which makes obama look self-defeating." guest: he is absolutely right that the settlements issue has not been the be all and end all. israel pulled out of gaza, 8000 settlers, and got 4000 rockets after they pulled the settlers out. if the issue was just settlements, the issue would have been solved. there have been many moments of compromise. never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. there is a criticism of the president -- speech that he did not challenge this on a variety of points, including some of the times that were available to end the conflict. but you want to look forward, and in looking forward, you want

to some help craft a two-state solution that brings dignity to both sides. israel has legitimate security concerns. the palestinians have legitimate concerns, but all people have to put things on the table. one of the most valuable things the president said yesterday was the need for arab states to get engaged. do not just say we had a peace initiative in 2002 that was back loaded. he called it a new beginning, but at the same time, he said they have to do something now. i think that is really why you want -- why he went to saudi arabia, too. he said i am going to do tough things on the settlements, but you have to do things that are tough, too. the need to be matched by the arab states taking steps toward israel to integrate them into the middle east. there has to be a parallel between these two ideas. host: "the washington post," "the cairo appeal." "the washington times," "obama

gives the bush speech." here is part of a the president said yesterday with regard to those territories and recognizing israel's right to exist alongside the palestinian people. >> now is the time for palestinians to focus on what they can build. the palestinian authority must develop its capacity to govern with institutions that serve the needs of its people. hamas does have support among some palestinians, but they also have to recognize they have responsibilities to play a role in fulfilling palestinian aspirations, to unify the palestinian people. hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, recognize israel's right to exist. at the same time, israelis must acknowledge that as it is real's

right to exist cannot be denied, so must palestine's. [applause] this construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. it is time for these settlements to stoppe. host: part of the president's 55-minute speech yesterday in cairo. the tour is on the democrats' line from missouri. caller: good morning. i want to say i am proud of my president. he has extended an olive branch, and he has done something that is long overdue, sort of using

instead of force first, using diplomacy, tactless, and understanding and compassion of all peoples -- using diplomacy -- i am a christian, but you believe what you want to believe because we have the right to believe. he wants to express that in the democracy way of our ideals. i think that christians need to know this and to honor him, not to look at him as a muslim because he is a christian. and i am so fed up with hearing about my fellow christians saying that he is a muslim. he is not a muslim, he is a christian. host: thanks, victor. comment? guest: i think the president needs to be commended for the fact that he is trying to reach out and trying to get many in these muslim communities across the world to reassess their relationship with the united

states, and, like i said, to draw a greater distance to extremism. he did say some tough things to both sides, but for reaching out, trying to transcend these old divides and trying to focus attention on a lot of the young muslims' -- let's put it this way, if president obama cannot make a dent in public opinion in the muslim communities, i do not know what american president could. i salute him for making the effort. host: some of the headlines first from "the globe and mail." "if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward." from washington, "obama calls for fresh start with muslims." and from the "new york post,"

"let's be friends." laura is next on the republican line from erie, pennsylvania. caller: i just wanted to address two separate parts of this. first, calling mr. obama is a christian when conservative christians in this country will never have common ground on his belief on abortion, on homosexual unions, and putting that agenda into our schools, and on comprehensive sex education, handing our kids condoms and birth control. its coat collar, how will you take those -- host: caller, how will you take those domestic issues and integrate them with -- caller: we are not going to find common ground on that because he does not reflect christian beliefs, you know, in our own

country that conservative christians agree with. i also wanted to ask -- there was a traditional values.org at said he was mixing fact with fiction. the center said there were only 2.3 miss lee -- 2.3 million muslims in america where obama said there were 7 million. also mr. obama is claiming that islam promotes power and dignity among human beings when non- muslims in islamic nations are subjected to a depression and death. host: i am not going to go to the point about the number in the u.s., but i can share with you that in the top five muslim nations, there are 1.6 billion worldwide. indonesia, pakistan, bangladesh, india, and turkey. david makovsky? guest: in the arab world, they

tend to see threatening -- they tend to see america as threatening because they are secular. europeans tend to see america as religious. there are different attitudes. like i said, i think the president was right to extend a hand. i think if you do not try to extend a hand, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and you will have a much more polarized environment. i think given his life story, he is the perfect person to articulate american values and interests, and i think it went a long way toward doing that yesterday. host: "thanks to the path that president obama has set out on there will be a nuclear exchange, the only question will be how big." guest: i agree with the caller correctly about iran, which i write about in the book. we have three chapters on iran in the book. mike co-authored dennis ross --

my co-author, dennis ross, is now working for secretary of state hillary clinton. people might want to read that book for some clues. but i think everyone understands, and the president said correctly, that and iran with nuclear weapons is the game changer. it destabilize the middle east, create the basis for a middle east arms race -- egypt, saudi arabia, turkey are all going to be states that want a nuclear program. there is a greater chance of proliferation. if it can throw its weight around the region, it could intimidate moderates and emboldened extremists. so there are sets of concerns. i think the caller was referring to the fact that the president said that the united states did not object to iran having some -- civil nuclear power.

is that a change in american policy? if i'm correct, secretary of state condoleezza rice said if the issue that iran wanted was in power, we could solve the problem. but i do not think there are any differences between the president and the former administration on the need to stop iran from getting in a car bomb. what is crucial to point out are the people that are the most worried, are not just israel, but it is all the arab states due to a historic enmity with iran, these regimes are very nervous and quietly working with united states. when the president was trying to see yesterday as we have got to end the gap between what you say publicly and what you say privately, because privately, these regimes are very nervous about iran. but publicly you do not talk that way. , and that has to change, i think the president said. host: we have a history dealing with nuclear power, certainly with china, the policy of

deterrence. would that work with iran? guest: when you think about it, you had made with 500,000 troops. in europe at the time of the cold war, you had a whole set of institutions that were in place. you have hot lines between the united states and the soviet union, and even with the cuban missile crisis. even so, history has told us that there are a lot of different evaluations. iran is threatening to wipe israel off the earth, keeps saying it is going to do that, and there is no communication, no hot line, no diplomatic relations. there is no communication,. . then you have another factor, some of the apocalyptic statements of some of the leadership.

ultimately, iran makes a decision on a cost-benefit analysis and they are not suicidal. but this is a whole dimension that we did not have to deal with with the soviet union. the president of iran says statements about the 12th imam, the messiah. but he is not the one who decides, it is the ayatollah, n who is still in charge. there are a lot of differences in the iran grace vs. the soviet union case in the cold war. -- in the iran situation versus the soviet union case in the cold war. caller: my comment on the speech -- the speech was a very warm

speech, especially the one that he did i did not really listen to -- this is a good thing. he did not touch on the sedan issue because sudan is one of the arab nations, and on the sudan issue because sudan is one of the arab nations and -- host: i should point out that it did come up as a question this morning, the president did talk about the situation in darfur, and we will we talking about his meeting with angela merkel, the chancellor from germany, later on c-span. thank you for the call. guest: i think one of the point here that the caller alluded to -- yes, there was a change in terminology, but i think when

the president was trying to articulate american values and interests, he said, look, this idea of 9/11 being perpetrated by al qaeda, some in the muslim world question that if it was al qaeda, there were lured rumors. he said this is the fact. 3000 of my citizens have been slaughtered. that is why we are in afghanistan. i think he tried to be very direct when he said this is the priority of the american president, to protect american lives. but i think he fails by reaching out and trying to widen the distance between the muslim communities and extremists, that is the best hope, is to isolate. and al qaeda -- i think it is no coincidence that ayman of zawahiri and osama bin laden -- i think given their statements, their most nervous about the president's speech because he was trying to bring people over to the american side, to the west cost side, and to make sure

these people are isolated would make clear that there is no justification for the slaughter of innocents. he said if you shoot rockets at women and children, you do not claim moral authority, you abdicate it. so i think he was very consistent there. host: one moment from the speech yesterday that lasted just under one hour, 6000 words, including these brief words in arabic. >> i am grateful for your hospitality and hospitality of the people of egypt, and i carry the goodwill of the american people in the greeting of peace from the muslim people of my country. [speaking arabic] host: good morning, tom. caller: good morning to you, thank you for taking my call and thank you very much for c-span.

it is easily the most insightful picture into the american political scene, and thoroughly enjoyable. and i believe that barack obama is spot-on in his message, and i have agreed with everything that has come along so far. i think that the elections in iran next week will be key because he has already set a tone that there are millions of voters in iran who are hopeful that his message carries some weight. we may see the dawn of a new era, and that is pretty remarkable considering that barack obama has been in office for less than six months. , let me share with you one of the many editorials -- host: tom, let me share with you one of