excluding women means excluding the entire wealth of knowledge, experience and talent we can offer. so the united states will use the full weight of our diplomacy to push combatants and mediators to include women as equal partners in peace negotiations. we will work with civil society to help women and other leaders give voice to the voiceless, and we will also help countries affected by conflict design laws, policies and practices that promote gender equality so that women can be partners in rebuilding their societies after the violence ends. and that brings me to the fourth focus of our plan, insuring that relief and recovery efforts address the distinct needs of women and girls who are the linchpins of families and communities and invaluable partners in stabilizing countries scarred by conflict. ..

for united states will encourage our international partners to include women in civil sunni battista will society organizations in the implementation of relief efforts and reconstruction planning. we will designate gender advisers for all usaid crisis response and recovery teams and these advisers will highlight

the specific concerns of women and girls to ensure that their perspectives are solicited and incorporated in the design and implementation of our program. refugees and displaced people are highly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse including sexual violence. we will prioritize, prevention and response of sexual violence along with other life-saving humanitarian assistance and help build critical services such as food distribution, emergency education, cash for work -- cash-for-work programs around women and their needs including reproductive and maternal health care. small steps can have a big impact. for example i talked with women who walked long distances from their refugee camps to find wood for their cooking fires, putting them at great risk of assault and rape. i remember being in a very large

camp in goma in the democratic republic of congo and all the women told me the same thing. than they were in this camp where there were many international ngos and humanitarian relief organizations but they wrestle having to go out on their own to find would to make sure they have an adequate supply of fuel and they were subject to attack when they left the camp. it struck me as strange that we have all these people organized, teams of people to help the women as they went out to protect them, was there a better way that we could pursue to eliminate this problem? we are supporting a global effort to provide cleaner and safer stoves that require less fuel and therefore fewer trips through dangerous territory. the global alliance for clean

cookstoves that we are at the center of creating and expanding is doing research for the national institutes of health because this is a three for one investment. women don't have to stray so far from home or a refugee camp to have fuel to cook the family's food. secondly children and women will not be dying from respiratory diseases which are unfortunately the byproduct of breathing that smoke all day every day sometimes in a very confined spaces and first -- third we will cut down on black carbon and black soot which is that for the environment. we're very focused on bringing this to scale over the next year and have a lot of support in doing so. i realize this national action plan lays out an ambitious agenda that will require a lot of concentrated and coordinated

effort. the fifth focus is institutionalizing this work across the united states government. part of this process we will increase trading for our troops, diplomats and development experts on international human-rights and humanitarian law, protecting civilians, preventing and responding to sexual and gender based violence and, thating trafficing in person. we will update policies and practices across our government because of goal is to fundamentally change the way we do business. the president's executive order direct key department agencies to develop comprehensive strategies to implement the national action plan within five months. let me offer a few specific examples of what this will look like. the state department we have already begun a new initiative on women in africa focused on developing local capacity in countries affected by conflict. its first round of grants will

train women activists and journalists in kenya and early-warning systems for violence supporting new trauma center for rape survivors in sudan, help women in the central african republic actress legal and economic services and improve collection of medical evidence for prosecution of gender based violence in the democratic republic of congo and that is just the beginning because around the world from iraq and afghanistan and south sudan the new transitional the democracies in the middle east and north africa our embassies are developing local strategies to empower women politically, economically and socially. at usaid among other projects we will be launching a new global women's leadership fund in partnership with the consortium for elections and political process strengthening. this will train women activists and civil society leaders and support their participation in peace negotiations, political

transition and democratic institutions. we are also stepping up our efforts to, that human trafficking and conflict zones. the department of defense which helped develop the national action plan will have a lead role in implementing it. the fact that both sandy winnefeld and michele flournoy are here, reflect we have learned in ten years and deep understanding about the link between the security and agency of women and the peace and stability of nations. by working with partner military's the pentagon will build on the excellent work already underway in places like afghanistan where our provisional reconstruction team to engage with communities to curb violence against women, and female immolation. in the democratic republic of congo where africom experts are trading local soldiers to protect human rights and prevent sexual and gender based

violence. am very proud that we have several female flag and general officers with us today living proof of how important women are to american national security. in today's military women are leading carrier strike group's leaders like the tiexiera strike groups and numbered air forces. they are on the frontlines defending our country responding to disasters and working with our allies and our partners. in other parts of the government also stepping forward. the centers for disease control and prevention is launching a new system to monitor sexual and gender based violence in 20 countries. the department of justice is working with police prosecutors, judges and jail workers around the world to increase accountability for sexual violence and human trafficking. the list goes on. suffice it to say this is truly a hole of government effort as well as an international effort. national action plan will help us work with allies and partners here at home as well as abroad.

i am delighted by the announcement about georgetown's leadership. there could be a better institution to lead the way in the academic work that is necessary around these issues. in fact more than 30 countries have already developed their own national action plans. nato is factoring women and their needs into key planning processes and training courses stationing gender experts throughout operational headquarters and deplaned females engagement teams to afghanistan where the alliance is training local women to serve in the security forces. in 2012, 10% of the afghan military academy's class will be women. by 2014 afghanistan expects to feel 5,000 women afghan national police officers. united nations is also making important progress building on

resolution 1325. with strong u.s. support the security council has already adopted more additional resolutions on women and security in just the past three years. last month the general assembly's third committee adopted a new u.s. lead resolution to encourage greater political participation for women and an expanded role in making and keeping peace. the establishment of a new organization within the u.n. system focused on gender called you and women headed by the former president of chile. making an important focus. special representative for sexual violence in conflict, a step which strongly supported and the department of peacekeeping operations steadily improved its guidance to peacekeeping in order to offer

protection and leadership as key training components. why is all this happening? all these countries. the united nations, nato and certainly us. the reason is because we are convinced we have enough anecdotal evidence and research that demonstrates women and peacekeeping is the right thing to do and the smart thing as well. it is right because after all women are affected disproportionately by conflict. they deserve to participate in decisions that shape their own lives and it is the smart thing because we have seen again and again that women participating in these processes build more durable peace. as strong as the case is it is true that the question of just how women contribute to peace and security aside from the high-profile women who sits at the table or the nation's leader that makes the piece, what is it

that women themselves across the board can do? this does deserve far more quantitative research and rigorous study. that is why georgetown's plan to establish an institute for women peace security and development what -- support scholarships and research as well as out reach, will help us elevate public understanding of this important matter. it will be a home for primary source material such as oral history and quality analysis that will help activists and leaders as well. i can't wait to see it up and going. a new push on research and data collection will be particularly useful to us as we implement our own national action plan. of course we know the change will come easily and it won't come quickly. to ensure we are headed in the right direction, that our strategies are effective and sustainable we have to be able to measure what we are doing and that means developing sound

metrics to guide us. so thanks to georgetown for taking on this really important task. let me close by telling you about one woman whose experiences and accomplishments somebody much of what we are discussing today and that is our special guest, the president of kosovo. she is here with us today and i have been able to spend some wonderful time with her over the last few days and in meetings before she came. and that won't let carol tell you how young she is but she has accomplished a great deal in a very short period. the future president was still a student when war tore apart her homeland. i will never forget those days, meeting kosovar families in a refugee camp, meeting others in europe, hearing their stories and be forced from their homes

at gunpoint. personal hunted a in the eyes of a doctor who was literally chased from caring for her patients. they're returnable conflict and i am very proud of the world united states played in ending of violence. after finishing her studies this young woman who would not have been identified as a future president of an independent kosovo went to work as a police officer. so she could help keep the peace and protect her community. she worked closely with international troops, earned the respect of her colleagues both on the front lines and in the offices where decisions were made and he earned the trust of her fellow citizens, men and women alike. she rose through the ranks quickly, eventually helping lead the new kosovo police force. earlier this year she became the first woman elected president of

kosovo and also the first woman elected president anywhere in the balkans. since then she has sown--shown consistent leadership and work to bring her country together. behind a program of good governance, will of law, ethnic reconciliation and regional stability. she has also stood up for the rights and opportunities of kosovo's women and as she explained that a recent investment conference with women entrepreneurs she understands the role that women must play in increasing regional prosperity and security. like so many women around the world, president atifete jahjega endured the pain of war and determined to secure the benefits of peace. kosovo is better off because she insisted on being part of the solution. our goal together should be to

open that opportunity anywhere that peace and stability are threatened so they can contribute to lasting security to their community and their country. that is what this national action plan is all about and that is now the mission and redoubled purpose of our own government. and it is the future of peacemaking. there is so much to be done and i know that many of you who are studying at georgetown have a future ahead of you of being among the peacemakers and keepers. in government and ngos and multilateral institutions and the nation's military, in academia, we need you and we welcome your commitment to this great struggle of the twenty-first century in procuring peace, equally, prosperity and opportunity in

the context of freedom and democracy for people everywhere. thank you for deciding to be part of the solution and i look forward to taking some questions about how we can chart this new approach together. [applause] [applause] >> secretary clinton has agreed to take two questions. so we will begin with you. please introduce yourself and say where you are from. >> my name is emily. imus second year master of science and foreign service to and and i'm originally from maryland. i was wondering how reaction

plan will deal with the cultural sensitive issues of -- including cultural norms and sensitivities within the plant and how it might have implementation mechanism that might take into account any potential backlash. >> that is an excellent question and of course it is something we think about all the time and it is really a -- along a spectrum of actions and reactions. of course we understand that there are differences that are historic and cultural importance in many places around the world. many of those we respect and we try to be very sensitive to the legitimate concerns that people have about protecting what they value in their own societies. but there are certain actions that are beyond any cultural

norm. beating women is not cultural. it is criminal and it needs to be addressed and treated as such. [applause] and then there are those historic practices like female circumcision that have been around for centuries or honor killings which serve the purpose in a prior time that we believe we must address by demonstrating how come productive, how destructive they are of the very fabric of the society that is being affected by them. so when you look at the work we did in san a goal, we point to the great difficulties women had bearing children. bearing children is high priority. if you are doing something that

you have inherited from centuries before that now to date you know is destructive and undermining of an even higher priority, namely having children and producing the next generation, you begin the conversation not in an accusatory fashion but in an effort to try to have a dialogue about what works today that perhaps didn't. a lot of people if you look at the series "mad men" or smoking madly when it became three irrefutable that doing so would shorten your life and we learned second hand smoke might shorten other people's lives. there are things we learn that can't be viewed as somehow outside of the historical and even cultural framework. so we are aware of the sensitivities and what we try to

do is wherever possible have a respectful dialogue. training and programmatic approaches we support through u.s. aid and other institutions. certainly attempt to do that but there are certain areas where you cannot accommodate. you cannot be sensitive. have to draw lines. we are looking for how to do that. in this area of women, peace and security, we are acquiring a body of evidence about the role that women play. women played a very critical role in ending the northern ireland troubles and ending the civil wars in central america and ending the liberian war that adjustment and and being part of peacemaking in other conflicts throughout the world. so we have both an argument as to it being an important goal

but we also have evidence that points to tactics and strategies about how you achieve that goal. so i am hopeful that we will get a broader discussion. finally, i would say that when people said their own goals, norms and values and violate them, it provides an opening for discussion not only coming from the outside but from within. certainly the scenes we are seeing out of egypt today should be first and foremost distressing to egyptian and not to us or others before the egyptian people themselves. the promise, of the beauty of the revolutionary aspirations that everyone watched unfold,

for terrier square. the restraint of security forces on how they responded, all of that was very promising and it was held up by the egyptian people, leaders and citizens alike as to what a new egypt would look like. scenes of cat -- coptic christian protecting muslims while praying and muslims protecting coptic christians while tests that this was egyptian. when countries are running afoul of their own self, when a great country with such a history as egypt is seeing unfold before their eyes this kind of violence, vendor needs to be a reaction from within. women's voices need to be heard and women need to be protected. they assume a position at every table in the country to make decisions about the future.

there is no formula or guidebook that you can look at but those are the general principles by which we try to think through and do our work. [applause] >> one more question. introduce yourself. >> i am mark legand and i have a bachelor of science and i am thankful that the lancasters on the advisory board. a question that is informed by ambassador dukakis's predecessor in the state department. eyes are there that prevention is as important as the activity after words after the gender crimes and human-rights abuses. the latest your emphasis on prevention, getting women involve upfront in preservation. you rollout a presidential plan. i would imagine that the prevention matters would be the one that would be the hardest to

maintain the momentum on for implementation. what do you think you can do to look at that prevention side and make sure that sticks through the years? >> great question. obviously it is something we work on a lot that -- what often happens -- is not just in international affairs but also in our own domestic resource allocation, very often prevention gets short shrift because you deal with the crisis and it is a circular argument. we could have avoided the crisis if we spend more on prevention. is one of those conundrums we face in policy across the board. certainly in this particular area of women, peace and security the more we can invest in prevention, broadly defined, there are problems we think work. there are interventions like the global cocoa -- global alliance for clean cookstoves that can prevent women from being a

soldier were killed as they seek firewood. there are programs that support ngos and other government efforts to protect and empower women. so we have to be smart about what we invest in, especially in these budgetary times but really any time we need to be and we also need the metric, measurable outcomes. we have to be quite clear about this. we can't continue supporting programs because we know the people and we like them or because they worked ten years ago but they are not working today. we have to be creative and innovative and very clear. i don't think we have some tools we are beginning to understand how to use and the cellphone and the internet. equipment women with cellphone this so that they can get information in real time about matters that are important to

them empower them in ways that we couldn't have imagined a few short years ago. getting information to go to your area of trafficking trying to get broader information about what to look out for. be aware of and don't accept that nanny job or that factory job without really going to the source of information. there are a lot of ways since cellphone usage is exploding all over the world that we can be smart about how we use technology to empower women to protect themselves. prevention is going to be a major killer of this whole policy that we are developing and we are looking for good ideas. we're looking for good outcomes. as part of the q d r that i commissioned two years ago that we are now implementing in the state department and usaid we have to be quicker and the

evaluation. something on steinberg and 13 have zero -- have -- more real-time information to support what works and no longer support what doesn't work so that we can shift those scarce resources somewhere else. i think that we know for sure that making a changes in laws that give women an economic stake protects women. it is a prevention strategy. since 60% to 70% of the farmers in the world are women in africa, asia, latin america, and many in many places particularly in africa if a woman's husband dies, for father dies they -- she cannot inherit the property she spent years working on and the primary harvester of the crops. changing that gives women a

status that protect them and gives the mistake that is recognizable. if a woman shows up and says i own land in this province and on want to be part of helping to resolve this conflict, then that carries a higher status than if you show up and say i'm a market lady and so vegetables that somebody else grows. all of this is part of the cultural do you that we have to understand better and i think we are getting smarter about it and we hope that prevention will always be up there with other strategic priorities. thank you. [applause] [applause]

.. two national electorate. television, network, forecast televisions come down for a 50 million euros to 10 years ago to 25, 26 million today.

newspaper viewership is down. it is remarkably difficult to communicate any kind of a message to the public. slogans beat details. to me this is one of the truths i learned in recent politics that you cannot communicate details. it is on the detailed side of the issue -- >> i look at "legacy of george washington." we talk with residential historian, norton richard nortoh how the immaculate dress. famou

>> we are going to open up this very famous painting from 1851 have seen this . at some point in their lives. and we're talking about this today because it occurred on december 25, 235 years ago. and on this day, the following day, 235 years ago, the battle of trenton, which was decisive for the new nation as it pursued its independence. richard norton smith, author of a book about george washington called "patriarch" is here to talk about george washington's presidential leadership skills and the lepping a he's left to today's presidents. thanks for coming back. in 1993, you gaye us an interview on that book, and you said at that time that george washington was your favorite president. you've done a lot of presidential work since then. is he still your favorite? guest: boy, that's such a

charged word. let's put it this way. here's an evasive answer. he's the one president of whom it can be said that if he had not been president, we would not be having this conversation. host: what do you mean by that? guest: he was, as james famously said, the indispensible man. he defined the office. in many ways, he defined a nation. that painting is iconic for a number of reasons. and it shows washington, the risk taker. we often tend to think of him as the reflection of a conservative or even something of a aristocrat. washington was conducting, in some ways, a guerrilla war by christmas of 1776, and very few people would have taken the chances that he took that

night, knowing that if he failed, the odds were the revolution would be snuffed out. host: we hope you'll want to talk presidential history, specifically about george washington and his legacy. our phone lines are open on this december 26, and you can also tweet your comments to us or send us one by email. we'd love to have you involved. our c-span audience always enjoys talking history. "the washington post" actually gave front page above the fold to coverage and photographs of the reenactment of washington's crossing, which is reenacted every year in the town of washington crossing pennsylvania. more than 168 reenact fors participated yesterday. guest: it's a wonderful story, too. obviously it was no accident of timing. over the weekend, i don't know if some of the viewers may have seen the alternate picture of the crossing. there's an artist who's very well known for his civil war paintings, and he was commissioned to do a -- kind of an alternate and more

historically authentic portrayal of the crossing. and it bears very little resemblance to the picture we've all grown up with. host: i wish we had a color photograph. this is the "new york times" from saturday, but it is a simpler version of it. it is fleeting when he's on the river. guest: yeah, it started raining, and then it turned to snow, and then it turned to sleet. so the weather was abysmal. if you've been to the delaware and what is today washington crossing, you realize the river is not very wide. it's about 300 yards across. whereas in the painting, it seems almost like the ocean. likewise, you see virtual icebergs in the version of the delaware, and that's want how ice freezes. it's much more the sheet of ice that we're all familiar with. the flag that you see over washington's shoulder in the painting did not exist at the time of the crossing.

there are a number of other inaccuracies. host: was george washington the general of the same as george washington the president, or did he develop additional leadership skills along the way? guest: well, i think they're inseparable. i think he was, for all intents and purposes, he was president. i certainly was the executive, as well as the military leader during the war. remember, in some ways, the most important thing to keep in mind about washington and the government that he bequeathed to us was that it is a limited government. and that is particularly demonstrated in the fact that not once, but twice he voluntarily walked away from supreme power. he did it at the end of the revolution and, of course, he famously did it at the end of two terms as president. host: he, as a communicator, we think so much today about the importance of communication. was he, in effect, a communicator? guest: he was not a great

communicator, which wasn't to say a great deal of attention wasn't paid to his public pronounce ams. they were as carefully orchestrated as a major presidential speech would be today. the classic example is the farewell address, which actually went through several drafts over a period of several years. but washington himself was not comfortable delivering speakers. he stayed away from prompt few remarks, which is something that politicians today probably might profit from. it was not something that came naturally. host: thanks to the internet, "new york times" has the color version. here's had a it looks like in all its colorful glory. as we look at that, we're going to go to our first telephone call to talk about george washington's presidential leadership legacy. tucson, gary, republican, good morning. caller: good morning.

i wanted to ask your guest a question. george washington underwent many physical and mental hardships during his time. but how much impact do you think benedict arnold's actions had on him when he was second in command? guest: that's a great question, because i think it was a pivotal and shattering experience. washington did not give his trust quickly or easily, and i think it became exponentially harder for him to do so after the betrayal of arnold. americans tend to forget, he was a hero on the continental side early in the war. host: having fought a war for independence, was he then a nationalist or an internationalist?

guest: well, he was a nationalist, but again -- and we get into the age-old debate about isolationism, washington for years was trotted out supposedly as the author of a farewell address of entangling alliances by isolationist. he actually use would the phrase permanent alliance. and what he was talking about was, you have to remember, the united states was a raw, feeble power. the united states army numbered all of 600 men in 1789. it has been mauled by indians along the northwest frontier. the last thing in the world that the united states could afford was to get sucked into europe's ongoing squirrels, particularly between the british and french -- quarrels, particularly between the british and french. so, when washington is talking about avoiding permanent alliances, he's talking about the dangers of becoming alive

militarily with one world power against the other. host: here's a bit more from washington's farewell address -- host: what's the message? guest: well, washington was a man above party. he was perhaps the only american president who had the luxury of being above party. he used to say men's politics are as variant as their faces. and just as acceptable as the product of nature. but again, you have to remember, washington's presidency is an exercise in buying time. what he wanted to avoid were

these sent rig al forces. for example, americans were loyal to the french revolution. some americans were loyal to the english. and having that conflict play itself out on the streets of america as it did, we think of washington as this revered, god-like figure who was also above criticism. not so. ofingse burned in of gee on the streets of philadelphia, and he came in for more than his share of criticism in the press. host: washington never governed in washington, d.c., new york first, and then philadelphia. judy or thom tweets us, the most noble thing george washington did was give up his power under his thumb. a less moral man, and we would have a king. we're talking about george washington's legacy. woodstock, illinois, lydia, good morning to you. caller: good morning, thank you. i would like to know if there's a powerful connection to the

pledge that washington took as a freemason, and the fact that when it happened, disenfranchised from power and government. he's wearing the freemason apron as he lays the cornerstone, and for me, i'll take credit or blame for this possible theory, there's no small coincidence that the image on that apron is similar to the king's stone. you contrast that with the queen post, the king post versus the queen post. i don't think it's any small coincidence that we don't have an elizabeth or isabella or cleopatra women who have exercised power, and i wonder if there's a possible connection with the pledge that was given to the freemasons. host: thank you. guest: i wouldn't see the connection. i can tell you that washington in many ways was ahead of his contemporaries in taking women

seriously. in fact, the woman who probably had the most was perhaps was persuading him against his wishes to run for a second term . it was the wife of a philadelphia measure chanted, former mayor, and someone whose political views, not just social owner men station, washington took seriously enough to be guided by. host: winston-salem, north carolina, frank is a democrat. caller: yes. did george washington have any lob hobbies later on in his life? guest: that's a great question. washington loved the theater. washington's great passion was agriculture. farmer washington, he was called. host: we have a picture of mount vernon we can show as you're talking. guest: sure. he was also an amateur architect. if you work at mount vernon, that was his great passion. he built up that estate.

eventually he had about 8,000 acres surrounding five separate farms. he would ride every day 14 miles around his acres, checking up on other operations. that's the room that he added the great public room with the played upwindow that he added at the beginning of the revolution as a kind of stage setting. that's the room where he was, for example, formerly notified of his election to the presidency. that's the room where he and mrs. washington entertained the endless stream of visitors who popped into mount vernon with no ticket of admission other than their curiosity to see the most famous man on earth. host: talking about george washington on these couple of days in december that were very important. he also died in december. how did he die?

guest: he died rather miserably. you might say, a lethally sore throat. it was a disease, a contraction of the throat. today he could have been saved by antibiotics. he died -- host: how old was he? guest: he was 67. washington was very cognizant of living on borrowed time. his whole presidency, washington men died often in their 40's. host: he also gave us the two-term presidency. guest: he did. again, washington's example was so powerful that 150 years went by, and world war ii intervened before an american president, in effect, dared break that tradition. of course, in 1940, franklin roosevelt successfully ran for a third term. host: freeport new jersey, pat, republican, good morning. caller: hi.

i think you just answered my question, because i wanted to touch on the two-term limit that washington set up as tradition, and i thought that prior to 1940, there were a couple of presidents who thought third term or talked about seeking third terms, and they were rebuffed by either their party or by the voters. and i'm wondering if you could address that, thanks. host: yes, right you are. this woman's a budding historian. ulysses grant came back four years after his second term and tried to win a republican nomination 1880, was unsuccessful. of course, theodore roosevelt in 1912 sought the republican nomination and then split the party and ran on a third-party ticket. host: we're getting quite a few tweets with people talking about george washington as the slave holder. guest: sure. well, george washington actually employed more people in mount vernon that -- than

did he in the entire executive branch of the government. host: how large was the executive branch at that point? guest: it was fewer than 200. obviously the difference is he didn't own the people who worked for him in the executive branch of government. his attitude on slavery, you know, books and books and books have been written about it. and i don't want to oversimplify that, but i would argue, if you look at the overall arch of washington's attitude about slavery and race, that washington outgrew much of the racism of the surroundings that produced him. and, in fact, famously, he's one of the few founders who, in his will, went out of his way to see to it that the slaves, a majority of whom, would not only be freed, but would -- and

here he broke the law in virginia -- would be educated as well. host: gary, indiana, stephen, independent. good morning. caller: hello. earlier in the show, you explained how it was very important that george washington was elected the first president. how different would america have been had anyone else been elected, like the federalist john adams been president instead, or the anti-federalist, george clinton, or anyone else like alexander hamilton, if he had been president? how would that have changed america from what we have now to what we had in case someone else was the first president. i'll take my answer off line. guest: sure. that's a great question. obviously there's no definitive way to answer it, except this -- i would actually take your inquiry back. let's go back to the constitutional convention when the delegates were designing this office. no one quite knew what a

president was. was it a republican with a small r, monarch, what was it? and arguably you can make the case, the reason that the constitution got written and approved and ultimately ratified was because of a nation that just revoted against what it saw as the abuse of executive power in the form of a british monarch, believed one man, and that was george washington. so i can't receive of an american presidency without washington. i'm not sure i can skee of a constitutional republic without washington. host: speaking of john adams, who was his vice president, did he set the stage for the role of vice presidents with what tasks he gave him? guest: poor adams. he ringers in the shadow of not

only of washington, but of jefferson as well. he is representative. he wants the first unhappy vice president, and virtually everyone who's held the offense since has followed in adams' footsteps. he had an up and down relationship with washington. there were times, frankly, when he was easily moved to anger. he was known to refer to washington as old muttonhead. abigail adams resent the double standard, that is now, people who wouldn't criticize the president directed their criticism at the vice president. but imagine having to succeed george washington. there is a great saying, one of the great tableaus in american history. in march 1887, when washington is leaving, and he attends the inauguration, we've come through this great turning point of peaceful transition of

power from one president to another, and, of course, adams realizes everyone's sleeping, and they're all there because of washington, but not there because of -- they're there because of the setting, not washington tried to be as inconspicuous as he could. he could not be inconspicuous. host: we have a decision from our colleagues of george .ashington's adentures they look pretty painful. it asks whether he used -- had a terrible pain and was dosed with an opium

derivatives regularly. it does not seem to have impaired his presidency. host: next is hendersonville, north carolina, william, democrats line. caller: i am calling from hendersonville. i am very delighted with your program this morning and you're having richard norton smith on. the question i wanted to ask is what was george washington's affiliation with the episcopal church or what we now know in america as the episcopal church? i have been to the church in alexandria, i think.

where there is a pew mark of a george washington. i just wondered how is he fit into that scene? host: thanks so much alexandria claims george washington in lots of displaces. guest: in old town alexandria, washington did attend services at christchurch. he was a vested member there. there are stories about his christianity. some say that almost never took communion. there are those who believed it was a formalistic tie that he had to the third, the tide with

his status in society. i'd think it was more than that, something that evolved. if you look at what he went through, the crises, the agonies, the anguish, the fact that this country was every day on the brink of extinction and that before he became president. i think washington over and time and found that he had a different view of christianity. it became much more personal form of solace and inspiration that perhaps some of the critics believe. host: next, republican in naples, florida. caller: good morning and thanks for c-span. i think that george washington was one of the greatest presidents. i read the book that new gingrich wrote.

it said that at the end of the war there was a young lad that had crossed the stream and helped to win the war of 1776. i am 91 years old. if i make a mistake, i am sorry. george washington said to his men, called the young man and said he will be decorated to the highest. he was supposed to have had a purple heart and everything. the people called him that he had pneumonia and died. george washington now stand prayed for the young man. i have always had a good feeling toward george washington. when i went to school in a one- run school in a covered wagon. at our school we had a flag on the back of wall and on the

wall/alonof the they had chapel and prayed every morning. >> thank you. we love to have viewers of your age watching. now, what can you tell about his bullish until with women, based on that call? -- his relationship with women? guest: go online and read the farewell address if you want a final boword on george washington and religion. he writes that he believes it is indispensable. there is nothing formalistic about his wording. host: another dress, his first inaugural, here is a quote.

"there's no truth more thoroughly exacted -- guest: there's idealism and -- john f. kennedy called himself an idealist without illusion. george washington could use the same words. he understood that he was dealing with human beings. he said at one time that post believe you cano ose who e said the po believe you can win a war on selfishness -- that made him a gifted leader of men. he was a great psychologist. he certain we never would technology was a politician.

but politicians, first and foremost, have unique insight into what motivates and inspires him beings to go beyond the norm. over and over again that is what washington did in the war and as president. host: mr. smith is a long time consulting historian for our projects as a c-span and was involved with our contenders series. 14 people that lost the presidency but shaped american history. thomas dewey is featured tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern. all the rest of the week we will continue to run this. it was a fun project. guest: it was. i learned a lot. host: here's a question from linda on twitter -- guest: yes, but there was also

great ambition and some vanity. i don't know of those qualities can coexist. humility in what counts? we were talking earlier about death and kim jong il. i don't think anyone would suggest public utility was kim jong il's style. george washington understood cy of populartimate t government required to limitation of power and tenure on the part of those serving. he was on the human. host: you will probably like this question from twitter. guest: i don't think he had irish roots. you can go to suffolk in england

and c.b. ancestral home -- see the ancestral home. washington had red hair as well as hamilton and the marquis day lafayette -- >> host: now this question from a viewer by e mate. can you tell me what books george washington liked? i know he read a philosopher named seneca and i noticed he did what he did in the 6th century and stepped down. >> guest: the farmer called away from his plow to serve his country, and then returning to the acres. washington was much more of a reader than people think. he read fiction. he loved the theater. you're right. he read seneca, a key in many ways to his philosophy. most of all, though, he read

books about farming. he was a very practical self-improver. >> host: was there a consensus on the part of the american public that his suppression of the whiskey rebellion was constitutional? >> guest: deep into the second term, a host of fishers developed, and there were in all but named, there were political parties, and there was certainly many of those who believed that washingtonfuls guilty of overstepping bounds, and, indeed of posing a danger to the liberties of his countrymen. expwhrs a number of viewers sending us washington quotes via twitter. "it's impossible to rightly govern a nation without god and the bible."

from philadelphia, independent. >> caller: it's testament to washington's character that the followers -- we see history, people like that dnapolian, and they seem to want to hold on to power. is it true he once said that he could not become -- despite george the iii to become george the i? >> guest: i don't know. it's a great sound bite. whether he said it, it's how he lived. i know george iii said if washington was serious about voluntarily releasing power at the end of the revolution, then he was the greatest man on earth, and king george iii was not given to making complementary references to his enemy. >> host: good morning? >> caller: can you hear me all

right? >> host: sure can. >> caller: you kind of stole my -- i was looking at -- i'm assuming you were a redhead as a young man -- >> guest: what makes you think i'm no longer a young man. >> caller: my question was to be -- washington was a red hair, and wasn't jefferson redhead >> guest: he was indeed. the redhead league gave us america. >> host: was gw a heavy drinker? >> guest: agree yet. he owned a distiller ri, one of the few, but that's washington trying to make mount vernon profitable, taking to make a business from the estate. it's funny. we have accounts from senators in pennsylvania who went to

these weekly dinners that the president had in philadelphia, and it was noted that after two glasses of champaigne, the president became positively merry. >> host: positively merry. >> guest: wouldn't you love to say that? >> host: was he the first to create a cabinet, and how did he do that, and does his formation of the cabinet still affect us today? >> guest: absolutely. great question. it goes to the heart of his native political genius. the constitution says nothing about a cabinet. washington created it out of thin air to be a kind of privy counsel, but having created it, then what's fascinating is how he used it because he brought into it what turned out to be, of course, the ultimate political philosophical adversaries with alexander and hamilton, and they kept both in

that cabinet long after each one wanted out. again, washington is trying as much as possible to have the formal creation of political parties. he's trying to hang on to the spirit of unity from the war. >> host: sal tweets if you're interested in seeing the distillery, you can go to the c-span video library. we have lots of materials about george washington in the video library if you are interested in touring the sites associated with him and all presidents as a matter of fact. speaking of presidents, you do some tours with people who are interested in getting on a bus and visiting sites for themselves. >> guest: yeah. >> host: what's the next one? >> guest: june 8th. it's a nine day lincoln tour beginning in lexington, kentucky and visiting his birthplace and a host of sites in indiana, his

boyhood home in illinois, all the sites in springfield, new salem, and places north, and general grants home as well. herbert hoover birthplace and presidential library in iowa and other things along the way, so there's a website if people are interested. go to www.presidentsandpatriots.com. it's all one word. >> host: how many people go? >> guest: between 35 and 40, and i think we have about 10 spaces left. >> host: greenfield, south carolina, hello to barry. good morning. >> caller: yeah, good morning, good morning, c-span, thank you for c-span. i like looking at comparisons, and i like to know how you compare president obama to george washington thinking about the fact that washington was first president and president obama was the first black

president, and first of all, washington took over the country when the country was in turmoil, and obama did the same thing because we were in financial turmoil, and we're still trying to recover, and i'd like to know your comparing'ses, thank you. >> guest: well, there are some parallels. i mean, for example presidents, like we talked about earlier, you know, washington sometimes in some ways is kind of a patron saint for modern embattled presidents because it turns out he was widely criticized, harshly criticized, some say unfairly criticized as any president since. that whole relationship between the president and the media is something that is ever green. washington traveled around the country in trips that were as cor graphed as anything president obama might do today.

you know, it's interesting. it's speculation, but washington did tell someone after he left office before his death in 1799 that the one thing that really worried him about a long term survival of the united states was slavery, and that unless we found a way, of peacefully and over time to eliminate slavery, he feared that there would be a great civil war, and, of course, he turned out to be precedent. i think if washington could come back today, he would feel no small amount of pride that problems as we still have, that we've come as far as we have on the issue of race. >> host: three minutes left on the relationship with congress, and did he use executive orders? >> guest: everything he did set a precedent. he took literally the consent clause of the constitution so in

august of 1789, a treaty with georgia indians, he goes to congress in front of senate waiting for them to device and concept, and now senators made up their own rules, and they didn't take into account the wish #* wishes of the executive. washington lost his temper, regained composure, walked out, and ever since presidents have submitted treaties and other diplomatic agreements quite differently. he did say on the way out of federal hall i'll be damned if i ever do that again. >> host: maverick on twitter wants to know what would washington be considered today, a republican, democratic, independent, tea party, or occupy wall street? >> guest: i get asked that all the time. it's literally impossible. look at the farewell address. for example, he talks about

debt, which he doesn't like, but at the same time, he talks about the necessity, however unpopular, of taxes to pay off the debt, so you go figure. >> host: you have to answer this. a lot of people are really interested in those pieces. i have to tell you. there's a number of tweets saying they have read that his dentures were made out of the teeth of his slaves. >> guest: actually, there was a set. it is true. it is a horrifying, but quite accurate bit of history. >> host: west palm beach, florida, john, democrat. >> caller: a pleasure. as a child in grade school, when i went to school, a picture of washington and also a picture of lincoln, and you really don't realize until you get older, and the older i get, how great he really is, and he is considered the greatest president by me. do we know what he sounded like is my first question, and the

second question is did the average person speak with the elegance of the founding fathers like washington? did they write that way, or was that just the upper class that spoke that way? >> guest: great questions. we think that washington, one reason why washington was uncomfortable in a public speaking role was he just -- he was not very good at it. first of all, there are those who say that his dental problems affected his voice. secondly, as a young man -- well, he'd be prone to pulmonary complaints, and the combination of illnesses actually played havoc. you'd see a majestic god-like figure before you, but he didn't have the majestic god-like voice. that's also true, by the way, of thomas jefferson. the other question? >> host: i only remember

sounded like. let me -- running out of time. let me ask this, the next segment is back to modern elections, learning about access to voting rights and help america vote act so this ties in, a tweet that asks george washington reportedly enticed people to his campaign events by offering them free beer. can he comment on that and on campaign finance in general at this time? >> guest: first time he ran for the house, he came in third, and that was attributed in part to his refusal to comply with the custom of the day which was to provide liquid refreshment to the voters. the next time around -- george washington always learned from his mistake, and this was no exception. >> host: how about campaign finance in general at that time? >> guest: i think he'd be appalled. i mean, -- >> host: how were elections financed in the earliest days of the republic? >> guest: money was less of an issue because you got to buy --

you didn't have to buy ads. what you did was have your own newspapers. these were fought out in highway partisan newspapers, and since he was often the victim of those newspapers, it's not surprising that he was not a big fan of the system. >> host: always fun to talk presidential history with you=na big fan of that system. host:

>> guest: they end up compromising on the temperature and get back up to where nixon, the idea was they didn't want to sweat. the nixon people saw him sweat perfusely in the debate, and they didn't want that to happen again. they knew what was going on. it's about who was going to rule america. >> this weekend, abc news interviews chris matthews on jack kennedy, on "after words" saturday night on c-span2's booktv.

>> so, with our new hampshire primary coverage getting underway, tonight on 8 eastern on c-span, we talked today with the political director in new hampshire about the latest poll numbers and where the candidates stand. >> host: joining us now is james political directer of the wmur tv in manchester, new

hampshire. >> guest: good morning. >> host: talk to us about the latest poll and what it's showing. as many other polls reveal, it's got mitt romney with the sizable lead. take us from there. >> guest: mitt romney has a sizable lead at 4 # -- 41%. second place in the poll which we stopped calling people on six o'clock sunday night, released the poll 11 p.m. news on sunday night, showed ron paul still strong in second place, and with rick santorum and jon huntsman tied at 11%, and following them is newt gingrich, so you really do see a race that's really shaping up for second, third, and fourth, and even possibly fifth place in this state. what's changed, i think, since

sunday, is a lot of momentum and buzz and interest among those classic, undecided voters towards jon huntsman. in fact, the key question this morning is whether or not jon huntsman has overcome ron paul. it's not like ron paul's voters are going away. they are hard core with him. the question is on the poll sunday night, we had 56% of likely primary voters still deciding and where would they fall, and it looks like a number of them are late deciding to vote for jon huntsman. >> host: have there been developments in the last couple of days that could influence voters? there's debates over the weekend and joking on twitters there's back to back debate.

how does that affect the next few days? >> guest: it's influential, and while there may have been other debates for entertainment value or to be informed, new hampshire voters here really like to meet their candidates, and so maybe they met them at a house party or town hall meeting, but what you saw over the weekend were an explosion in the amount of people showing up to the events which is typical, but people taking a more serious tone when they watch these debates, when they watch news coverage to say, okay, find, beyond getting to know who that person is or the story line of the campaign, a decision to make, and they make that decision 15% of them making the decision today. >> host: james pendel, political director of wmur tv. you can phone in this morning.

if you live in new hampshire, 202-628-0184. what about the other candidates? you mentioned that there's a race shaping up for slots two, three, and four, and possibly lower down. who else is in play right now? what are you seeing from candidates like newt gingrich and rick perry? >> guest: look, following the iowa caucuses, there's a lot of conversation about what this meant for rick santorum, as you know narrowly lost to mitt romney in iowa, and would he be able to come in here with a full head of steam and become the obvious anti mitt romney race. that has not happened sort of because of rick santorum and the demographics of the new

hampshire electorat that is not like iowa in that case, but newt gingrich has not gone away. he has a strong campaign here although it's a fairly new organization that only really started in late november, but he's polling well here, having good crowds, and as you know, went right directly to south carolina, really has a flat line campaign. in fact, in the last poll, he was just 1%, and former louisiana governor and former congressman, buddy roemer who doesn't qualify for the debates, he's pulling ahead of texas governor, rick perry, at 3%, so there's a number of candidates down, where there's still a lot of competition and questions, even though it may not be as consequential in terms of who comes in fifth versus who comes in second. >> host: getting to the phone, steve in chicago on the democrats' line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. how are you?

>> host: good, did right ahead. >> caller: good. thank you. i just wanted to let you guys no i'm from chicago, and i'm really pulling for ron paul. i'm a liberal, families' all liberal democrats. i found out this morning new hampshire's motto is live flee or die. that sounds great. i hope they all vote for ron paul and have a good day. thank you. >> guest: look, ron paul in terms of the early primary states, five or four of iowa, new hampshire, south carolina, nevada, and florida, this is probably the one state where he's the strongest. he has a very good organization though in nevada, but in terms of new hampshire, he's putting his foot down here. he's consistently been in second place over the course of say, the last month, and he will have a good showing here. we expect that later tonight. >> host: looking at newt gingrich who you mentioned a moment ago and the role that money's playing in the campaign. there's a story in "usa today"

las vegas billionaire banks on newt gingrich. the las vegas billionaire pumping $5 million into a group backing newt gingrich is refusely competitive mogul making a mark in republican politics. the casino business and foreign policy for years and helped underwrite political ambitions of newt gingrich to launch a non-profit group, american solutions for winning the future to advance the republicans' political causes in the years after newt gingrich won congress. there's a story in the "new york times" saying for newt gingrich, a rich friend and big lift, super pack donation shows the court impact of the supreme court's decision giving packs more free reign. there's a last minute injection of cash by mr. adalson and says that underscores how last year's campaign finance made it possible for wealthy individuals

to influence a race. james, how is money playing into what candidates have been able to do in new hampshire? >> guest: you know, it really has not played a significant role. we're in almost uncharted territory in this generation of politicians and certainly myself where we had, as you know, campaign finance laws that were first introduced after watergate, and we're almost now in a situation where those -- any campaign finance rules really don't exist. we had just one candidate, for example, who applied for matching funds as a candidate. i mentioned buddy roemer, but when it comes to this presidential primary process, it's important to note that nobody drops out because they lose states. they drop out because their campaign is broke, and what we saw with the citizens united supreme court decision is that that sort of changes the rules. now we have a case where newt gingrich could come in fourth,

possibly even fifth in the new hampshire primary tonight, but because of donations like this $5 million coming in, he can continue to stay in the race, so with jon huntsman for your new hampshire specific question is the only new area where we've actually seen a single pack come in and spend a lot of money, which is the pro jon huntsman super pack largely funded by his father. where candidates typically in the past needed to perform well enough to move on from past iowa to new hampshire and those two states don't pick presidents and dwippedding down the feel --

convince one person, his father to put him in the race, you have all of these other candidates on the ballot, and mitt romney, not the strongest candidate may win. >> caller: i'm a ron paul supporter, but i want to make several comments and have this fellow respond to them. in large part, the national media are elected officials, in other words, it's not got a lot to do with the ballot. what i heard is the next

presidential election will cost about a a billion dollars. who spends a billion dollars 20 acquire a -- to acquire a $400,000 a year job. i wonder why part of the reason they need all of the money is to run all of these television ads. let's take the money out of this rat hole, and i'd like to hear your observations, sir, because i value your opinion. thank you. >> guest: well, number one, in terms of the national media dictating who our elected officials are, that's the beauty, and i'm biased, but that's the beauty of the iowa and new hampshire system where you have people who can come in who are national political figures who are able to raise

much more than their competition, and they come in these states, and there's magic. there's spontaneous moments where you have to personally connect with these voters who get to size you up where you can't simply -- if we had, for example, a national primary system, then absolutely the national media would dictate, you know, who's up or who is down in money and that would have a huge factor in terms who runs campaign ads running from tarmac to tarmac to tar rack. we'll have that starting this week where the candidates run into south carolina, a bigger state, and obviously, florida, a much more expensive state. one of the reasons i believe why iowa and new hampshire while i would never argue is a perfect system, we don't talk about urban policy enough. we can have a bunch of issues where we are pretty white -- not diverse, but what they do is we have a very empowered electorat

a lot of people run for offices, and they asked tough questions, and they are very informed. we saw that situation in iowa. as to a couple other points -- one, do you remember the second question? >> host: i think you addressed the largest part of it. >> guest: okay. >> host: relating to, you know, i think you dealt with it. thank you. let's move on to twitter. jkl wants to know how much coverage has each candidate get? did your station interview them all? >> guest: well, we do -- well, all, let's be fair. there are 30 republican candidates running on the ballot. you have 30 options, it's a thousand dollars to get on the ballot or use petitions. we're open in that process, and then on the -- side, there's 14 candidates. at wmur, and new hampshire media in general, we take this primary

very seriously, and because of that, we don't dictate and try to decide who or who does not get covered through very minimal thresholds, and base clay -- basically if you don't campaign in this state, you're going to get covered by a few papers, and we're the only state -- we're the only television station in the state, and wile cover you. we give significant amount of coverage to candidates like fred carver or buddy roemer who you don't hear about much, but if they're in new hampshire, we generally cover pretty much every trip they make. >> host: all right. let's go to our next call. we have lined up to speak with us from los angeles, tim, independent line. good morning. >> caller: all right, thank you for taking my call. i'm a ron paul supporter. people have to know about jon huntsman that he's willing to

start world war iii by attacking iran, and that's scary as our ships are going to the gulf, the pro-israel lobby in america and england are pushing the apac in america, and ron paul is the only one standing against the war for israel agenda, and americans should look at him unless they want to send their sons and daughters to war for israel with iran. again, jon huntsman and other g.o.p. candidates are for war in israel, and then there's newt gingrich who has this jewish donor from las vegas who wants war with iran as well and is responsible for newt gingrich saying the palestinians don't exist, and, again, newt gingrich is just a pan doring warmongering hawk. thank you for your time. >> host: how much --

>> guest: ron paul's -- >> host: go ahead, but i asked how much is foreign relations, policy, and goals shaped this race? >> guest: this has been a race that's been largely shaped by two things. one, the economy and jobs. i mean new hampshire has a lower unemployment rate than the rest of the country where it's 5.2 #%, but the general mood we try to speak to help the country, very mindful in that perspective. who do you think is best on the economy and jobs, and seconds, who do you think from the republican perspective, who do you think is best to beat president obama. that's the two issues. foreign policy has been a major subplot in town hall meeting after meeting after house party after house party, and the issue the caller raises, the potential war with iran or what do you do with iran's perceived nuclear build up has been one that is

constantly talked about and ron paul's position on iran is one thing that does separate him from the rest of the deal that's been controversial as you've seen in a series of debates that we've had. >> host: our guest, political directer of wmur tv in manchester new hampshire. website is politicalscoop .wmur.com, and you can find the news and commentary about what's happening in new hampshire. he's been a political director there since august of 2010, and prior to that publisher of the new hampshire political report, worked for the boston globe, des moines register, campaigns in election magazine and the indianapolis star. lucy, democratic caller in franklin, tennessee. good morning, lucy. >> caller: yes. >> host: welcome. >> caller: thank you for having me on c-span, and i'm going to vote for president obama because i'm going --

why elect who got us in this mess in the first place. whatever candidate become president that they would lead this country in a way that would be pleasing and acceptable in god's eyes. >> host: lucy, is there a republican that you'd like to see win the primaries, somebody you think president obama could beat? >> caller: well, he can beat them all. they all speaking the same. >> host: okay. let's go on to james. >> caller: look, one thing about new hampshire is that while there's a lot of focus, and i'm glad c-span is here for another primary. you did excellent coverage, and i thank you for that as a political junky and for informing the country. after everyone leaves on wednesday and thursday, new hampshire remains a presidential swing state. this is one of the dozen or 13

states you see presidents talking about. president obama has seven offices of all the republican presidential candidates competing today come combined he has 20 staffers here today. after they move on, this is still a hotly contested state when it comes to the general election. >> host: virginia, clinton, 5 republican. good morning. >> caller: good morning. thank you for having me on, and i really have to say i love c-span, it's the only fair and balanced news out there. you know, one of the things looking at elections, it's really being able to bring in more than just the party and being able to capture that inexcellent vote, and, you know, you look at obama and the promises he made and how things have come out, i think the only candidate that can beat him is ron paul because ron paul is the

only one out of both the republicans as well as obama that stands for habeas corpus, one of the things that obama campaigned on to restore habeout corpus, and what he's actually done is weakened it further through the recently signing the national defense authorization act. i'd like your views on that, and then one other thing i'm curious is how's come there's no media coverage at all to the fact that the ad they afribted to -- attributed to a ron paul supporter that was pa seniortive to huntsman and his adopted daughter was created by huntsman campaign in attempt to create bad media coverage for ron paul, and it's been shown the video was produced by someone who never uploaded any other videos, existed first and only on jon huntsman's website showing it was actually an act of

treachery. i'm curious why isn't the media talking about habeas corpus, and ron paul's the only one to defend americans and protect their rights to a fair trial and how come we don't talk about the fact that jon huntsman is actively pursuing an act of treasury in terms of manipulating the views of the american public. >> guest: well, i think one thing you're seeing is how this unique space that ron paul has been carving out in american politics. he's a very passionate -- you have passionate callers this morning making that case. there's been a number of new hampshire political events seeking out oh different he is from republicans and democrats, and that's frankly where this conversation goes in terms of a third party conversation. if ron paul is unable to win the republican nomination, would he do with such passionate supporters who don't feel like there's a home in the republican or democratic party, and it's one reason you have seen a

number of establishment republicans reaching out to ron paul, and you notice the body language and conversation between mitt romney, who looks to be the nominee, we don't know where that's going to go, and ron paul. it's been extremely cordgil in the debates. one thing to watch tonight while the republican side seems to be on the right here in new hampshire, seems to be that it's a choice between mitt romney, rick santorum, newt gingrich, there's another battle for 40% of the voters today which will likely be independents and going head to head there is jon huntsman and ron paul. that's a dynamic that's been under explored, but still very important. >> host: let's look at a cbs news story touching on this issue, this video, that our caller brought up, which we played over the weekend.

we talked about that here on c-span saying paul campaign calls the anti-huntingsman video disgusting, and the question is who put up the video deeming jon huntingman, and ron paul's campaign denounced it. what have you heard about where this video came from? >> guest: you know, i don't really know a lot about it. obviously, i read the stories. the timing of this is -- we have stories like this on primary week. there's usually a push-pull episode or some other illegal activity, but given the timing of it, it's not having a lot of coverage, or a lot of impact because there's so much other stuff happening, particularly in this state. my sense is that if it pops up again, and it may not given the negative coverage, it will happen in the ten day period

after new hampshire and south carolina, but as for the particular details, i am just not well versed enough to be on national tv talking about it. it would be irresponsible. >> host: we appreciate your responsibility and journalistic ethics. this story does not attribute ultimately to any campaign. it talks about how there's an individual who put it up, and so even though our caller said he thinks it's from jon huntsman himself, the news stories are not saying there's a lings there. i want to make that clear. >> guest: right. that's my understanding. >> host: tom, phoenix, arizona, republican, good morning. >> caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. you just said something i want to talk about, and i'll get to the other appointment. you just said that the new hampshire republican right is for romney, santorum, and newt gingrich? you got to be kidding me. what i don't understand is this political campaign seems to be about the economy, and yet i

don't know -- can you name one cut that -- a significant cut, that romney's going to do? one significant cut that santorum's going to do? one significant cut that newt gingrich's going to do? one significant cut that huntsman's going to do? none of these guys offer cuts other than ron paul, a trillion dollars, yet all of these guys, all of these guys want to expand tsa. not one comes out against the tsa. they want to expand the wars. they want to expand the police state. every single one of the republicans other than ron paul is for the bailouts. bachmann was not, but she's out of it. they are all for bigger -- none come out against the federal reserve, and now, newt is touching the corners, but nothing about the federal reserve. i just saw mitt romney say he wants to give more money to the international monetary fund. that's our money. what right does he was to give our money to this international

thing? they are all for higher inflation. they are taking our civil liberties with. they are all -- in fact, jon huntsman said he's for the national defense authorization act, totally taking our civil liberties away, eroding our rights -- >> host: let's get a response from james who is watching this unfolding in new hampshire. >> guest: well, i'm glad the caller brought up those points. i did leave out ron paul. ron paul in the polling sunday night had the second most support among republicans. the growth for ron paul is going to be among independent voters, and that's where we've seen that interplay work there. in terms of where the other republican candidates want to cut, all have released, i believe all released plans now detailing that. they look at entitlements, particularly rick santorum's looking at entitlements, and a number of them embraced paul ryan's plan to do that.

mitt romney also talks about touching defense with a 50-90 point plan. i don't think any come anywhere near the plans of ron paul to cut a trillion dollars from the federal deficit i believe in year one. >> host: wmur conducted a poll january 2 #-5, and another one january 5-8, and there were changes in the numbers in that couple daytime spread. romney fell by 3% from 44% to 41%. ron paul fell by three points down from 20% to 17%, and there were some folks who gained ground, namely rick santorum and jon huntsman who both gained four to five percentage points. what do you read from that movement. now, as we mentioned. you stopped polling on the 8th, so we've had a couple days since then, but what did you learn from some of those changes? >> guest: what's surprising to

me is the mere fact in our polling, and i know your next guest has different numbers, but stated that the lead of mitt romney has not collapsed more. you know, when -- traditionally when folks come into new hampshire with large leads, that lead shrinks. we can give an example from 1980, one example of that in the previous guest chairman mcdonald gave, and reagan came into this state with a 49-point lead into the final lead of the new hampshire primary and it clamsed to 27. jimmy carter had a 29 point lead over kennedy, and that lead collapsed in the last week of the primary down to a 10-point lead. one thing that's excising is that mitt romney's lead did not collapse more. this race has not tight ped, particularly as the focus is really turned on to him as the opponents see this may be the last chance to stop him. of course, the other surprising

thing is that rick santorum was not able to have conservatives behind the campaign. it's something similar we saw with mike huckabee four years ago. he won the iowa caucuses then, came here, and both had him on a bounce from 3% to 11% bounce, that typical seven to eight point bounce if you do well in iowa, when you come to nesms, and then the jon huntsman effect coming on very late, obviously, i talked about that at the beginning of this segment, but he's peaking now in the last couple days pretty much since that poll. >> host: kathleen in ohio, independent line. good morning. >> caller: hi. this is any view. should the pundit class like msnbc, which they are mostly part of the 1%, should they -- like this morning, i flipped back and forth between c-span and msnbc in the mornings, and, you know, they had buddy on,

newt gingrich on, santorum on, they had huntsman on, but, of course, who didn't they -- they didn't have ron paul on, and last night i watched msnbc from 4-10 last night, and barely a mention of ron paul, so, again, i mean, i can support ron paul's stances on domestic issues, but clearly, he is running through all independents, republicans, and democrats on foreign policy issues, so the pundit class like chris matthews, he called ron paul, the only thing he said at the end because somebody brought him up, was that he was unelectable. should chris matthews be determining or the pundit class be determining who people in new hampshire or anywhere across the nation -- they should just give us the bloody information. they should not determine who we're going to vote for. >> guest: i hate do go back to the point, but that's the beauty of the new hampshire primary where chris matthews doesn't have a vote, and he's another

voice in the national media. here, you don't have to rely on his voice or any other national pundits' voice because we can interact with the candidates ourselves. there's an old saying that the person who shakes a particular candidates' hand thee times and the candidate asks are you voting for me? they respond, i don't know, i only met you three times. we can talk with them directly and get our information from them directly. >> host: even though you've talked about the ain't of voters in new hampshire to have the one on one contact and hear from candidates themselves, the national media certainly di sends on your state, and there's images in the newspaper today in the "washington post" showing a lot of reporters waiting to talk with huntsman, and you can see them huddled there, they're in front of a cake with the former

utah governor's name on it, trying not to get in the way of the candidate who is greeting supporters. you're flooding with the media. how does that change the element of the flavor of the debate that happens there as we see the national media going to your cafes, your restaurants, doing live shots. what's that like? >> guest: yeah, this week is a circus. it's the most magical week in american politics, this week between iowa and new hampshire because there's so much activity and movement. obviously, candidates drop out, other people change positions, and there's a lot of jockeying going on, but one other element is this flood of media that's developed. that's why i cherish the early moments in the campaign when you ride in the car with the candidate and follow them around the state. there's no question -- really this week, ron paul had to cancel a breakfast event yesterday in manchester because the throng of media, and rick santorum is having problems with his events so he does them in

park lots because of the interest. clearly, these candidatesment the interest. clearly, they want to be covered as the campaign moves out of south carolina, and the only way for south carolina voters to have an interest in what's happening is seeing rick perry or by watching these news shows, and they can also get money from people that maybe in dayton like yourself and you have an understanding of where the candidates are. there's a whole other element of when all the media comes to town, and it's harder for the candidates to talk directly to the people, but the smarter campaigns manage that a bit, and, for example, mitt romney's one of those who still directly talkings to voters. >> host: james, political dwreghter at wmur tv in new hampshire. donald, independent caller from golden valley, arizona. welcome, donald. >> caller: good morning. i just have a couple comments.

as far as these wars and stuff, i think the only way we're going to keep out of these is bring back the draft, and i'm a pretty strong democrat, but i would vote for ron paul and given his age i think this is his last try, so i think he ought to run as an indidn't. >> guest: well, the third party option is something that he gets asked about a lot, and he really has not closed the door on to that. some people say he's laying the groundwork actually for rand paul who's been on the trail with him in iowa, and now he's here in new hampshire meeting a lot of people. this probably will be the last run. he announced he's not running for reelection to the house, and i think he's trying to reshape the republican party. i don't see any scenario in which to the earlier point that

nobody drops out of the race because they lose contest, but they drop out because they are broke. ron paul can raise money week after week after week from small donors, and he'll be in the race probably until the convention in tampa. >> host: caller, donald said he was a democrat, but willing to cross over and support ron paul. james, you mentioned earlier that a big question 1 who is going to vote, and can ron paul shore up the base, but get the independent minded voters to go his way? what are you looking at as far as how influential the undecided or undeclared voters will be today? >> guest: well, look, they are the group that -- two things, one, makes up their mind at the very last minute, and because of that, the second point, nay are totally up for grabs, and so in that sense ron paul and any candidate really wants to try to find a way to be sure to get the independent voters, but to the caller's point, independent

voters in new hampshire, the wars and the wars itself have not played a major role. we talked foreign policy earlier, and it's the concept of a nuclear iran, how to deal with the challenge of china. friend or foe? how do we deal with russia? how do we deal with the european debt crisis? it's that time of foreign policy discussion we're having. you can throw in afghanistan there where hunts han and ron paul have the same position on that basically, but in terms of future wars and getting involved, it's not a conversation we hear a lot of independents talking about. they are more concerned about the economic condition, and our polling has shown that. >> host: betty, republican in se loresberg, pennsylvania. good morning, betty. >> caller: good morning, and thank you. i was trying to save my call for later in the game, by i speak up for jon huntsman. they barely let him on the stage in the beginning, and the first

comments at the start of this, i thought, wow. i like the fact that his sons are participating in the navy, i believe it is. teddy roosevelt had the right idea, walk softly, carry a big stick. i'm not a fan of the war, but my hoses was a pow, and my two sons served. i'm not personally a big military person, but there's a lot of danger in the world today, and i feel mr. huntsman is a worldly person that i feel he's an american and please, ladies and gentlemen, look at his record, like at his picture, and let's put him in the white house. thank you. bye. >> guest: well, i i thank your family for your service, and you sacrificed as well because families give as much sacrifice as the troops. in terms of jon huntsman, his campaign was slow to take off, makes a lot of money early on,

had financial problems, and he's pretty much under the radar. in fact, until last week, i've been very down on jon huntsman campaign. here in new hampshire, even though it's the state where he's putting all the eggs in the basket, this never caught on. it was always in this seven to nine point area in terms of our polling. consistently never seemed to have enthusiasm or moe money tum -- momentum, but winning the nempledz primary is like catching lightning in a bottle. i'm not saying he'll win today, but he is catching lightning in a bottle in picking the right time for people to turn on and tune in saying who is this huntsman guy? >> host: who could could today be a deal breaker for? >> guest: i think new hampshire will decide the make up of this race going forward or what kind of presidential nomination we'll have. if one person emerges to be a

clear alternative to mitt romney, for example, second place within single digits of mitt romney or mitt romney under 40%, then we could have a very fascinating and a very long process, particularly begin the way the republicans change their primary process if the proportional dollar hits that we don't have to get into, but the most likely scenario we'll have tonight is we'll have mitt romney on top, maybe he under performs a little bit, maybe some of the national media or national republican fundraisers are not too impressed, but if we have a lot of candidates in the second through five bunch, you know, getting, you know, 15, 11, 9, or 10%, and none of them drop out and all go to south carolina, you know, then mitt romney doesn't have to get 40% or 50% of the vote. he just has to have more than

everybody else. if that's the situation, it will be difficult for anyone to stop mitt romney from being the nominee. >> host: one last call, john from new york, independent line. >> caller: good morning. excuse the voice. i'm just getting over a cold. thank you, c-span, for being the ofertion you are. you're the only organization we get a fair shake from. i'm a big ron paul sporter, and i want to discuss where everybody calls his achilles heel of iran. we already overthrew them once, and we put in a dictator, the united states loves dictators as we can see as we put them all overred world. they are easy to control. when are we going to stop the cycle of madness that we're trapped? how propgan diesed are the american people to believe that peace is dangerous and war is the order of the day? >> host: jim, you think it's ron paul's achilles heel, and is

that enough to distract voters? > caller: i don't consider it his achilles heel, but the attention from the mainstream media and the other candidates, definitely going to play to the military industrial complex, and we're going to be stuck in the cycle of madness. rope paul has the most sane foreign policy, yet -- sane foreign policy is like an insane idea these days. how did we get to this? >> host: let's get a response from james. >> guest: i think the biggest achilles heel among ron paul and other republicans and polling i talked to is they don't think he can beat president obama. they are willing to compromise on not finding the perfect candidate. the perfect candidate has not emerged yet, and that's why they are a hard time deciding who they like, but they want to beat

president obama. there's no question about that, and he is viewed failure or viewed unfairly as a candidate who cannot build a koalation to get to 51 #% or get the 270 electoral votes. you may disagree with that, but that's the biggest perception problem there. when i talked to ron paul strategists here in new hampshire, they knew this was the biggest problem, and they been trying again and again and again to make themselves more of a mainstream candidate. they worked very hard at that in new hampshire because they knew that was the biggest problem. >> host: politicalscoop .wmur.com, political directer at wmur tv in manchester, new hampshire. thank you so much. >> guest: thank you.

>> polls in new hampshire closing in a 34*eu7b from now, others at eight psm eastern, and voters are selecting a republican presidential nominee. c-span will have live coverage as results come in tonight. coverage begins at 8 eastern. ..

and then they said we are not going to of this happen. it's about who's going to rule america by the way and this kind of stuff is going on.

today during a brief u.s. house pro-forma session representative jim moran a democrat from virginia attempted to be recognized in the house. the chair did not recognize him. here's a look at what happened on the floor. house re >> pursuant to section four of o the house resolution 493 with nn legislative business will beay. conducted on this day. per% to the section 493, the house stands adjourned until >> a.m. on friday january 13th, 2012. >> as you and may have seemed jr moran seekinggi recognition that the house gaveling out of a pro forma section as democrats can bring republicans back to extend

the cable tax cuts for a full thaorather than just the two passed which was passed before the house went into the holiday recess. we will havein another session r you, live coverage of the 11 on friday and the house back for legislative work a week from today. ; his attempt to be recognized on the floor representative spoke to reporters off the floor. this is five minutes. >> you want to ask a question? >> do you think this is going to go down to the lawyer again? now at the end of february where the leaders have an agreement of the payroll tax to you think in this time the amended in september? >> i don't think that it is going to go smoothly.

i will say it is going to go down to the lawyer and that it's going to be reached an unsatisfactory conclusion and it's designed to do that to achieve that result. that's why i tried to speak on the floor of the house today. we need to have at least the republican conferees here to meet with the democratic conferees who are already here on the payroll tax cut. there are 160 million people who will be adversely affected if we don't act by february. there are 6 million people who will lose their unemployment benefits, and there are millions of people on medicare whose physicians will not be adequately reimbursed, in other words their reimbursement is going to be cut by 40% if congress doesn't act. well, i can understand if you as a matter of not being able to

reach a constructive agreement between the republicans and democrats, but there is no excuse now other than the fact that we are only going to be in session about five days during the month of june very. all the too to become democratic conferees came back thinking his thoughtful they would have an opportunity to meet in conference with republicans that they are gone. no one is here so we have no recourse but to go to the floor of the well because there is a sham going on at a pro forma session. but they immediately shot off my microphone in fact they even shot off the microphone during the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the united states just to make sure that the democrats could not be heard. i can't imagine there is one constituent of one elected republican or a elected democrat who feels that it is appropriate for the congress to meet half a dozen days during the entire

month of january. it's not as though we are not getting paid. we are getting paid by we are not meeting. we are ready to meet. and whether the republicans say we have nothing to discuss, first of all they should understand politics ought to compromise but what they should be discussing is what are we going to do about the millions of people of americans who were going to be adversely affected if we don't do our job? that is why we are here. this is extraordinarily frustrating and we have no -- we could go bang on the door of the speaker but he's not there. i don't know what else we can do other than just try to speak on the floor of the house when we are suppose to be in session. and i have to say it's not only rude, but it's a responsible to cover off the microphones and nobody can be heard even the pledge of allegiance. they are that afraid of being held accountable to the american

people for not working during the month of january. so, i don't know what more to do the leadership of the democrats asked if i would try to be recognized, but i don't think the republicans are prepared to recognize any democrat to say anything because of they would rather the american people not know what's not going on in the converse. estimate of the house isn't expected to come back until next week. >> in the pro forma session. >> did you expect now -- meanwhile the clock is ticking on the payroll tax extensions which runs through the end of february. the conference committee that was set up to broker a deal do you think they are going to meet at all between now and next week? have you heard when the first meeting might be? i know your leaders wrote a

letter yesterday to, you know, the chairman to ask for a meeting. have you heard back? >> there was an agreement with the president that -- and this was in return for the house republicans voting to extend the payroll tax cut in two months. there was an agreement with the president that the republicans and did democrats would appoint the conferees and they would meet immediately to work out the differences between the political parties so that by the time the payroll tax cut and unemployment compensation and that medicare, they call what the fix, but the medicare change by the time those are agreed upon the president is able to sign them. well if we are not meeting because you can't meet with yourselves, you need to meet with the other side. if we are not meeting that legislation isn't going to be done in time. or it's going to be pushed through at the last met probably

in the dark of night and then members don't even know fully what will be contained in the legislation. this is no way to run the legislative branch of the greatest nation on earth. i mean, what are we doing here. this is in the whole month of january and virtually nothing is being done. i talked to the space countries. they are here and waiting to meet and yet there is no waiting on the schedule. so, thank you. >> editor of the "national review" will we talk about the gop presidential field after today's new hampshire primary now a discussion on the annual african-american focused symposium hosted by the radio and tv host tavis smylie impleader c-span's of light on the magazine looks at manufacturing jobs in america

with james benet in a tour of the atlantic magazine. washington journal takes your calls and e-mails life every morning starting at 7:00 eastern on c-span. c-span will have live coverage as a result of the new hampshire primary come tonight. second debate here in washington nbc studios. nixon gets control of it. so he brings that level down to 40 degrees. it's a meat locker when he arrives. willson goes racing down to the basement, five as to the confines the guy and there is a guide understanding guard on the desk and he says if you don't get out of the way of the service desk let me turn it up

to 65 for 79 calling the police. so they had another standoff ended up compromising on the temperature so they get back up. the whole idea was they didn't want nixon to sway. so the head to see him sweat profusely in the first debate and then they said we are not going to let this happen again and they all knew what was going on but this was about who is going to rule america by the way. >> this weekend abc news sam donaldson interviews chris matthews on his book quote coach jack kennedy elusive hero," on "after words" c-span light on book tv.

white house press secretary confirmed today president obama was surprised by the resignation of white house chief of staff

bill bailey. in a briefing with reporters, he says that incoming chief of staff jack lewd with a smooth transition. this is 45 minutes. >> i apologize for that. maybe there's some announcement we are going to make right after i finish. i apologize for that. scheduling is a complicated business, and a lot of moving parts here in the west wing of the white house. >> tell us about them. >> i will, will be telling -- >> what have you got? >> well, let me begin if i may. i wanted to mention this yesterday and forgot. i just wanted to offer my condolences to tony blankley's family. i knew him reasonably well. we spend a lot of time in greenrooms together -- a very decent gentleman and smart man

who served both the reagan administration and in speaker newt gingrich well. and we will miss him -- i will come personally. i would also like to say a few things about the united -- the american automobile industry. yesterday the north american international auto show kicked off in detroit, michigan. with companies unveiling of their new vehicles and folks eager to get their first peek. transportation secretary ray lahood was on hand for the opening defense and commerce secretary john bryson, energy secretary steven chu back come epa administrator lisa jackson and the labor department's director of the office of recovery for all zero communities and workers jay williams are all taking part in of osha activities this week. and the new of social is a reminder to me nicu u.n. shorty -- of the fact that in the face of stiff opposition the president a tough choice to help provide the auto industry with the temporary support it needed to rebuild their companies and get moving again.

this was a difficult decision, and came with significant risk. but the president was not willing to walk away from those workers, and to allow the great american automobile industry does bear the could disappear. today the industry is coming back, creating jobs and moving cars off the line. last month the bottom automotive industry added nearly -- rather 11,000 positions, bringing the total number of jobs added in the fourth quarter of 2011 to 36,000. the industry added 100,000 jobs over the course of 2011. in december, we saw although sales climb for the seventh consecutive month, and the big three's -- ford, gm and chrysler all salles sales increases for december and the year as a whole. since chrysler and gm emerged from bankruptcy in june of 2009, the auto industry has added back more than 170,000 jobs. the best period of job growth for that industry in more than a decade. i will also noted that as many of you know, that one of the

positive signs we have seen of late, among other positive signs for the economy, is the growth in manufacturing. and while the automotive industry makes up 5% of the minute factory in this country, it is responsible for 25% of that rebound in manufacturing. so another reminder of why it was so important to make the decision the president made to rescue the american automobile industry a few years ago. with that, i will go to the associated press. jam. >> thank you. i wanted to go back to yesterday's surprise personnel announcement. mr. daley had earlier indicated he wanted stay through january of next year and he was supposed to build relations with republicans, build relations with the business community. what prompted his sudden decision to leave? and did he get to accomplish that? you don't seem to have the strong relations that maybe he intended to building as he came in? >> first of all, jim, i

appreciate question, and i think there is a case where it is important and accurate to take at face value what bill said. bill daley said in his letter of resignation to the president coming and with the president said yesterday in announcing this transition. flat 2011 has been -- was an extraordinary year in a rather extraordinary three years of this president's first term. even before he had officially taken the job, the day after he was announced, if i recall correctly, she was here in the white house doing some paperwork associated with taking over as chief of staff when the news came that there had been a shooting in tucson arizona. he found himself in the situation room with the president as that terrible news unfolded. and from that day on, bill daley proceeded to help the president navigate an extremely even filled and difficult year for washington and for the country -- a year that included the arab spring, even some egypt and libya and the rest of the middle

east; the tsunami and earthquake and tsunami in japan; and your -government shut down; an extraordinarily impressive and important mission to remove osama bin laden from the face of the year; the very tough negotiations with congress over the debt ceiling increase and a deficit reduction that resulted, despite not achieving the grand bargain that the president and bill daley is also aggressively -- nevertheless, walked in $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction. in the fall, he helped oversee the president's american jobs act proposal, which, by the end of the year, resulted in several provisions passing in, including most importantly, the extension of the payroll tax cut and

unemployment insurance. these jobs are difficult. people talk about how a year in the white house and the west wing in particular you can measure it in dog years. this one was particularly jam packed. and as the president said in his announcement in the state dining room but also to was in staff meetings, and a senior staff meeting, he is extremely grateful for bill's leadership and for his friendship. what does it mean about the white house's outreach to the business community though and republicans? he seemed to be your best opportunity to do that. what does it mean going forward? >> well, going forward with jack lew at the helm, we have someone who for decades has had excellent relations with both democrats and republicans, is

broadly respected throughout washington for his service in the house of representatives for the former -- for then speaker of the house tip o'neill, for his service in the clinton administration, as well as his service here this department and as director of omb. i think if you ask any member of congress -- republican or democrat -- who has dealt with jack lew, they will testify to the fact that he is a total straight shooter and knows how to work with members on both sides of the aisle. and also come to the point about business, has a lot of respect in the business community, so there is a continuity in that respect. and the president, said and he has said, is absolutely committed to working with congress this year to get more accomplished for the american people. and we remain optimistic that opportunities will present themselves to do just that. there are ones that -- there are things that have to get done, like the extension of the payroll tax cut and extension of unemployment insurance for the

full calendar year. there are other things that really should get done if members of congress are listening to their constituents. putting construction workers back to work rebuilding our infrastructure is a key component of the american jobs act that could really help our economy, told the folks who were out of work now go back to work rebuilding our bridges and highways and schools and other things, working on projects that help our economy grow well beyond the duration of the project they are working on. so, jack lew will be intimately involved in that process. i think it is -- while that was, as the president said, is priced at bill decided that this was the right time for him to go back to chicago, eight how he loves dearly, and does that president -- if i could digress, i don't think there's another family like the daleys more closely associated with a great

american city, so the connection there is extremely strong. and while this was a surprise for the president, the fact is it is because he has somebody like jack lew who can step right in and fulfill the chief of staff's role that we will not miss a beat here in the west wing. speculation the continuity. how quickly do you want to -- does the president want to get a new budget director? and how do you get of reconfirmation hump given the toxic environment with congress? >> i don't have any announcements to make on jack's replacement at omb. he will be staying there to finish the 2013 budget. in addition to jack there is a talented team at the omb that will function as effectively as

they have under his leadership after he's gone. and once the president makes a decision about the leadership at omb we will have an announcement for you. estimate does he want to have somebody in shortly after or before the payroll tax? >> i don't want to go any further -- i don't want to get ahead of any announcements the president make. >> there was a report that came out the other day and one of the conclusions that it found this in the first the treasury put out regarding the park has been in the highlight. >> regarding what? >> press releases put out by the treasury regarding the cuts that they've tended to highlight those areas for making a profit if you will bringing money into the government, but not the areas where it was losing money for the government. the you have any response to that? >> i think that we have been very straightforward about how

much t.a.r.p. has costs, with the projected cost was versus what the actual cost has been and where money has been paid back and it's true also in the automobile industry. i'm not aware of any discrepancies with regard to that but i'm not familiar with the report. estimate does the president had a short list which accepts jack lew? >> i have no announcement on that and no estimation of the length of the list. i sure there is a list. speed is there any recess appointment in light of the republican opposition? >> i'm not going to speculate on that. and again last -- the reports that the president plans to create a government task force to monitor china for trade and other business violations and that he plans to announce at the

time of the address can you confirm that? >> i don't have any announcements today on any administration task forces or efforts on that issue. what i can tell you is we will continue to work to take steps necessary to level the playing field for businesses. you've heard the president speak about this repeatedly. and he did so on his trip to the asia-pacific region not that long ago where he made it clear that he will continue to stand up for american workers and businesses. as you know, secretary geithner is in beijing today, and that is part of our constant discussions with china as well as our friends and partners in the region about the importance of the asia-pacific region and the importance of our economic relations with that region. yes, sir. some of the iranians apparently have confirmed to the swiss, who are protecting power, and they've sentenced to the american captive to death. has the administration heard anything, have you responded, and how come to the iranian is through the swiss? what's new?

>> well, i don't have anything new for you in terms of communications through the swiss from us. but we -- our position is what it was yesterday, which is that the charges, the allegations against mr. kekmati are false. this is not the first time, though we could only a would be the last, that the evidence had falsely accused people of being spies. we urge his immediate release, and we are working towards that end and hope that it happens soon. >> now that you know he's been officially sentenced to death, what's the response? >> welcome that is the response. it's absolutely -- the allegations are false, the sentence is absurd and wrong and we urge his release. >> next week king abdullah comes to the white house, and it won't be his first visit. they will be talking about the efforts to jump-start the middle east peace process, although

that will certainly be part of it. will there be new approaches this time? what will they try this time that the have not tried before? >> welcome as you know, the president has already linked king abdullah for hosting the resumption of talks. they will obviously discuss that issue. they will discuss the king's effort at reform in jordan. and they will discuss the host of issues affecting the region. so it won't be limited simply to the middle east peace process, although that will certainly be part of it. i don't have anything new to report about our approach to that very difficult issue. our commitment to doing everything we can, working with our partners, to urge both sides to come together and negotiate a

peace remains a very strong. and we will continue to work with jordan and other nations towards the end. >> are you satisfied with the king's commitment to working to try to get things solved in a more peaceful way in syria? >> well, you know our position on syria. we've been working with a variety of, and a long list of nations, friends, partners and allies around the region and the globe to put pressure on the syrians, to pressure on president al asad, whose legitimacy has long since been lost because of the alleged violence he's perpetrated upon his own people, and our position on that certainly hasn't changed. yes, dree and and then christi. >> the mechanics senator robert menendez is blocking the president's nomination of judith schwartz, to the third circuit court of appeals, and some suspect it's because her longtime partner is the head of the corruption unit that investigated him. is the president concerned that there's any sort of revenge going on here? >> you know, i honestly don't --

i don't have anything on that. we obviously want to see all of the president's nominees considered in a timely manner coming and we would like to see this nominee also be considered in a timely manner. but i don't have anything specific on this particular nomination of those stories. but isn't it strange it's a democrat that's getting in the way of this time? >> will again, i don't have any particular comment on this. whatever obstacles are presented by the members of the senate to nominees we always disheartened by those. the president has put forth a very qualified nominee including the woman you are referring to right now, and that ought to be considered on the merits. >> has the senator -- he said he has substantial concerns. has he voiced of those to the white house? >> not that i'm aware of, but i haven't had a lot of -- and that discussions about that here. >> there is a planning to pay a and indian rupees under the new

financial mechanism with iran and pakistan is going to go ahead with building the pakistan-iran pipeline. so is the white house worried about these leaks and the enforcing sanctions of iran? >> well, we are working with our partners and allies around the country to enforce the sanctions and to take a multilateral approach, an approach that we hope will maximize the impact of the sanctions without creating an unintended consequence, any negative impact on the oil markets or our allies. and we are engaged in that effort now. >> can you say what bill daleys's role with the campaign will be and when it will begin? >> i don't have a specific announcement on that. i know that he will be -- i mean i would expect the campaign would have that. plan sure he will be very

involved. he was involved last time. and i sure it will be a suitably high profile role. >> he is very committed to this president and to his reelection, to the policies that the president has put into place last year with bill's help and to ensuring that all the work that has been done to pull this country out of the worst recession since the great depression to put it on a path towards growth and job creation and a greater security for the middle class continues. and i know the bill will be very involved in the reelection campaign. >> is he traveling with the president tomorrow to chicago do you know? >> i don't know for sure all the white wouldn't be surprised if he were. >> i wanted to ask on jack lew and built daley windel daley was named a year ago, the president made a point of saying as a business guy as you were talking with jim about it he had created

jobs. he was the ceo of several companies. why then since you also told jim and jack was good ties to the business community why did the president mengin yesterday jack lew's private sector experience being a hedge fund executives at citigroup? >> i don't know that there's an answer to why. jack's resume is quite long. it is most notable for the fact that he was budget director twice and in his first stint is, as the president mentioned, the only budget director in history to oversee three years of surpluses, surpluses that were quickly squandered in the years that the next administration was in power, and that his tenure here with us the state department here in the white house as director of omb for the second time has been stellar. but it is also true that he has private sector experience as a manager of a private firm. and i think that is part of a

very broad resume. >> when he was manager at the private firm, the huffingtonpost.com which is not usually very critical of the administration, said that he ran citigroup's alternative investments division, which made billions of dollars by "betting that u.s. homeowners would not be able to meet their mortgage payments." how does that -- >> welcome jack was a management executive. he was not an investment adviser at citigroup. >> he was the chief operating officer, i believe, was the title of the alternative investment -- >> but again, he was not an investment adviser. he didn't make an investment advice. >> but how does that -- running a business like that or helping to run a business like that, how does that square with the president what he's been talking about with richard courtenay and the administration is going to be really tough on the big banks

on the white house -- newt white house chief of staff is somebody who used to be at one of the laws big banks? >> i would suggest to you that your tilling very fellow ground here, but i appreciate the effort. we believe very strongly in the fact that the american financial industry needs to be successful and robust. it's an important part of the american economy. also needs to follow the same rules as wall street -- ayman as mean st. wall street needs to go by the same rules as main street. >> that's why the president pushed so hard to pass and sign into law will st. reform. that's why he pushed so hard, since you raised, to get richard kortright nominated. i need to give richard cord ray reconfirmed. and when senate republicans despite his obvious qualifications refused to allow an up or down vote on richard

cordray, the president felt he had no other alternative but to make a recess appointment -- one of the relatively few pieces appointments he has made as president compared to his predecessors. because this country needs, the middle class here in this country, folks to engage with non-big financial institutions to pay lenders and nonbank mortgage brokers and things, they need somebody here in town watching out for them, looking out for their interests. so the president is absolutely committed to the commission the commission that the cftc has to the mission that richard cordray specifically has. yes. >> thanks. how will jack daley take over as the chief of staff, which will not be before the end of the month. he has some loose ends to tie it up as the omb director, and he will obviously make some

decisions about how the office is structured going forward but he does an invaluable senior advisor to the president. his role under bill daley was highly effective in terms of helping the operations of the west wing to run smoothly. and i am very confident he will continue to be, you know, one of the most valuable players here in the west wing. >> under the transition hasn't been determined who the person for converse will be? >> i'm sorry, for what? >> who will be the lead person that we see when we revisit the payroll tax cut for example. >> we have a variety of folks who engage on that, but we do have the head of legislative affairs speaking of the most valuable players might be my top

vote-getter. so he will come as he has come to take the lead in that effort. >> but the chief of staff will obviously have control. >> no question and it's important to remember in terms of, you know, his legacy at omb he was intimately involved in that process last fall. and in december to bringing that agreement finally to fruition to congress that would allow the extension of the payroll tax cut to make sure that 160 million americans didn't see a tax hike as the new year's day present. and he will be intimately involved in the effort to ensure congress does the right thing without drama and extends it for the full year. >> one insider describes the timing of this as switching places in a canoe in rough waters. how does the administration see the timing of this giving that

you are heading into the tough new election? >> well, i would disagree with that description because of what i think i told jim, which is bill's leadership has been exceptional through a very challenging year. jack has been there. he has -- i think it's important to remember he has been a participant in the 7:30 meeting as you know when the meeting of the most senior staff and chief of staff office every meeting. jack has been there every morning. he will i think as much as anyone possibly could slide pretty effortlessly and seamlessly into that role. he is widely respected here, inside the west wing and the broad white house, just as he is on capitol hill. for those of you who know him, he is just about as decent and smart an individual as you'll

ever encounter here in washington. yes? >> during the argument of this at ministration on the stricter standards. but would you agree with critics who say that you can turn on cable television at any time and see and hear these images that are being questioned right now and would you conceive of these critics to say that there is no need for the government to take the controls over broadcasting in this day? >> i confess i have not looked into this issue so i don't want to venture an opinion except to say that as a parent you always have to wait out the concerns about exposing kids to things as a parent that you would otherwise not have them exposed to. but i will have to take your questions in terms of the broad issue because i wasn't aware of it. yes?

>> can you tell us more about what the president wants to learn out of that? i know it -- is he trying to come up with ways for the future possible the idea is to spur more sourcing? >> absolutely. he wants to hear from the executives who will be a part of this forum participating in a and who are examples of major american companies that have brought jobs back to the united states. of why they did that, what were the incentives to doing that, and he's very interested in ideas that go to adjust your question, which is what can we do to further develop this trend, which has american companies that are international and global companies that do have factories and installations

abroad and employee a lot of people abroad. what kind of incentives can be created to bring those jobs back to the united states to keep the company's highly competitive, to keep them making the best product in the world? with american leader. when that's possible and then that makes sense. is absolute and this will be a session where the ideas or exchange as well as the fact of the in sourcing and reinvesting in america is noted and celebrated. >> can you announce the ideas related to that which is just -- >> i will let him make whenever announcements he might become i want to meet tomorrow but i think it will be an important event, and it goes to what life and talking about and what he's been talking about for a long time now which is he is committed to doing what ever he can working with the private sector using executive authority working with congress to further growth the economy to get them, getting more jobs as we dig ourselves out of this terrible

recession and there's been an important aspect of this. i noted at the top the decision he made about the automobile industry to recognize it and why that has paid dividends and was the right thing to do and there are a variety of decisions that the president can poll, decisions he can make to help that cause and this president is committed to exercising all his options with regards to growing the economy and creating jobs. >> doing the same thing that the epa is their anything similar is he going to continue to do that are not the executive branch he is sort of rediscovered people are keeping the government operating. >> i think that he is aware of the high quality of people working out of the agency doing an exemplary work for the american people, and i don't

want to preview or predict other visits he might make, but he is noting important work that people are doing and in his visit today i am sure it's about that and they played an integral role in the automobile efficiency standards, fuel efficiency standards that were announced by the president as he was surrounded by close to a dozen automobile executives and automobile company executives. the epa was obviously playing the lead role in the mercury standards that were released after more than a decade, maybe two decades of work on that. mercury come as no is a very dangerous toxin and the standards are very important to the health and welfare of american children and american citizens across the country. so he will thank them for their hard work and for the work to

come. >> some of his decisions seem to be going against the direction and it feels like he's -- >> i think you were more on target in the first part of your question about taking note of the unheralded work that really talented americans do that come to these agencies and the work they do on behalf of the american people and with regard to the epa which is often under siege but is responsible for ensuring that the air we breathe, that our children breed when they run on the soccer field is clean and the water they drink is clean and not harmful do really important work and this is an agency that was created under president nixon, people forget, and has been responsible for ensuring the health and safety in many cases of millions of americans so i

think that he will note that. >> you mentioned him being in china. one of the things that he's doing is asking china to reduce imports of wheel from iran. there's indication that china might do that or what argument is the administration making? >> i would refer you to answer that i gave about the sanctions on iran generally and our efforts multilaterally to work with our friends and allies around the globe in that effort to ensure they are implemented in a way that has a maximum effect and maximum designed affect and a number of unintended consequences, so we will be having that discussion with numerous countries and allies around the world, as regarding that effort with iran.

specter they have any indication they might proceed? >> i don't want to get ahead of either psychiatry governor's conversations or conversations we may or may not be having with the chinese. the secretaries portfolio is certainly broader than that. >> will the house a debt ceiling increase? >> i don't have a specific announcement for you. i am confident it will be executed in a matter of days, not weeks. did you have something? >> i do. when the treasury secretary indicated to the president that they wanted to go home to new york president leaned on it exceptionally hard on the job. i'm wondering why that case is different than the case of the chief of staff. by understand you have to sleep on but that is a very different order of pressure than he brought to bear on the treasury

secretary. why is it easier to let this happen and it was to let that happen? >> i think you are talking about -- label simply address the daily decision -- daily without a the stifel. i think that he made up his mind, believed it was the right time, and yes, the president did ask him to reconsider and to sleep on that and maybe talk about to begin the next day. but he made his decision and the president respected that and he understood that in particular perhaps because of their shared love of chicago and as their mutual home town and understanding and bills connection why you would want to return to chicago, and let's -- i would point out there he would be an important part of the team in the broad effort here in terms of the president's reelection and will be available

to give advice to the president and as noted he will be calling bill for advice going forward, but i think he was very clear about what his decision was. >> it would have been the president's clear preference. >> i think we have established that the president was surprised and that completely understood his decision and was gratified by the fact that both he and bill had the same fault that he would be an excellent successor as the chief of staff and gratified by the fact that jack was if you will standing by and ready to take on those responsibilities and to do so seamlessly

>> did the president make a sort of persuasive case to mr. daley we have so much left to do together. please think about staying on. i know you may not love it but -- >> i don't have a further read out of that conversation because there was more than one. i think that we have unveiled the ticktock with a fair amount of detail, but i don't have any more for you. >> is the president concerned that any other senior members of the administration might choose to leave during the year? has he done with some of his predecessors have done asking senior staff, senior cabinet level people to stick with it through the election year to bring continuity for the administration? >> i don't think the president is concerned about staff turnover. he knows that everybody here is committed to this enterprise to helping the american people,

helping him, help the american people, helping him do what he can do as president to keep america safe both here and abroad. transitions are an inherent part of, as you know, and discovered several white house as you've noted the transitions are a part of it. these are demanding jobs. i mean, think about what flows through the corridors and offices. every decision is of enormous global impact made every day, and of the pressure is significant. the privileges profound. but these are not jobs people occupy for long periods of time. that's always been the case, and especially in this white house where the chief of staff in all cases have been and will be empowered and have significant portfolios and responsibilities.

these are tough jobs and the president appreciates bill's service has been greatly appreciated rahm emanuel's service. islamic because of the sensitivity and the jobs if that is the top person in a presidential campaign is interpreted as a disruption is that not applicable to the white house? >> i don't think it is because of the kind of team that this president has assembled that allows for this transition which i have accepted the blood as the chief of staff but allows it to be as smooth as it will be because of the exceptional qualifications and temperament that jack brings to this job. so i think this will be exceptionally smooth and seamless, and that's because of the way that bill has

effectively been the chief of staff and the way that the president has dictated to his senior staffers how they ought to conduct their business and because of the kind of men and women the president has surrounded himself with. i just ended a sentence with a preposition. [laughter] >> the president has asked and she has accepted cecelia to be the next white house director of the domestic policy. as you know, she has served us of the deputy assistant to the president and director of the intergovernmental affairs where she has overseen the obama administration relationships with state and local governments. as the director under valery geren, she leads a partnership

between federal, state, local and tribal governments, that governing magazine described as, quote, more responsive than it ever was, citing praise from local and state officials from across the political spectrum. she has enormous experience and brings a great deal of policy knowledge and intellect to this position that the president is greatly appreciative of the fact that she's willing to take on this important job. anybody else? you again? go ahead. >> do you think this will help outreach to the communities? >> i think that cecilia is the person for the best job and she's done great work at ig a and for those of you that know her know what an effective advocate she is for the president's policies and how

knowledgeable she is about the whole set of domestic policy issues in the white house conference and that this president has been dealing with for the past three years. this? i want to keep it clean. >> following the latest option by iran and nasiriyah has said things coming out against pressure against the regime has the white house had conversations with their allies about increasing the pressure that they are putting on the two governments -- >> i'm sorry, iran and -- >> iran and syria both and maybe giving it more aggressive in the purpose? >> the answer is of absolutely we have been working quite

aggressively with the international community with our partners and allies around the world to put pressure on syria and isolate iran and in both cases and obviously with regards to iran this is an ongoing effort. we have effectively isolated iran to a degree that has never before been the case. the impact of the sanctions that we have implemented is profound as every reporter out there has recognized and we will continue to work with our allies to do that to get iran to believe to live up to its obligations and in the case of syria to pressure the president to cease the violence against his own people and to set aside so that the syrian people can have their space transition the they demand and preserve. estimate will there be military

action? >> welcome malae of said with regards brought the to these questions the president takes no option off the table but that we are focused in both cases on diplomatic and economic and other non-military actions we can take to bring about the results that we and many countries all around the world our international partners and allies are demanding. >> my last question is a lot of people in the region are wondering what more they can take from these regimes to leges seek a military or strong response from the u.s. and its allies. >> again, we take no option off the table. it is not -- we take a lot off the table. we are pursuing at this point diplomatic, economic and other means to bring about the results

that we and so many other nations are demanding and with regard to the pyrenean and syrian behavior. >> can you confirm the are no longer coming to the u.s. and -- >> i don't think i have an update on that. let me see. as -- let me double check and see if that has changed. >> i just don't have an update on the application status for you. to my understanding it hasn't changed but if it has i will take that for you. i will check on that. his decisions might be about where he is going. it may not necessarily be related to the application status for the visa here. >> yesterday at rick santorum said that he and the president has the same view on same-sex

marriage. what is the president's response to the candidates using his position? >> i think that you know very well with the president's views are on old ddt issues and civil rights. >> the question is about marriage. >> i don't have update on the president's position on same-sex marriage. i think that you know and others here know and understand the position broadly on the zero gb t issues is quite significantly different from that particular candidate's views. last one, yeah. >> thanks. two questions. first, you asked supporters at an event that she knows what it's like to get pink slips and

if he's ever had to worry about that. deal of time that happened? >> i would point to his memoirs. i haven't had that discussion with him and i have not discussed those remarks with the president. >> deval one chris's question. over the weekend, sarah palin said something earlier delayed a similar but the language that she used was very specific. she said the president position on the definition of marriage is the same as rick santorum's, gingrich's and mitt romney's. >> again i would point you to the answer i just gave. >> would that be a true statement? >> i will point you to the president has said in his record -- >> but the president -- he said before that he believed that marriage was between one man and one woman coming years ago. and now he's saying his position is evolving.

would it be fair to say that the definition no longer exclusively -- >> again. i don't have anything. i don't have anything new to give you on this. i appreciate the question, the president has spoken to it. i'm sure he will be asked again about it. but as of now have nothing new for you. ..