states this. we oppose school based clinics that provide referrals or counseling or related services for abortion and contraception. it should be noted that under obamacare there would be $150 million has been earmarked for these controversial school based clinics. just recently cbs reported planned parenthood clinic set up shop in los angeles high school the same planned parenthood that is under a cloud of suspicion over criminal and unethical

activity. we should restore this language back into the platform that was in the platform in 2004-2008. >> the amendment has been presented, explained and seconded. language is on the screen in front of you. is there a discussion on the amendment? you are recognized. >> i would like to speak on behalf of this amendment and i remind the group that this opportunity for health clinics in schools was introduced as far back as the early days of no child left behind. it was repeated and hidden in pieces of legislation several times. it is important to include this as part of our platform. >> are there further comments or discussion?

>> arizona, i also support this wholeheartedly. thank you. >> the question has been called. is there a second? we are on the call of the question. all in favor say aye. all opposed say no. we are now on the amendment. health amendment no. 13 presented by mr. perkins of louisiana. 87 line 30 the insertion of the words that are reflected on the screen. all in favor will say aye. the amendment is adopted. >> no other amendments to this section pertaining academic excellence for all. we will allow the record to reflect at 5:02:00 p.m. we will inclose that section. we are now on page 8, higher

education going through line 11. i have no call for amendments. no call for amendments. we will have the record reflect that 5:03:00 p.m. that we closed this section. we move to line 13 addressing rising college costs. no amendments on this section. we will have the record reflect that at 5:03:00 p.m. we considered and closed this section. we move to line 34 and began consideration of safe neighborhoods. you will see that this goes through the end of the session. this is the last amendment we will have. we have two amendments that are proposed, what is the second one? i don't have that one.

15. all right. i will give you that one. we will begin on page 9, line 2. the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized for health amendment number 6. >> thank you. as the wife of a retired new mexico state police officer and because our law enforcement officers much like our soldiers are fighting wars on american soil it is imperative that we support efforts to make sure that they are well trained not only for our safety and well-being but for theirs as well. therefore i am asking that on line 2 page 9 we just add well-trained law enforcement officers. well-trained. >> is there a second. the amendment has been read, explained and seconded. you will see it reflected on

your screen. it is highlighted. it is the insertion of the word well-trained. question has been called. all in favor of calling the question will say aye. all opposed no. we are now on the amendment and this galaskini it is inserting the word and well-trained. all in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the amendment is agreed to. we now go to line 8 of page 9. does everybody have this? health amendment 15. we will move forward with the amendment. you are recognized for your health amendment 15. it is page 9, line 8. you are recognized for 60

seconds. >> thank you, madam chairman. i made a mistake on this. i would like to change federal to national registry. i did this kind of quickly. the rationale for this is several years ago my niece and nephew were murdered, 3 and 5 years old in indiana. the murderer is going to be released in september to a neighborhood across the street from an elementary school and he will be living with his mother and verified very close to the school. there is no national registry for child murderers. there is a national registry for sex offenders but there is no national registry for child murderers and i ask that you please pass this so that the neighbors of this person would at least be advised that they

will have -- there is no indication that this person has been rehabilitated -- will have a child murderer of a 3-year-old and a 5-year-old as their neighbor. thank you. >> is there a second? the amendment has been seconded. it has been read and explained. the language is in front of you on the screen. is there a discussion? the question has been called. all those in favor, say aye. all those opposed will say no. the question has been called. we are on the amendment. all in favor will say i. all those opposed will say no. the amendment has been agreed to. i have no further amendments to this section. a further amendment to the section? we will show that 507 --

5:07:00 p.m. we concluded. i call on you for closing comments. we are close on all sections of your report. >> madam chairman, thank you for the good work of this committee brought to you a diagram that is better than the original. so we thank those who brought forward the amendment and so i would move that we accept the document that has been submitted to >> motion on the floor to accept the movement as amended. second. all in favor say aye. all of those opposed say no. the section is adopted at 5:08:00 p.m.. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> congratulations. you finished 45 minutes early. [applause] >> we have a little more to do as we wind this -- i want to -- >> we're having technical difficulty from our signal. this is the last day, final day of consideration of the republican platform. they're wrapping up the final

moments, wrapping up deliberations this afternoon. we hope to restore the signal and have that for you. in case you missed it earlier we're covering it throughout the day and also yesterday will find much of it in our video library and c-span.org and the convention kicking off next monday. beginning of a concession the chairman of the republican national committee will get things started with the convention platform being unveiled for the delegates monday afternoon and the roll call of states monday as well. later in the day delegates will vote on nominating mitt romney for president and paul ryan for vice president. live coverage getting underway monday on c-span at 2:00 eastern. >> adopted -- >> we have gotten our video

back. back to tampa and the platform committee beginning to wrap things up. >> to reach out to undecided voters and attract them to our side and you have been able to -- i also ask you to leave a better friend than you came in and i hope that has been accomplished and by your debate and your civility and good cheer along the way you have accomplished that throughout your dinner for your formal conversations here. >> we lost the signal from tampa again. earlier today, it is in our video library and c-span.org. convention coverage starting on c-span monday afternoon at 2:00 eastern. you will see every minute, every speech, all that on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. >> there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities and i

do because some issues just aren't all that simple. saying there are weapons of mass destruction in iraq doesn't make it so. saying we could fight a war on the cheap doesn't make it so and proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn't make it so. >> three days after september 11th i stood where americans died. in the ruins of the twin towers. workers in hard hats were shouting to me whatever it takes. a fellow grabbed me by the arm and said do not let me down. since that day i wake up every morning thinking about how to better protect our country. i will never relent in defending america whatever it takes. >> c-span has aired every minute of every major party conventions since 1984 and our countdown to

the conventions continues with a week ago and to live gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican and democratic national conventions live on c-span, c-span radio and online at c-span.org starting with the gop conventions with new jersey governor chris christie and the keynote address and 2008 presidential nominee senator john mccain and former governor of florida jeb bush. democratic convention speakers include san antonio merrier--mayor castro delivered a keynote address and first lady michelle obama and former president bill clinton. >> next on c-span2 from chicago republican pollster neil newhouse and peter hart released their latest findings on the mood of the american electorate. this is from the national conference of state legislature's annual conference in chicago. it is about 50 minutes. e certainly live in interesting times. the >> we certainly did in

interesting times. the economy but elections, health reform and fundamental role of government dominating the national stage as we head into november. this morning you will hear from two respected and veteran cultures for return engagement to share their insights into what americans think about our country now, how that has changed and what it means for all of us as we head into 2012 elections and beyond. because they have such important things to say we are going to keep them an extra 15 minutes but don't rush out to committee sessions because they will all be starting 15 minutes later. peter hart is one of the leading analysts of public opinion in the united states. since 1971 he has been chairman of the peter hart research associates, national journal named him to its list of national leaders who shape

federal government policy, characterizing him as probably the foremost washington pollster of the democratic party and his centrist candidates. neil newhouse is part and co-founder of public opinion strategies. a firm described by the new york times as the leading republican polling company in the country. neel was recently named pollster of the year by the american association of political consultants for his work on scott brown's winning senate campaign in massachusetts. now he is working to put mitt romney in the white house. please welcome peter hart and neil newhouse.

>> i am peter hart. i am delighted to be here with neil. he is a good friend and good colleague in the field. we both agreed it is unfair we have to follow miss charles. seems absolutely unfair with all of her abilities that here we are and we're going to talk about the 2012 election. neil and i do a lot of back-and-forth. what neil doesn't know is last night i had an apparition and i tell you i saw three people in front of the pearly gates. it was newt gingrich, james leclair and neil newhouse. neil looking at the other two a

little uncertain and the voice came over the loudspeaker, congressman gingrich, dorr number one goes behind door number one and there is a barking dog and sitting there growling and snarling and everything else the voice comes over the loudspeaker and says newt gingrich, you have sins. you will spend all of your life with this growling dog. the voice over the loudspeaker says dorr number 2, goes behind regional cyclops, slobbering voice over the loudspeaker. you have sins. you will spend all the rest of

your days with this cyclops. a little concerned and uncertain at this moment. it comes over and it says neil newhouse, dorr number 3. he opens the door and there is penelope cruz. the voice comes over the speaker and says penelope cruz, you have sins. [applause] this philosophy -- he hasn't sins even if he is working for mitt romney. what i said i would do, what i thought i would do is talk about where we are in america, what is happening, neil's partner -- we have been doing it for 23 years.

neil and i had a great honor of doing it four years ago when phil was working for john mccain. let me go into the slides and begin with where we are in terms of the mood of the nation. elections are about the mood and where we are and what it is about and the first thing you need to know is how the country feels about itself. essentials the only about 30% of americans say things are headed in the right direction and 60% say we are off on the wrong track. if you are an incumbent, that sets the tone. the tone for president obama is going to be challenging. it will be more challenging by the fact that america's optimism about where we are economically says that this is a country full of challenges and particularly in terms of the economy. i will talk about that more later. third thing that is important to

understand, >> reporter: of where we are in the world has to do with getting to the next -- thank you very much -- trust in institutions have dropped dramatically. it used to be we trusted most institutions. today outside of military and outside of firemen, police and ems, our trust has dropped. doesn't matter whether it is the media, congress, state legislature. all of those and now in the financial field we're down to 9% in the area--but the other thing that is important to understand is our sense of where we are in the world and all of these things have changed. we asked a question on nbc wall street journal about 17 years ago. week said looking a generation ahead tell me what you think which country do you think will

be the leading economic power? 54% said the united states. 2% said china. today it is 40% saying each of them and change of turns of our security of where we are is tremendous and finally, the question, how many of you are better off than your parents work? hands up. how many of you believe your children are going to be better off than you are? eight republicans with a trust funds. i am not sure about the arrest. in any respect the ones that are not going to be handing the baton forward for the first time in thirteen generations give you a sense if you're an incumbent and incumbent president of the united states these are hard and difficult times to run in.

second thing to understand, got everything working except the remote. any chance we could move to the next screen? there we go. economic constance. for the university of michigan survey research center they do an economic constants question. they have done it over the course of the last 55 years. essentials when a president is above 85 in terms of confidence--not talking 85%. it is a constance level their chances of reelection are excellent. when it is below 85 it says we are still in recessionary times. it is difficult. if you take a look over this period of time, thank you very

much, you can see the difficulty facing jimmy carter. next slide please. if you take a look, look at ronald reagan. he was playing above 85 and won reelection easily. take a look at george bush 41. only at the end did he get up to 85. too late in a campaign. what happened after that in the next campaign if you look at bill clinton, next slide or next charge bill clinton played above the line in 1992 -- 1996, and won reelection easily. if you look for george bush 43 he won a narrow election but economic confidence was up. here is what barack obama faces in 2012. those numbers are well below 85. they are at 73 now. the question is will constants build in the next four months?

will it be enough and what help? when you talk about that but i am telling you is look at the macro and not the micro situation in terms of where we are as a country. if we could go to the next slide please. thank you so much. let me talk about something which you all know about. this is the campaign we have and what is out there. if the american public had a lever and could vote out every single member of congress, 54% of americans would pull that lever. 54%. that tells you exactly where the public comes from and when we asked tell us if you think obama is running at negative campaign, romney is running a negative campaign, both of them are running a negative campaign or neither, 75% of the american public think that at least one of them is running a negative

campaign and 56% say obama, 47% romney, 34% say both. this is a campaign. this is what the american people are seeing, feeling and reacting to and neal has some dramatic stats in terms of the stocks that are being run. next slide please. when we asked in an open ended question in the nbc wall street journal -- it is $1 and have every time i mention it so you understand my repetition. what campaign do you want? you look at this and the bigger the words of the more people said it. fix the economy. to what is best for america. focus on important issues. stop negative campaign. work together. be honest.

smaller government. the american public is crying out for somebody to talk to them, somebody to communicate, somebody to give them a vision, somebody to give them a sense where we can go out of all this and all we have is a lot of slimed going back and forth. that is republicans and democrats and it is exactly the opposite of what the american public wants. let me talk about where we are. next slide. in our latest nbc wall street journal poll we have president obama ahead 49-43%. the interesting thing as you know as state legislators what really counts here are the subgroups. the president has a huge advantage with women. he is losing the male vote just slightly. if you look in the midwest is absolutely key and always is whether it is wisconsin or ohio

or iowa or missouri or whatever number of those states and here we have the president ahead. independents, critical block, romney is ahead. if i could look at one group and know what is going to happen it is suburban women. they are actually president obama is ahead. you will note that he is ahead with young people. he is behind with elderly. this is an election that has a long way to run. anybody who tells you we know how is going to turn out, don't believe them. the fact of the matter is everything we know about elections everything says it is going to be excessively close and it is going to come down to the wire. all these things say where we are. next slide please. it tells us about america. this election is not about the country as a whole.

it is about 12 states. in fact, if you will whether it is illinois court georgia, neither of those states count. one is red, one is blue. you could go 38 states. we know exactly how it is going to turn out. it is the swing states that make the difference and if you look at those states in every element that we can see essentially obama is doing better in the swing states than romney in this stage of the game in terms of comfort about romney as being the nominee in terms of business experience, in terms of how these people feel about obama's handling of the economy, better in those 12 states. they spent a lot of money. a lot of money and they have made their case in the swing states and that is where it is. next slide please. elections are about one thing --

voters. voters decide to go to the polls that counts. if you look at the measurement we used four years ago is the one we use today. how much enthusiasm, how much interest do you have and if you 9 or 10 on the scale we know you are going to turn out. it is 4% lighter this year than it was four years ago. but here is the real fact. take a look. four years ago the democrats had the advantage of 78-70 over e terest over ths. at this stage of the game the republicans have a 6 point advantage. seventy-four-68. so that is a huge 14 point turnaround one way or another. for democrats the question, two groups. will they bother to turn out? will people who are under the age of 30 turn out? at this stage there at 5-0 on

interest and hispanic voters are at 55. those two groups do not turn out and you can turn off the lights in any number of states whether it is colorado or nevada or mexico or north carolina or virginia or any of those states. the democrats are down in terms of enthusiasm at this stage of the game. next slide. elections are about not only the. but it is the most personal vote that people make. it is the one that comes from the gut and the feeling. we ask people to tell us in their own words what they think of barack obama. a lot of human qualities come out. for the people, a good speaker, good job he has done. he is intelligent. all those things as well as

health reform, foreign policy, immigration, etc.. he has a very rounded profile and one that is positive. next slide please. on the negative side of things you can see the economy is overwhelming, you get the sense of disappointment in terms of incompetent broken promises, too much spending. obamacare, liberal socialism. the complaint with him are all on the -- a lot of the things -- the good parts are the personal side. next slide. how did all of this -- i do a lot of focus groups and i care about focus groups because i think it is a great way of getting underneath what people are thinking and one of the questions i love to ask people is something that relates to their lives in a personal way and i said let us take these

three candidates and suppose they were in the fifth grade. what do you think they would have been like as fifth graders? and i put up various types of people. push the next button please. i had been heard, the respected, the rich privileged kid, hard worker, loaner, teacher's pet, star athlete, of the noel. what do you think newt gingrich would be? push the button, nowak all. who do you think mitt romney would be? rich, privileged kid. how did obama come out? star athlete or the teacher's patch. you say these are just cute but they tell you a lot about where people are coming from. i asked the question a couple weeks ago and i said to them a

dozen people, let us suppose you go to the ball game with either barack obama or mitt romney? nine of the 12 raise their hand and said i want to go with obama. it would be fun. he would be easy. we could just talk back and forth. three people raise their hand and said i want to go with mitt romney. y mitt romney? he has got the limo. he will buy the beer. he will buy the soda. soak in the end of the day when you think about this election it really comes down in a lot of respect to how i look at the people and how i feel at them. this is the problem for challenge facing mitt romney. mitt romney in his own way is really only known on three things. they know his religion, they

know his occupation and they know his wealth. essentials very snow personal element to him. he is a businessman. he is conservative, represents change obviously and some people say he will fix the economy or against obamacare. next slide. all of these things give you a sense of where people are coming from. favors the rich, bad policy, women's issued, bain capital, big business, untrustworthy george w. bush. he hasn't figured out how to make that connection on the personal level. next slide. where all leaves us is if we could punch up three things right now. thank you. two more. essentials the on the personal level when we ask for a

comparison on easy going bleaker still cares about the average person, compassionate, huge obama lead. when it comes to the professional element he is the incumbent president sir you expect obama to have an advantage. he has a major advantage in the area of foreign policy. they see him with a slated vantage in terms of knowledgeable and commander-in-chief but then you get to the other side and when it comes to the question of improving the economy or changing business as usual, romney has the advantage. you get the dynamics of this election where it is coming from and what i would tell you if we could flood to the next slide, we can put it up, essentially in a humorous way, over the past 30 years this is the person who has made more self-inflicted errors

than you can imagine. the inability to release taxes, the wealth of his vacation, ability to talk about the olympics in its own way, and a lot more is out there. i want to conclude if i can with something i feel very strongly about and very personal about and that isn't about humor. it is something that is a series of feelings about where we are as a country. ten days ago like you, spectacular opening ceremony and watching the nation's athletes walk around a track and feeling like all-american this, the july, let humanity and the positive energy those ceremonies give us.

and look to juxtapose it to today's presidential campaign. all the tawdry at sir, super pacs, candidates. in a way that he essentially is anything but the most support of the powerful office in the world. the olympics lifted our spirits. expectations and possibilities and the campaign is the opposite. each candidate and every citizen must take personal responsibility to the campaigns run in our name which we contribute to vote for. 2012 is going to be the most expensive campaign and the most negative campaign in the history of mankind. we look at the serious issues senator durbin raised and the headlines from syria to spain from greece to afghanistan and

realize the strife around the world and here at home is more significant and more important than the campaign the american people are receiving. with the help of pollsters, you the politicians, all politicians have figured out how to win an election. the key is to figure out how to knit a nation together and how to find compromise and begin to solve some of our major domestic issues right in front of us. toomey that is the message of 2012. thank you very much. [applause] >> let me start sharing a story that i know that peter and i have in common which is the role

and definition of a pollster. i live in alexander, virginia and i'm from kansas. could be a constituent. and alexander, virginia is the capital equivalent -- a ton of people. my wife is a reformed political operative and stay at home mom going to women's circle meeting organizing meeting one day and was introducing herself around and people didn't know each other and this woman asked what does your husband do? my wife said he is a pollster. she hesitated a second and said how nice. you must get all your cares redone for free. chris carmichael the story with peter he said you stole my story. i said what do you mean? that is the same thing that

happens to him. this just shows you you have to be short, bald and distinguished looking to the 8 pollsters these days. we both qualified. i would like to have -- go through hard data. we looked at each other's presentations and want to make sure i didn't replicate everything he was doing. i just wanted to touch on the kind of -- next slide -- five things you need to know. there are probably no cameras here. this is off the record. in boston yesterday we were talking to the mvp was going to be and i figured you would want to know. the first thing -- next slide --

the nominee will be -- next slide -- one of these four people. portman, marco rubio or governor tim pawlenty. could be one of these four. paul ryan, bobby gentle -- governor bobby jindal -- could be one of these three. condoleezza rice, chris christie -- all on the list. i am not here to break any news unfortunately. all the names we have been talking about the mvp will be one of those names. here is what is important. voters as peter described don't really know mitt romney very well. or what is going to happen at the convention. he will get a bounce. the convention bounce.

just to compare incumbent versus challengers in terms of presidential numbers and if you look at his numbers usually an incumbent gets about a 7 point bounce in terms of voting behavior and preference pre and post convention. the good news is the challenger gets a little more. the challenger gets more because of another challenger and the challenger -- more importantly for mitt romney is the image of the challenger that really changes free and post convention. the challenger goes into the convention average favorable on favorable score of 32-40 and comes out with an average score of 40-30. if you think what you are seeing right now in the polls is what is going to happen in november, we are pulling in the middle of august in the summer doldrums and voters haven't been through the connection, there is going

to be -- there's going to be a sense of take another look at these candidates and that will happen soon. second, obama's challenge in this election is his record. interesting away he started off his campaign, the republican primary and positive advertising and he gave that up after three weeks and started on june 3rd running negative ads against mitt romney. the reason is i don't think you can move numbers in presidential races especially if you are the incumbent president. what is interesting is look at the data today. the numbers of the president, voters have come to their decision about president obama. they like him or don't like him and voters are undecided right now, guess who you are not

undecided on. they are not undecided on barack obama. they have decided on him. disapprove of the job and want a change but they are undecided on mitt romney. that is why barack obama is attacking mitt romney. that is the way this race is focused right now. just as peter has his favorite questions in focus groups i have my favorite question. here is the question i asked. if you could describe barack obama what type of animal would he be? i did this for jeb bush years ago and he hates this. he still gives me trouble about the focus groups we did for him. interesting exercise. what is interesting is users talk about cars and animals. what do voters say? he looks like a deer in the

headlights. hasn't followed through with his promises. pushes us around. confused. a likable preacher but makes you wonder what is there. just an ass who has delivered nothing. very knowledgeable. a turtle's slow movement, sitting duck. was interesting about that one is focus groups across the country with respect to the bailout. those voters you cannot -- how angry voters are about the bailout of wall street. ac washington bailing out everybody and wonder where is there bailout. when will i see that? resentment is on top. and butterfly. doesn't stick. what these indicate is a real disappointment with president

obama. a sense that they voted for real change in 2008 and didn't get changed. the hope part they still have but they didn't get the change they were looking for. errors that frustration. a sense that they voted for a transformational leader in barack obama and what they have is another politician. it is no different. they voted for something different. buyer's remorse. one please use see that is iowa. they put him in office over hillary clinton, and even more buyers remorse. question president reagan running against jimmy carter, and are you better off than four years ago. people urged me to -- from the

work we have done didn't you expect to be better off? in two four years, didn't you think things would be different than they are now? it plays on expectations and concern and discipline that americans feel. you look at his job approval numbers were going at 37%. if this is the basketball -- should be 65 or 66. he would be -- whether he gets out, 47% is a precarious position. as you know, this is not an election you will hear about taxes. you hear about california and new york. iowa and north carolina and virginia and ohio and the the ten states and president obama's job approval numbers are under

water and net negative in 12 target states. the key is not just where he is in terms of job approval. it is where he is in terms of the intensity of approval. more voters strongly disapprove than approve of the job he is done. that turned against him. it is the direction of the approval rating. president obama was more soft year ago that he is now. the other part of his the challenges. can't think of many ads -- he alluded to a couple times. he can't run the economy because

the economy is not doing well and if he told americans we turned the corner they wouldn't believe him and there is a sense of frustration with president obama that he doesn't have economic policies to turn the country around. americans are less optimistic than they were a few months ago. the economy is not headed the right direction. he is trying to make this a contract with himself and defend his record. this is cbs new york times from a couple weeks ago. on a right hand side, if barack obama was reelected, the financial situation, make it worse or have any impact? the same on mitt romney. of 14 point margin, the personal financial situation could be worse and if mitt romney by 7 points would be better.

almost as if what they are saying is i like him a great deal and respect him. first african-american president. got to respect his accomplishments. but he can't fix the economy. his policies have failed. not that he has failed but his policies are not making things any better and he has run out of ideas. some voters say he has thrown in the towel and given up and there's frustration. our challenge -- for mitt romney it is about definition. who he is. 20% of americans say i need to know more about this guy. only 9% of americans who are undecided in this race and another 4% say they can change their mind. that is a low percentage of americans who were open to persuasion so voters know a lot

about that. when you look at these numbers the address the less important problem for the country 55% say it is the economy and jobs. which candidate can do a better job handling the economy? mitt romney by ten points. fix the deficit mitt romney by 19. creating jobs, by 4. are we leading? no. because they believe obama is more relatable. he is likable and honest and trustworthy and understands the problems americans face. likability won't balance the budget or put jobs in ohio. it won't help a family with their overall budget but there is a sense that he relates to average people. that is the challenge we face in our campaign. and a fourth thing you need to know. if you live in iowa or virginia

north carolina or florida or target states you know this and you have seen it. this is campaign spending like you have never seen before. this is going to be a level that is unprecedented. let me show you a few stats. the estimated broadcast advertising for the presidential campaign $1.1 billion. and cable that spending $200 million. this is not -- if you live in dallas legal taxes or sacramento you won't see a single ad. if you live in ohio good luck to you. just look at the amount of money spent so far. $455 million in ohio. $89 million in virginia. $64 million in florida. $91 million. in cleveland there have been 19,000 at running cleveland so far. peter worked out for me.

167 at the day in cleveland. you are being pounded by this advertising day and night. if you think your getting more than before the reason is you are. there is more spent in july of 2012 than october of 2008 by $1 million in charlotte, orlando. this is unprecedented. i think it is going to get worse. finally to make sure you understand, the victory in the electoral college and what you through this. romney is going to start with the mccain -- he is going to win every state mccain won. he starts for john mccain left off. that is number one.

secondly if there are blue states out there we won't be competitive and lose those states and it comes down to 14 states across the country where this election will play out. there is one road map. 1/2 that is easy to explain. is the 3-2-1 plan. three states in the left are the historically republican states of indiana, virginia and north carolina. indiana is not competitive. no one is on the air in the presidential campaign. virginia and north carolina. north carolina has a narrow lead the field pretty good about it. virginia is crowned zero in this coming election. virginia, of ohio and florida. ohio and florida are the next two states. the two largest swing states for george bush in 2000-2004. they are on the level in terms of how competitive those states would be. if you look at nothing else if one candidate when the ohio,

florida and virginia that race is over. we can win without three of those three states and all three campaign is over. and on the right hand side, wisconsin and nevada. my favorite is eyewall because of buyer's remorse when we talk about earlier in terms of voters be more reluctant to reelect because they lost faith. that is one planned and it is an easy way to explain it and think about the states that going to be key. a couple of key take aways. the first is what the capture in focus groups which is a sense that things will be different. i thought the country would be different and the economy would be better, and with barack

obama, and many americans do the job. i thought it would be different. secondly not which candidate can get the economy overall but fix my economy. i care about the national economy but who will help me. that relateability is the sense that mitt romney cares about the middle class americans that really resonates. third is which is riskier? by riskier -- and if barack obama is reelected it won't be a lot different. and they are asking themselves that question. can you just vote already?

in the target states americans -- they want this election to be held immediately. they want to stop the negative advertising. as peter says, the debate are important and we are going to have relations in the campaign. advertising may be negative but it will be debated at the end of the they themselves and that is worth it. those are the questions voters may have at the end. almost forgot. baseballs signed by the next president of the united states to peter hart. is it from barack obama? from mitt romney. [applause] it says i throw a good

curveball. >> we have some questions on the screens in front of us that you have twitter theed in. we will go from there. >> what is the most sought-after demographic group this election. terribly inappropriate if the line from blazing saddles which i won't repeat the whole line. whites and independent women are the key in this election. both campaigns fighting like crazy for them. that is the most important democratic group. if a northern virginia and ohio and suburban philadelphia and markets across the country.

>> that is where the election will come down to and those people a feeling cross pressured very much on one hand, feeling tough times from the economic front. on the other hand they look at the social and cultural policies of the republicans and brings them back toward the democratic side. they care about education, environmental issues. that is where democrats have a way in to them. it remains a very tough subgroup. >> if you take a look published online a lot of work for walmart and walmart moms and focus on political issues and it is all online and available. if you can understand how these women talk about issues it goes along way in terms of improving the way you talk about issues and everything from when these women talk about upcoming elections the they don't talk in terms of themselves. they talk in terms of what it

means for the kids. they are done. ..ing to make life better for their children. one woman in one of the focus group started donating blood on a regular basis in order to help make ends meet for their family. go on line and look for those focus groups and the wal-mart moms. >> next thing we were asked and we heard a lot about was a political gridlock. will the public send a message? one of the things we have done in the nbc wall street journal poll is that we get as many votes for a third-party candidate at this stage of the perot. rosross

everything in the numbers i have talked about is that the american public is one match away from revolution. if you do not believe how upset and disgusted the american public is, you are not listening. we go to focus groups. we talk to people. every single element says to them, i cannot stand with you are doing. i cannot stand the way that you are doing it. given all of that, i have to tell you that see this frustration. will it generate itself in 2012 with 90 days to go? i do not believe it will, but i do believe that -- think of all

the work -- i think the potential for an independent, third party, something that breaks the mold is there. we are in a transitional age and transformational page at this stage of the game. if you think the arab spring is over there and no place else, it takes so little today to be able to organize. all i can tell you is we understand and see where the public is is at. >> he went through the political environment stuff earlier on. putting it into some context, this is the longest time of sustained pessimism since we started pullinollinh. -- polling. many say america is on the wrong track.

there could be another change in election this fall. america is saying that they will keep voting people out until they get it right. >> it is interesting. it was lovely for neil to give me this ball. it is unbelievable. from my point of view looking at it as an analyst, rob makes a lot of sense. the double down in budget areas. this is a person who has been the standard for the democrats. he will be good in the debate. he is smart. he knows everything. the one thing that i will tell

neil as he put down his 11 different people, the one thing we know is that one person choice on one day. bob jeter, our good friend and former republican pollster, knew it was going to be john danford. in the end, it turned around and it was dan quayle. whatever you know, whatever you think, mitt romney, one ch oice, one time. >> keep in mind, our predictions are good for today only. we have 90 days to go. this'll be an extraordinary election cycle. i agree with peter in the type

of issues that will be debated. this'll be a big election over big issues and not little issues. americans will be decided which candidate they feel can better address the future of the economy and bring the economy back along. the next 90 days will be exciting. would you rather have the election next week or 90 days from now? i am loving every day of it. i am anxious to see what will happen 90 days from now. i do not want to rush it. i think the debate will be educational for america. it will shine a light on these two candidate. americans will make the right choice. >> i want to congratulate you on csl. i did a focus group yesterday and neil will do one with

several republicans. the seriousness of what you come to these proceedings and the convention is impressive. it is that which the american public would love to be able to see. i congratulate you. we will be back for a fifth time. they told us until we get it right, they will continue to have us back. thank you. >> thank you. [applause]

>> just a short while ago, the

republican platform committee approved its draft of the party platform. this morning, the committee considered amendments to the foreign policy and defense sections of the platform for just over an hour. >> completed the most difficult task of the week getting a picture taken. it was well-organized. i hope you are rested, read the last four sections, and you are ready to go. we'll open in prayer, and i'd like to recognize mary from north carolina to lead us. mary? >> thank you, governor. heavenly father, we thank you for the opportunity to live in the freest nation on earth. we are sorry for the many times we sinned against you and beg your forgiveness. shower us with your blessings today, and in particular, we ask guidance in discussing the issues that formed the fundamental principles of freedom and in particular, the belief in the dignity of the human person. help us today to honor your view

in our thoughts, words, and actions, in jesus' name we pray, amen. >> i want to recognize heather sanstrom prt pledge of alliance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> well, ladies and gentlemen, just a quick recap. we are ahead of schedule. that is the good news. we have completed the sections, the two sections that we were scheduled to complete yesterday, and we have completed most of the section on the american century of foreign policy.

we have five amendments left on that. senator will take the gavel in a moment, and then we'll proceed with the constitution section, and then government reform and health care, crime and education, and congresswoman blackburn will chair those remaining sections. at this point, i think we received about 16 or so new amendments for the entire last three sections. i anticipate more forthcoming. there are new forms user friendly for you to use, and we'll use, as we did yesterday, technology, so that you'll have those on the screen so it's easier to navigate. i would ask we endeavor to ensure we get through this. i imagine quite a few more amendments on the tews government reform section. i'd like to ask as you present your comments or make further comments, keep comments to a minute or so and everyone has a chance to be heard. with that, thank you for your

good work and spirit of team work and cooperation. it's been very good, especially the great work on the subcommittee to proceed with the batch and be where we are now and ahead of schedule. >> good morning to you, both of you, and all the of you. as you recall, we left off yesterday on the foreign policy and defense section. we were on page 14, and the subsection are unequivocal support for israel. we had an amendment submitted, fp13, which you should have in front of you, fp13, submit the by randy paige of south carolina. that is an amendment to substitute a new section for the current section, our unequivocal support for israel. with that, turning first to mr. paige -- except that he's not here --

>> yes, his counterpart, working on compromised language right now on that particular amendment. >> oh, boy. are we at the point where he'll be here shortly or move on to something else? >> might want to move to something else. >> okay. all right. then out of deference for mr. paige, we'll move to -- see if we have another -- i think we were going to take fp3 next which is also on page 14. if you would, go to amendment fp3 -- >> senator, if i may briefly? >> yeah. these next three all relate to the same section. >> oh, boy. >> may i suggest we jump back to the beginning of the documents. >> yeah. >> since we might be stepping on amendments -- go back to fp101 or -- sorry -- if we go back to fp15 -- >> yeah, all right.

>> page one. >> you said 3, and we have fp13 # and fp3 relate to this? >> 102, just handed out -- >> okay. all right. so fp102 is, if you don't have it, it's coming. those three relate to the section. we'll step over those. we go to fp15 which takes us back to go back to page 15, line 24. all right. everybody have fp15? all right. that is submitted by thad cuby of defs, page 1, line 24. >> yes, mr. chairman, thank you very much. kind of the explanation for this amendment is that i have a list of things i believe are universal chutes, and one of them is if you're going to grand

the power for government, first imagine the power in the hands of your worst enemy, and so this picks up online 24, and i'll read it into the -- as history has shown, even fellow citizens may rarely become enemies of their country. nevertheless, our government must continue to ensure protections under the constitution to all citizens, particularly the rights of habeas corpus and due process of law. for this reason, the republican party must oppose the detention of american citizens proposed by the national defense authorization act. the -- the obama administration has -- it's not beyond them to use other things like the irs to

go after donors for conservatives. the idea of granting this power to government is in defiance of the constitution. i guess it's open for discussion. >> okay. is there a second? >> i will second. >> there is a second. mr. bob? >> thank you, mr. chairman. jim bob, indiana, i rise to oppose this amendment. amendment to the same subject was moved in our sub committee, the restoring the constitution. it was defeated. what this would do is change current law including current constitutional law which permits enemy combatants who are

captured on the battlefield to be held indefinitely without the right of habeas corpus. the supreme court upheld that concept; and it doesn't matter whether the enemy combatant is a u.s. citizen or not. if they fight for a foreign country or foreign interest, they can be so held, and, of course; during world war ii, there were literally thousands of both german, io it -- italian, and japanese ennies held in camps in the united states, and they were dealed with by the military authorities, were not subject to the right of habeas corpus, and that included several german soldiers who were captured after they were released -- after they got into the united states by a submarine on the east coast, seen they were captured in the united states, and they were an

enemy combatant, they were subject to military authorities and indefinite detention. i support the idea that that constitutional law that is currently existent be continued, and i oppose treats enemy combatants as if they are peaceful united states' citizens so i oppose the amendment. >> when we were in the justice department at the time of 9/11, we needed maximum flex abilities to deal with terrorists like the possibility of detention in places like gitmo. terrorists, if they have someone to clip themselves u.s. citizenship do so. anwar is a recent example, and a john walker lint among the original al-qaeda, used u.s.

citizenship. they will have the right of habeas corpus as my colleague from indiana mentioned and have access to article 3 court review. putting this blanket statement, while i agree with the base sentiments of the sponsor, i think putting this blanket solution doesn't give us the flexibility needed in the war against terrorism. >> [inaudible] >> get closer to the microphone if you can. >> [inaudible] >> there you go, now you're on. >> [inaudible]

>> respected colleagues on the other side, and taking care of of -- [inaudible] fact is absolute power and putting that kind of pain out again of a single person or small commission without checks and balances envisioned by our founders is wrong and up -- incredibly dangerous. >> the gentlewoman from nevada.

>> cynthia kennedy from nevada. the gentleman against the amendment talked about german sub mariners captured and imprisoned. it was obvious when captured who they were and what they were here for. they were in a submarine. it was obvious they were enemies, and i don't think anyone disagrees with him they should have been captured and imprisoned until the war was over, but i also direct people's attention to the japanese citizens who are put in concentration camps throughout the country, and years later, 10-15 years ago, those japanese citizens received an official apology and renumeration from the united states government because they regretted imprisoning the people just based on their heritage and not considering at all the fact that they were u.s. citizens, and held their own personal

allegiance to the country and not japan, but there's another aspect of ndaa that i also find very alarming, and a severe infringement of first amendment rights, and i also want to say that when bin laden and his -- >> ma'am, we're on a different amendment. >> well, no, i'm talking about this ndaa. >> well, it's -- well i'm just going to say there's also a part of this -- of the ndaa, about the first amendment speech and not protesting within so many hundred feet of persons protected by secret service. there's so many people in the federal government now who receive secret service protection, i find unusual that that many people in government feel the need for that kind of protection, and we're paying for it, but the fact you cannot even protest around them. i see obama on television with roads lined with cheering people and wonder where are the

protesters? well, you don't see them because they can't be this or they'll be arrested. think about your first amendment right to free speech. you should be able to tell elected people how you feel about them and not have to worry about getting put in jail just because you stood there and were too many feet too close. >> point of order. >> mr. attorney general? >> senator, couple things. one, when i look at the number of amendments today, if we don't have limits on these individual amendments, folks are going to be shortchanged at the end of the day. i think we need to have limits. >> i'm gipping to let the delegate from nevada complete her point. you've been interrupted. >> i thought it was indefinite suspension? >> for me, it was very important that i don't want my rights for free speech to be infringed and

protest when and where i feel on public property, and i don't want to fear being put in jail for that. >> mr. chairman, first of all, i correct the woman from nevada, those people were american citizens, not enemy combatants. my wife's family was part of that. >> [inaudible] >> secondly -- >> excuse me, the gentleman has the floor. >> this is a motion brought up at the state convention, and as chairman of the committee dealing with the defense and foreign affairs, we, none of us on the committee had read ndaa, and the former commander for intelligence of nato was a member of my committee, and he volunteered to head up a review of the statute. they came back 30 minutes later after specifically going through the statute and found there's a number of very specific exemptions that apply to american citizens in the statute, and they could not find a specific end in the statute

that met the purpose of this amendment. >> mr.bopp? couple points. first the historical record is that we have treated enemy combatants in such a way that they are not afforded full constitutional rights. they are subject to indefinite detention if they are captured. in fact, contrary to the lady's suggestion, one of those german sub mariners that came on to american soil to be a spy who was dressed in civilian clothes was, in fact, a united states' citizen. he was captured, subject to indefinite suspension under military authority. secondly, the -- as you remember, when the british

soldiers came to lexington, the militia formed to defend their homes and families didn't go to court to determine whether or not it was okay to fight enemy come baa at that particular times, british combatants coming to the town, but free under the rules of war to engage them. enemy combat taints are -- combatants are now treated in the same way that the japanese citizens of the united states who were enturned in world world ii. they are not treated the same way, and that was certainly a regretful period of our time where the distinction of combatants and civilians was not recognized. we recognize that error, but that doesn't mean we just abandon the whole concept of how we treat enemy come baa at that particular at that particular --

combatants. >> the question has been called. >> non-debatable motion. >> we'll vote at this point. all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. oppose, same sign. we'll have a show of hands. all those who voted in favor of the motion raise their hand. >> point of order. the motion we're -- >> wait, wait -- >> which motion? the motion to cut off debate or the motion to the amendment. >> to -- once the point of order is made, my understanding is we need to vote on the amendment at that point. mr. parliamentarian, will you make a ruling? >> i said point of order, but

met call of question. >> takes a two-thirds vote. [inaudible conversations] >> all right,. we're voting on ending debate. >> point of order? >> hold on a minute. >> [inaudible] >> just a minute. just a minute. mr. parliamentary, explain the procedure. >> when you call for the question, all right -- >> the question's been called. >> two-thirds vote. >> requires a second? when you call a second, does it require a second? >> yes, it does. >> there was a sufficient second; am i correct? >> yes. >> question was called, a second made. we're required to make the vote; is that correct? >> correct. >> takes a two-thirds vote to end debate, all right? >> correct. >> point of order? >> just a minute. mr. parliamentarian. question was called and been seconded. does it take a two-thirds vote. >> no. >> yes, it does.

>> but we're voting on to end debate; correct? >> just a minute, who is speaking? >> to end debate, it does take two-thirds. >> who is speaking? ms. layman, go ahead. >> i just wanted to clarify we're about to vote on ending vote -- >> debate. >> not the motion. >> takes a two third vote. we're going to the parliamentarian. if you want to discuss that afterwards, you can. takes a two third vote according to the parliamentarian. we're voting. all in favor of the motion which was to call the question -- do this by a show of hands. >> voting against this? >> wait. okay. clearly, that's two-thirds. opposed also raise your hand. all right. clearly two-thirdses, the eyes have it. now we'll vote on the amendment. is that the correct procedure >> correct. >> all in favor of the amendment raise your hands.

all those opposed to the amendment, raise your hands. the amendment fails. all right. now, are there any other amendments for the section american century? are there any other amendments for the section of an american century? seeing none, that section is now -- >> senator? >> yes? >> yesterday, at the end of the session, i was going to suggest, which i'll do now as suggested by yourself, i think it's an editing suggestion, but it goes strongly towards what we want to convey and communicate as part of this blueprint for the next four years with subtitles in pages 2, 3, and 4 principally. it's turning what seemed to be

the subcommittee had taken this into account. it's taking those subheadlines that are specific observations about the state of the situation in particular subject matter turning it into what our vision statement is for that, and i'll give a quick suggestion. for example, on se questing, who our party's proposal and what we hope romney implements is securing our military in a world of budget sequestering on leaks for political purposes, but it's about securing our nation's classified information. on the subtitle "a failed national security," it's about a new functional national security strategy. >> if i might, these are working titles just for the document with the fewest number of words to get people to the point internally. >> okay. >> the staff will be putting together more appropriate language. >> okay. >> share those with elice.

appreciate that. if you have thoughts, e-mail them in. tomorrow, when we do the proofing and editing before print, all titles will be, you know -- >> okay. >> i'm sorry. >> thank you. >> thank you. appreciate working that out. all right. >> senator, if i could drsh there's two ground rules -- close the section. >> yeah, first let me close the section. american century now closed. three remaining sections. ben? >> two things, when too many of you hit your microphone before you are recognized, that's why we lose mmps. when you put your hand up, and you are recognized, do not hit it because once three go on, you shut down sections two. state your name and state. thank you very much. >> all right. we'll did to -- we'll go to the next section. yes, point of order. mr. ericson. get closer to the microphone. they are having trouble hearing

you. >> [inaudible] i've been asked from other delegates from minnesota when you'll have the final printing. do you know about when that will be able to be distributed to the delegates coming in from the home state? >> question is when will you get a final draft. the document will be delivered to the tampa bay forum monday morning at 6 a.m., and the freeman folks who run the inside of the stadium will put it on every delegate seat, on their seat as they walk into the stadium for the delegates. we are printing an extra number in washington to put across the country, but every delegate receives it when they sit down in the house. >> all right. we're going to the current failure. there are actually several amendments. was that in -- hang on here. the amendments i have, i have

fp11 and fp101. those both relate to page 2, line 2, and that would be in the current failure. beep, do you have something -- ben, do you have something different than that? reporters asked me to remind you, every time i call on you, even if i say your name and state, repeat it so he has it for the record. now, the amendments in front of me are fp11, and i also have fp101, both of which relate to the current failure. ben, do you have something different? >> both what i have by mr. ford, same page. >> right, same page, same line. >> withdrawing 11. >> all right.

fp11 is withdrawn. >> fp101, sir. >> right. >> yes, sir. >> we're now on fp101, in the section of current failure relating to line -- excuse me, page 2, line number 2, richard ford from rhode island. mr. ford. >> richard ford from long -- rhode island here. yes. neison building, failed policy of the democrats, and we, republicans, need to go back to the humble foreign policy of george bush before 9/11. 9/11 pushed us into a situation where we had to do some things. we have to go back to not creating democracies overseas that creates islamic regimes and just focus on the goal of getting our enemies and bringing troops home as safely and as soon as possible.

that's why i wrote the amendment. >> mr. ford, on your text, you say you insert it after we face similar challenges so does it relate to line 1 coming before the current administration? or are you replacing something? >> i'm not replacing. >> you're just adding it after we face slave challenges today -- similar challenges today; is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> it actually starts online one. page two, line one. >> yes. >> is there a second? there is a second. is there discussion? >> mr. chairman? >> raise your hand, please. >> here. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i think i see what the amendment is getting at, but i'm very concerned it would be read and maybe intended to be read as getting out a whole range of tools that we

regularly use in foreign policy in order to protect the american security at as inexpensive a cost as possible, tools by which, you know, we assist other countries in developing grassroots, democratic, and economic institutions. now, we've been successful at doing that in the past, and in doing so, we've reduced conflict. look at germany and japan, which we helped develop in that way. we're trying to do that right now, and, as a matter of fact, ought to be trying to assist libya as it emerges as a democracy. it doesn't mean we go in and build a nation, but it means we can use tools like that in order to prevent having to use more expensive, more costly kind of tools to protect the security that might well cost americans in life or considerable treasure. i oppose the amendment. i would also say that we did spend a lot of time on the subcommittee mark. we considered a lot of these. we tried to take into account

instances where policies or powers have been abused and tried to provide hedges and protections against that so that we get a good, strong principle and balanced subcommittee mark. you know, certainly appreciate everybody's contribution, and i know the delegate's trying to be constructive, but i have to oppose the amendment. >> mr. ford? >> i appreciate that, but i feel 110% that nation building blows up in our face, especially in the middle east. we have yemen on fire right now. bahrain is ignored. so many issues over there that it doesn't work. libya is pretty much al-qaeda central now. i don't agree. >> all right. yes, sir? >> mr. chairman? you know, on a brief comment in response. i have to agree with senator talent, you know, with nation building, no one's promoting nation building, but we should say we don't like democracy,

only the democracy we want it at. for or against democracy in the world, but can't pick and choose, well, i want this country with a democratic government, but, by the way, i don't like the way the democratic government looks in the next country over. that's inconsistent and not consistent with our founding principles. thank you. >> ready for the question? >> how is scalia law democracy -- >> do you have a comment, first? >> yes, sir. i'd like to speak in favor of this amendment. i want -- i respect opinions of everyone here, but i don't think this, in any way, would detour us from using tools. it's just a policy that if we believe in national sovereignty, we have to respect the national sovereignty of other nations as well, and if we are -- if they

become a threat, we'll deal with them, and we've been how many years in afghanistan, and we keep finding new people to fight or new people to come to fight us. one tribe fights us one time, and then we are friends. with them, and then another tribe fights us another time, and then of all people lost there, it seems like we keep making no progress, and the idea that we're going to continue to do this in other parts of the world when our borders are wide open, and we have national security issues here and the financial crisis, and so i'm going to speak in favor of this amendment. >> the gentleman in the back, and then governor mcdonald. >> governor from massachusetts, may we call the question, please? >> the question was called and seconded.

we will vote on that motion. all of those in favor in calling the question signify by saying, "aye". opposed? motion carries. we'll now voten't motion. all in favor of the motion say "aye," and those oppose signify by saying "aye". all right, motion fails. >> ladies and gentlemen, brief briefly, first to maintain order and to be able to get through some a number of sections where there's going to be a lot of heart felt disagreement. please speak when recognized and follow the rules of decorum. we have a light on. now, we're going have this as a guide at this point, but if we get to the point where we can't keep the comments to a minute, we have to have stronger enforcement. because we've been ahead of schedule, we've been lean yet with that, but govern yourselves accordingly. the light is here for a guide as

this point, and speak only when you are recognized by the chair. thank you. >> and governor of the guide is 45 seconds -- >> [inaudible] >> keep comments to a minute. again, we want as much debate as possible. we want to make sure we have time for amendments and give everybody their shot. this is about maximizing debate and making sure everybody has a chance to give their thoughts and their comments and input. with that, i believe that we're ready -- oh, no, one more amendment. fp12 also relates to the current failure. that is mr. ford as well. mr. ford. >> richard ford from rhode island again. i just think just calling out the chinese on attack is wrong. entire block, brazil, russia, india, and china, and they all want our currency to fail, and

that's my position. >> i can't tell where this goes. >> mr. ford, would you explain where this amendment fits? you got page 2, line 4. where would that amendment fit on that -- >> [inaudible] >> right after the word "rising"? >> [inaudible] >> use your microphone, please. >> mr. ford, turn on the microphone. >> brazil, russia, india, china. ..

>> mr. kim from idaho. >> illinois. >> illinois, i'm sorry. >> this great country, especially india, the largest democracy in the world, so i don't think he's great countries will all sit together in their political attitude. so i would oppose the amendment. >> mr. ford. >> they are all working together to trade out of our currency and in their own and completely

disrupting our hegemony in the world, would have to disagree. >> i would like to speak on behalf of brazil. they love america and don't want our currency to fail. i guarantee it is the issue. and to call out names of friendly countries to the united states in such a pejorative manner, i think, is an error, and i oppose the amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. well, i just say in response to the amendment that america is not a hegemon, and if we work come brazil and india would not be opposing this. with great respect to the delegate to my call for the question. >> the question has been called with sufficient second. all those in favor of the motion signify by saying i. >> aye. >> opposed same sign. the motion carries. we will now vote on the amendment. all those in favor of the

amendment signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed to the amendment say it aye. >> aye. >> the amendment fails. i believe that causes of this section on the current failure. now we move on to sequestration. >> mr. chair. >> just a minute. we are going to make sure that we've got -- do we have an amendment in that sequestration section? >> no, sir. that section is closing. >> all right. sequestration is closed. the only question -- section i have left open is the changing. >> page 14, unequivocal support of israel. >> is that the only section remaining open? >> change in the middle east. >> okay.

the remaining sections are unequivocal support for israel and then add changing middle east. we have, at this point, three amendments, actually, that relate to a, i believe, those sections. the first one we will take is fp 13. >> additional amendments are being offered right now. >> all right. submitted. this is submitted by randy paige of south carolina. this was the amendment that we finished on yesterday. it would replace our unequivocal support of israel with the new section. >> randy paige, south carolina. i appreciate the upper to the to reintroduce them in the discussion that we closed that yesterday evening. the change proposed should not be controversial. it does not contradict the israeli government in any way. it does not prejudice any particular course of action or outcome. it is well wishes to continue a policy of negotiation, it can

certainly do so, but only as a matter of its own free will. our voters want to work toward repairing the damage that obama has done to israel's standing and to u.s. does is -- u.s.- israeli relationships. we cannot simply offer them more of the same. the voters who will put president romney in office already agree with us completely on the spirit of this new language, and we have good reason to hope that is more tempered and realistic approach will strongly appeal to democrats in florida, ohio, and pennsylvania who will be crossing over for this very reason. in fact, just recently the republican national committee passed a resolution authored by the committee woman from south carolina to put forth a 1-state solution. the platform calls for a 2-state solution. i simply want to move us to a neutral position to about his role to be sovereign. i want to close by reiterating my remarks from yesterday evening. how we decide upon the choice that we are facing here today will be known to the public.

they are watching us. if you stand for the area of having american pressure israel to continue negotiating the establishment of another terrorist state in its backyard just like president obama has, i challenge you to hold your hand up high so that every republican and every friend of israel can see just where you stand if you vote against this vast improvement. >> is there a second? >> second. >> there is a second. is there further discussion? make -- name and state. >> julie harris from arkansas. i would support this amendment. after two decades of failed and blind peace process, i don't think it is the republicans place to put in a platform to pressure or dictate to israel how to negotiate with palestine. i know that, you know, we simply don't want to go contrary to israel's wishes, but even their

prime minister at one time felt like to give palestine their own state would be a gift to palestinian terrorism. so i would support this amendment to just simply drop the language supporting palestine and that governor romney said his own policy for israel. as we know, it can change from one week to another. thank you. >> please try to keep your comments within one minute if you can. thank you. the gentleman in the back. >> tony perkins from louisiana. i rise in support of the amendment. the current language in the platform is good as it pertains to a our support of israel which i agree, we need to be unequivocal and our support given what this administration has done with our with israel. however, the language in the current proposed platform is

leading, and that it says, we envision a two-stage solution. i agree that should be up to israel to decide what is in its best interest, and we should be neutral on that language. i support the amendment. >> senator. >> thank you. i appreciate the delegates recognizing the language in this subcommittee report that does express our unequivocal support of israel. so i plan, actually, after the dougie remarks yesterday to read the first paragraph, but i won't. i encourage anyone who has and to read it, and you will see how strong the languages in support of israel. the question is whether we should say something in this report in support of the idea of two states in the mideast. now, the argument is offered that we should not say that because if we do we will be pressuring the government of israel, but it is exactly as amendment with pressures the government because the policy of the government of israel right now and has been for a number of years is to negotiate a piece

that involves to it states. i would suggest that the sponsors of this amendment of like that. i'm not sure they're wrong, but they want the government of israel to change its position. there the ones pressuring the government. here is what prime minister netanyahu said well in a speech to congress. israel will be ever vigilant in defense and never give up our quest for peace. israel wants and needs piece. we have achieved historic peace agreements with egypt and jordan that have held up for decades, but they are not enough. we must find a way to forge a lasting peace with the palestinians. two years ago at publicly committed to is solutions for two states. a palestinian state and jewish state. had we express support for israel if we are offering an amendment which is pushing them in the direction of abandoning a policy of their chosen? this is -- we talked about this and subcommittee. i appreciate the support. cannot be strong enough in support of them, but i have to oppose the amendment on the grounds that i think it is boeing to achieve the opposite of what is intended.

>> mr. bircher from california. >> mr. chairman, of like to call the question. >> there is a motion to call the question and the second. we will vote on that motion. all those in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> opposed same sign. >> aye. >> we will go to show of hands. all those in favor of the motion raised a hand. all those opposed, raise your hand. let's count and make sure. [background noises] >> you are satisfied? update. we will go to vote on the amendment. the motion carries. we will go to vote on the amendment. >> roll call. >> all those in -- well, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying i. >> aye.

>> all those opposed signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> it will go to show of hands. >> roll call, please. >> roll-call vote. in a request for a roll-call vote. >> is that in order? [inaudible] >> point of order. >> we are checking to make sure we're following the right procedure here. >> it only takes 20%. 20 percent. >> do you need a second for a roll-call vote? >> mr. chairman -- >> just a minute. just a minute. a request has been made for a roll-call vote. that has been seconded. mr. parliamentarian, is that sufficient? >> 20% must request. >> show of hands. how many request of roll call vote? show of hands. it requires 20% to have the roll-call vote.

[inaudible] keep them up. it requires 20%. request of the members present in order to require a roll-call vote. that is what we are checking, to see if there is 20 percent requesting. that would not be sufficient. [inaudible conversations] >> all right. insufficient for a roll-call vote, so we will have the standard ." all those in favor of the amendments signify by saying aye

>> aye. >> those opposed signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> we will do -- i believe that the amendment fails to but we will make sure. japan's. all in favor raise your hand. excuse me. the amendment. all those infected of opposed. the amendment fails. all right. do we have -- we have other amendments that relate to this. >> senator, several by kevin erickson, minn., line 14 -- page 14, less 28-29. >> we will go to fp3. page 14 line 28 and 29. kevin erickson, minnesota. >> kevin erickson from minnesota. this was -- i was a part of the subcommittee. this was a very close vote to strike the language requiring the 2-state solution or supporting the to-dissolution. i think it is worth a fuller

discussion about rather than completely throwing out the existing language and replacing it as a last amendment required, this would simply take that off the table. it would not change our policy, but one of the things that happens when we suggest that this is the solution we're pushing toward is that, that can cut off discussion if and when the negotiation happens of the other alternative solutions that make -- may come to negotiation. there's nothing in making this amendment that would pressure israel to do anything other than negotiate only when the palestinians reject. >> is there a second to the amendment? there is a sufficient second. discussion. >> mr. chairman. >> just a minute. go ahead. >> mr. stern's, the virginia. where are we? which document are we on?

>> fp3. >> okay. >> mr. erickson. >> okay. my apologies. >> all right. somebody else asked to speak. >> right here. >> you have to raise your hand. i can't see. >> thank you. i also have an amendment on this subject. i would offer a friendly amendment to of mr. erikson's amendment and just at mind to that which would say, we recognize israel's right to negotiate her borders with the palestinians. in said that language in the sentence thereby supporting is row completely, not saying that we support the two states position necessarily, but allow israel to do her on negotiation. >> well, we have a number of

amendments that relate directly to this same line. hold for just a minute. we're checking with our parliamentarians. [inaudible] >> all right. if you would come everybody take fp103. that is ms. mccarthy's amendment. that is what she is bringing up now. the parliamentarian said that is a more broad amendment. she is offering it as a friendly amendment to mr. ericson's amendment. now, you have offered this amendment. is there a second? >> second. >> there is a second. is there a discussion? >> illinois. i am very much in favor of the

amendment. i think it is imperative that we strike the two-stage solution language from our platform. adelle see how we can possibly be supporting his robe and we're telling them how we envision them to solve their problem. i think the better way to support is to take that language out and to instead support them in determining their own state in making their own decisions about their own country. >> mr. stern's from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just wanted to point out that when we are discussing this i think we need to recognize, we are not telling israel to do anything. this is basically saying, they reserve the right to make the best decision for their best interest. when the previous debate was going on, it sounded like we were trying to twist this into a, we're going to tell israel to do something. i am coming out in support of this because i think we do need to allow israel or at least have

frederick that is going to allow israel to be free to make their own decisions for their best interest. >> congressman, kentucky. >> thank you very much. i would ask to read this entire section with her amendment as she is proposing so that we can get up very clear -- >> is it correct on the screen. >> it is on the screen. >> is that sufficient? >> just a minute. >> all right. >> is that correct? >> no. we need to strike. we envisioned to democratic state sen. actually, i would -- it would read, starting on line 28 to my

we support israel's right to exist as a jewish state would secure indefensible borders with jerusalem as its capital and then the new sentence, we recognize israel's right to negotiate her borders with the palestinians to live in peace and security. so that would end on line 29 and go on with the rest of the original language. >> all rights. language has been clarified. >> thanks you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this amendment is -- and the amendment to it is an attempt to read litigate the issue we essentially just voted on which is whether our platform is going to support the policy of the government of israel. i think delegates should not be

mistaken here. if this language is removed and we are removing the language which is the policy that prime minister netanyahu has committed himself to publicly over and over again, i will share some language from the prime minister. the palestinians share this land with us. we seek a peace in which they will either be israel's subjects are citizens. they should enjoy national life of dignity as a freak, viable, independent people in their own state. if you don't like that policy, you can debate that. i think there are points to be said, but if you want the support, the policy of the government of israel, you have to defeat these amendments. i urge all amendments to this effect be defeated. >> i appreciate that there are more of you that want to comment we have got to move on at this point. and going to have to call for the vote. so, again, we have a lot of ground to cover. and as you want the way in. i have to call a vote at this

time. all those in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> those opposed? >> aye. >> those have it. the amendment fails. we object to the first amendment. but me check. do we need to return? of rage. we are now back. and i would call -- okay. mr. erickson, and then we're going to vote on fp3. >> again, just in response, but quick to fire striking the language making that two-stage solution our official policy we are not undermining the position or keeping any of our candid as to whether governor romney or anybody else from supporting that as a solution. it is just broadening it and being a little less specifics of that if, in fact, at some point in time the palestinians reject terror and commit to working peaceably then we can think about other potential solutions,

and we aren't really saying to is rare what their solutions should be if they change their mind. this is nothing meant to undermine their current position or to undermine the strength of our support for israel. it is simply meant to keep the idea, the box of ideas open for creative solutions. >> again, we have had substantial debate. i'm going to go to the question. all those in favor signify by saying i. opposed to > that's correct. >> same line. this is -- with a minute. fp102. >> 102 a. >> you have it.

>> we are getting it. >> with strong, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman. fp102amfp102 are my amendments, and i would draw the. >> all right. both have been withdrawn. the next amendment i have is fp 104. >> that's correct. >> that has been submitted by tony perkins of louisiana. >> mr. chairman, with all due respect to the gentleman from missouri, i disagree with the current platform and believe it is leading to a two-stage solution. i think it should be up to them. the will of this body, we have done with this matter, i withdraw this amendment corrects all right. fp104 has been withdrawn. fp105, and i'm sorry, but i cannot read the zimmerman's last name.

fp105. >> why. >> yes, sir. >> this amendment in no way alters the support for the two state system, but recognizes some reality in the middle east. i would propose that online 29 we had the following, recognize that this will not be possible so long as hamas is part of the palestinian government and so long as the palestinian authority refuses to this date in arabic that israel has the right to exist as a jewish state would secure insensible borders. >> is there a second? >> second. >> there is a second. >> again, i have read the point submitted. it is a superb piece of writing. fair, balanced, and i do not think it should be altered in any way.

it achieves exactly the kind of love with up program, putting up red flags, it sees exactly what the republican party wants to say on that particular subject, and i would oppose this and any other amendment to change it. it is probably the best who in the entire platform. >> again, i can't see your name. >> debt from the district of columbia. i would like to echo what the previous to unsaid. >> question has been called and seconded. all in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> opposed sinsyne. the question is called. all those in favor of the amended signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed, same sign. >> aye. >> motion fails. those are all of the amendments i have at this point. so at this point we will close the section. our unequivocal support of

israel. that leaves a changing middle east. no amendments submitted. is there any discussion? all rights. we will close that section. >> no other. >> at this point than we have no other amendments, so i am going to return briefly to the center for the closing comments. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will be brief. i think the delegates for their constructive and vigorous debate. at think that we have a great subcommittee. i hope part of the full platform. i do want to correct something said yesterday. it hurt further debate on this section. i think it is important. vital to american military to understand that the sequester

will call is an absolute real increase in the defense budget. if it's allowed to go into affect the defense budget will go next year from $5,503,000,000,000 to $490 billion. a $55 billion cut, and it will not recover. unprecedented that the president was support a cut in the defense budget that his own secretary of defense has said is devastating. cannot in my recollection, all my years involved in this issue, and this is true for everyone in the defense community, remember when the commander in chief could do something like that. we have a strong climb against that. i think the chairman. i urge the committee to adopt this. >> i just like to thank the leaders and the committee members year. and everyone is very passionate about their feelings, and i really appreciate the vigor of

the debate. and up every one is happy with the way it turned out. >> thanks to all of you for your passion on this and your consideration. with that, we will vote on the entire section. all those in favor of the section as amended signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> opposed, same sign. >> aye. >> motion carries. mr. chairman, back to you. [applause] >> thank you. we are halfway done. a ten minute break. see you in ten minutes. thanks. [background noises]

[background noises] >> the republican convention kicks off at 2:00 p.m. eastern on monday. delegates will vote on approving the platform. later in the day monday zero roll call vote on nominating mitt romney for president and paul ryan vice-president. addressing the convention monday night, house speaker. florida governor. kentucky senator. also, south carolina governor, former arkansas governor, and 2008 presidential candidate mike huckabee and and romney. all of that every minute of the republican and democratic national conventions live on our companion network c-span, also on c-span radio and streamed live at c-span.org. >> now, i know that there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities, and i do

because some issues just aren't all that simple. saying there are weapons of mass destructions does not make it so. saying we could fight a war on the cheap does not make it so. as to claiming mission accomplished, certainly does not make it so. [applause] >> three days after september the 11th i stood where americans died in the ruins of the twin towers. workers in hard hats were shoving to meet, whatever it takes. a fellow grabbed me by the arm and said, do not let me down. since that day i wake up every morning thinking about how to better protect our country. i will never relent in defending america, whatever it takes. [applause] >> c-span has every minute of every major party conventions since 1984, and our countdown

continues with one week to go until our live gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican and democratic national conventions live on c-span, c-span radio, and stand on line at c-span.org, all starting next monday with the gop convention was new jersey governor chris christie in the keynote address. also, 2008 presidential nominee senator john mccain and former governor of florida jim bush, democratic convention speakers include san antonio mayor delivering the keynote address stop-loss first lady michele obama and former president bill clinton. >> this weekend on book tv beginning sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern from his 2010 after words interview mitt romney from his book no apology. >> if they felt the president was not going to be a strong defender of american values and american principles, human rights, democracy, free trade, free enterprise, those words of apology and the statements, i think, have emboldened those who

find this as a weekend enemy. >> later in the book, the real romney, co-author and boston globe investigative reporter in explores the early years through the 2002 winter olympics and his tenure at bain capital, part of our book tv weekend on c-span2. >> today president obama begins a 2-day campaign swing through ohio and nevada. tonight at 8:00 eastern the president attends a campaign rally at a community college in reno, nevada. you can see them live on our companion network, c-span. >> you're watching c-span2, politics and public affairs weekdays featuring live coverage of the u.s. senate. weeknights what's key public policy events. every weekend, the latest and nonfiction authors and books. you can see past programs and get our schedules at our website and joining the conversation on social media sites.

>> washington journal this week takes a look at online news outlets and their coverage of campaign 2012 live every morning at 915 eastern on c-span. today we spoke with guy bentsen, political editor of town hall. >> this week the loss of internal is highlighting online media sources. a kicked things off yesterday was of the nelson. tomorrow, we will be tell the other online media at covington post. on thursday, neil monroe is our guest from the daily collar, and on friday we will wrap things up with the congressional reporter at talking points memo. today we are joined by guidance and from town hall. thank you so much for being here. what is town of? >> an online news and political aggregation site. we have news, an opinion. it is very much from a conservative perspective.

we follow the day-to-day developments from across the country. a heavy emphasis, naturally, these days on the election. we also have a magazine product, and our sister site is hot air dot com. we are super excited to be here and thank you for inviting as. >> yeah looking at the magazine version. we see a cover story that he did behind the scenes with the party man, strategy for firing the democrats. another story inside with the doj does not want you to know about him and trafficking. let's take a look at the most recent cover of town hall. michael bloomberg is america's most dangerous mayor. get a sense of how it launched in the anti behind it. >> well, it launched in the mid-90s. it was one of the first major political sights on the right on the internet. in fact, the speaker at the time, newt gingrich, was there as was majority leader bob dole for the big unveiling.

back at the time it was actually a property of the heritage foundation, so it was not for profit. it was a little bit different in nature. does not have the ability to be quite as partisan because it was a think tank. a few years ago. communications, primarily area company. some of the names that you may or may not have heard of. bill bennett, michael, you, dennis, that group of guys. they started expanding their portfolio on the online side with an eye to the future. town hall was one of the big initial purchases. hot air was added. i think it was two years ago. so it has been an interesting evolution, but we are now very much in the private sector. for profit. hoping to remain in the black. election season, very helpful in that regard. >> if you would like to talk with guy been some of townhall.com, here are the

numbers to call. the political editor. what is your big focus right now? you able to get on the campaign trail? >> i have been on the campaign trail for over a year. i was at the very first republican primary debate. i think it -- there were about 1,000. i think it was in south carolina. that was the one where governor romney was not there. tim pawlenty was the headliner. almost every debate after that followed around a number of these candidates. our leaders -- and this is not necessarily a shock, but our has made a distinct turn from the fighting in the primary where

our leaders had their dogs in the fight and are supporting so and so. you know, this person was a much better than that person. the republican primary. now massed -- now most of that acrimonious time, you could describe it that way, has shifted to a more general election mentality where regardless of people's misgivings about mitt romney and certainly many of our readers have more than a few of those, they have taken a backseat as now the focus is on beating the president of the united states command mitt romney is the only vehicle to do so. >> howdy you choose to focus? >> for me personally i -- my boss has just been great. he has given me a wide berth to just get the sense fur what people are interested in, what interests me . then dry and readers that way. having begun my career in chicago and talk radio where you are driven by ratings, phone calls, you sort of get a sense

of what people of thinking about, what people are talking about, what types of stories are going to interest folks. by and large the big developments on the election fraud, that is my job to cover. occasionally i can sort of go down rather into esoteric topics that interest me personally and try to get other people interested as well, but by and large day in and day out, especially now it is nothing but the presidential race. >> we look at some of the stories in the news this morning. we are seeing fallout from the comments congressman paul achan made about the senate race in missouri. how do you tackle a story like that, didn't it? how do you opine and decide how to write about it from a conservative perspective? >> well, i was on the phone with a couple of sources yesterday in the republican party and getting in touch with folks who were in missouri to try to get handle on what exactly is going on and if achan were to drop out what would happen in the next up. the answer to that question is

the state central committee was step and. they could do so without any penalty or rigmarole if he drops out today by 5:00 p.m. it is sort of incredible that we are not talking about this. if it goes until september september 205th there is still a possibility to replace him on the ballot, but it becomes much more convoluted. a judge has to get involved. i don't think the parties interested in that. i talked to a number of folks, getting a sense from folks, this is not someone who is garnering very much support among conservatives these days. he has made an egregious mistake . he said indefensible things, and i think a lot of people are saying, well, let's not defend him. there is an opportunity for a mulligan. let's take it. the question will be, will congressman a can recognize that, will he side to put his

country and certainly his party ahead of his own ambitions or will he march forward and let the chips fall? i suspect it will fall in a way it is unhelpful. there are a few things that play, and all you need to know is that senator clear mechanical, would be and could be a tonic in the general election, she is out there giving some warm words. oh, let's not read each -- rushed to judgment. praying that he hangs on past the deadline so that he can start being hammered with every single and she runs bringing up his comments. i mean, how do you miss speak about forceable rape? it is just -- it is mystifying. >> the op-ed in the "wall street journal" today. sinking ship, and it says, the most loyal supporters may consider it to -- consider the party reaction and fair. only one comment, but senate

control could well be decided by a single seat in on that hangs the future of obamacare and much more than one candid it's fate. they say that mr. aitken has sunk his own ship. , steel look at other media, other editorial pages to hone your message and it would you write about. finding most of your sources in the papers? funding a lot of it on line? >> much of it, of course, is on line. i don't personally subscribe to our copy of anything aside from town hall magazine, of course. i do visit these publications on-line. i have also found, we were doing this interview five years ago i would not be saying this, but i found a lot of the sense that pulse on twitter where i try to follow a cross-section of folks across the aisle from elected to officials, members of the media,

average voters, and everything in between command has been a very helpful resources well. of course, when you're covering a story you it sort of want to get a sense of what the people. i try to avoid particularly when it comes to instant reaction to speeches or some sort of policy initiative, something that i want to sort of lead on with an opinion of my on and on necessarily shop around and get a sense of what other people are saying. i prefer to kind of give my own reaction first and then later on go back and see what other people are saying. if it is something where if i am invited to do a television appearance or something like that, a topic i am not particularly well informed about, of course i will go to sources that i trust and read what they have to say and try to gather as many facts as possible, do a little critical thinking and go from there. >> you can find this. kids get to the phones and hear from crank.

on the republican line. good morning. >> go ahead. >> i am a republican. >> we are having a little problem with the ideal. i will tell them what you're talking about. he does go on townhall.com. the republican. what else? >> mr. romney is not coming back aggressive enough with the attacks on the democratic side. especially, john kerry only gave up two years of his tax returns. why shouldn't mr. romney come out and say, mr. president, you show us your record from your college days and i will show you might -- i will match those years. mr. obama hiding from his college records? very serious.

the republican side. commitment is pretty good. >> well, i think, caller, that there are a few things you have to keep in mind. if you're the president can it do you necessarily want to be its chief attack dog? if you decide that you're going to go on the attack, you want to pick your battles. i am not sure feeding into a democratic era of about governor romney's tax returns by offering counter challenges about college records and that sort of thing, i'm not sure if that makes the most sense in terms of the use of governor run this time. personally we have seen a little bit of a punch back effort from romney himself, what he has been asked about these tax records, where he will say that's actually deal with something that matters. if we are talking about being secretive and withholding documents, why is it that the president has decided tech assert executive privilege when it comes to us tens of thousands

of documents pertaining to the fast and furious scandal which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people, including at least one u.s. agent. there is no in my view defensible reason for the president to be hiding those. it's something that people should be asking questions about. if there is going to be a quid pro quo question or at least an attempt to fire back i would go in that direction. again, i think congressman ryan, governor romney's running mate said it well when he was asked about this in an initial interview. he said, there are a handful of americans who are deeply, deeply concerned about what is lacking in mitt romney's tax returns. we tend to call those people democrats who are not going to vote for mitt romney anyway. what americans and undecided voters in particular are worried

about him there not asking the tax records but the jobs. i think that is a central theme that we have seen from the romney campaign and will certainly see continue as we move into the convention next week. >> washington d.c. on our democratic line. welcome. [inaudible] this is what happens. over the years they have been building these shopping. people coming to the avenue. a lot of those companies went bankrupt. you can't start back in the neighborhood. the regulations. if i wanted to build an airplane, that is unheard of. i want to do it in my backyard. the only thing that is available is a hot dog stand. >> well, interestingly you brought of the example of a high blood stand because i think their is a story, and trying to remember where it came from. a story recently in one of the

states out there where a young man tried to us open a hot dug stand or standards stand in order to make some money to help pay for the health care of his ailing parents and was shut down by the local government because of local regulations. so i would completely agree with you that there are some major barriers to job creation in this country. one of them absolutely is burdensome government regulations. i think that is something republicans have been talking about quite a lot. governor romney was justin i am talking about regulations from the epa last week. i think you have hit on a very important point here. >> let's go to missouri. an independent scholar. hello. >> good morning. >> hello. >> real listening to you. >> lesson. your caller or guest made the comment in number ago that people that are concerned about romney's tax, not in this case.

the point that mr. rodney believes those records, i am going to vote for mr. obama. i don't want to do that, but i'm going to. as far as this taught a can character, man, this morning with a new ad saying that he is staying in the race and not going anywhere. mckesson again. thanks a lot. >> you are giving as an on the ground perspective from missouri. whether your friends and neighbors say? abcaeight. i think we lost him. >> i am interested in responding to a couple of those things. i think that he is right. i mean, this is christmas in august. santa claus is named it taught a can. unless he steps aside this is the biggest boon and windfall. she was in deep trouble and is

in deep trouble and a lot of ways. out of step with her state, voting in lockstep with the obama agenda. she is really, i think, on the press of this a being a former senator. one of the few things that could have intervened would, in fact, be an implosion of her opponent which appears to be happening in real time. the good news for republicans is that perhaps this came one day to relief for the democrats like the bad news, if you are a republican, it seems that demand in the center of the storm does not realize exactly what the implications of that employers and may be. when it comes to the tax records actually commit to the caller's point, i wrote a piece maybe a month ago suggesting that governor romney should release more tax returns. i gave four arguments against it because i think there are some good arguments against it. in 95 reasons why he should anyway. they have chosen not to go that direction. i mean, if you look at the state

of the country right now and the economy and the dead and you decide you're more interested in mitt romney's tax returns and getting the country back on financial footing where we need to be, i mean, i don't exactly know how i can persuade you otherwise. i would say that my own perspective on this issue shifted a little bit when senate majority leader harry reid had an imaginary friend show up and inform him that mitt romney was a tax chief with absolutely no evidence. he was totally to bunt by of the independent fact checkers, and i think if you have people on the political left willing to a simply make things up about governor romney that gives them very much i think it diminished incentive to play ball because they are not could fade actors in some cases. the other thing i would point out to the caller. there is this thing called the irs. if mitt romney were really hiding something and something more ms or illegal the irs would

have something to say about it. governors have no problems. he is paid tens of millions of dollars. i really -- and by the way, the mccain campaign has been in for vice-president and said his taxes are in perfect order and fully paid, if not overpaid. so we can talk about it, but i think that most americans are interested in the employment picture, the debt picture, and whether or not we are headed off a fiscal cliff and wondering the tucana dispositions and solutions. i think we are seeing a lot of practice solutions from the republicans, and we are seeing a lot of demagoguery from the other side, opinion, of course. >> political editor. we will go now to robert and up till tennessee, republican caller. >> good morning. >> a short statement, and then i would like to ask each of your question. this will be my last morning

washing to come watching washington journal. i have had all i can take of the democrats. democrats line in cheat and steal. when they use the republican line they are stealing a call from the republicans. okay? my question is, and i would like an answer from both of you. have either of you heard the name juanita broderick? >> why is that important to you, robert? >> well, as you recall caught she went on 60 minutes some years ago. she accused bill clinton of raping her. do you remember that? either one of you? >> i do. and i understand, maybe, you're going in the direction of the whole tide 18 thing and the comments about rape. activity reactor a couple of things. i think washington journal and

c-span is a very important service to the country and i would encourage you to keep watching even though it can be frustrating because i have watched the years to and sometimes you do get what some folks in talk radio referred to as a seminal -- seminar callers. people, knowing full well that they're not republicans but colin to say that their lifelong republicans who are all the sudden horrified and there is no credibility. i think it is pretty clear that you're not one of them. you're a genuine republican calling in, and a thank-you for the call. when it comes to that i think there is sometimes a tendency in this town to say, well, if one of our guys is in trouble, let's figure out something that that someone else has done the other side and try to draw some sort of an equivalent. sometimes there is a reasonable point to be made. sometimes there isn't. in this case he said something that is 100 percent on him. the last plo say, going back to my reference to harry reid before, by his standard of guilt

, bill clinton should have to prove that he didn't rape her because the allegation was out there, and that was not even just an endless person that was making the allegation that someone who went on television. senator reid, based on his logic, would say the word is out. bill clinton rape someone. it's up to him to prove otherwise. that's not the way this country works, our criminal justice system, and that think that was grossly unfair of harry reid to do and think that the one needed broderick example can at least help illustrate that. >> the washington post from 1999, clinton accuses story aired. her story was told to a national tv audience saying she did not tell authorities 21 years earlier offer contingent but bill clinton sexually assaulted her. i just don't think anyone would have believed me. that aired on dateline. our caller has some harsh words for democrats and used some names to derive them. as an independent election ever for a public and when i here people like rush limbaugh doing such aid and discontent?

well, where should the discourse level be and what sort of language should be used as we engage in this political fight? >> well, about debating ideas. and that we are an e-mail. whoever said that over to you. of course sometimes some figures on the right can become incendiary in their remarks. this is what happens in politics people get heated, say things. let's not forget that the president of the united states, his official formally endorsed super pak run by his former deputy white house spokesman is running an ad right now in the swing states linking mitt romney to the death of a woman with cancer based on absolutely no facts whatsoever. the president give a press conference yesterday in which she absolutely refuse to condemn the act and try to do that, played at farcical once again that i just described. well, the republicans are running an ad about welfare reform which has been claimed to be false.

i think it is probably an exaggerated at, but it is rooted absolutely intact. i think to say a policy dispute over welfare reform and what the president is doing to undermine a lot versus trying to tie candidate in to a woman's death when the facts are completely not on your side. i think that is some of the worst kind of rhetoric. the vice president last week putting on some sort of accident and telling an audience in a heavily black community that the republicans are going to put you back in chains. i mean, there is definitely some things being said by folks on both sides, but, i mean, if we're going to hold republicans in the standard of every single thing that russ limbaugh says, let's go back to what the vice-president and president of the unit states are saying and allowing to be set on their behalf. >> political editor at town hall. he was a producer at the san the

real show and also public radio reporter down in south florida. he attended northwestern university, and you can hear him on the radio. chicago 56:00 a.m. and also in the d.c. area. >> a sunday evening program. so encourage folks to tune in when they get the chance. >> let's go to a democratic caller. pompon of florida. >> good morning. >> good morning. >> i have a question for you. i would like to know, in effect for 12 years now. at the end of 2010, corporate america was not hired because of the uncertainty. president obama extended. i would like to know where the jobs are. >> that is a good question. they extended the tax cuts for one year. so, i mean, if you want a business, i think you probably understand that tax policy that

is inflects every single year where there will be a giant fight every single year, that really doesn't provide very much certainty. remind you that the president took over, as did president obama in a recession created by his predecessor. much less severe than the one president obama inherited, of course, but he had two rounds of tax cuts. what we saw was 55 consecutive months of job growth that president bush have reached 5 percent unemployment and it -- over his eight years in office. the budget deficit came down as low as $161 billion in 2007 which was still far too high. it's chump change compared to what we're seeing these days. and i would also remind you that president obama himself in arguing on behalf of extending all of those current tax rates as to not raise taxes on anyone,

he said that there is a consensus of economists from across the economic spectrum who told him, mr. president, if you raise taxes during our friends out, his word to my friend al economy it is unhelpful and will actually have a counter-productive effect on job creation. that was president obama's argument in favor of extending the bush tax rates. i do wonder, if he wants to build a case that the economy is in much better shape than it was in 2010 and things are going well and it is no longer fragile, let's go ahead and raise taxes. he's welcome to make that argument. i think americans will look around them. colada of the jitters that remain in sikkim actually, we are still in a state of fragility in a view we should listen to 2010 barack obama rather than 2012 in the midst of an election campaign. >> let's go to wayne, north carolina. they become independent color. good morning. >> good morning to you.

i have two things to say. i am proud to era -- my military service. i lived in salt lake city. another is a lot of incest going on in that state. why is religions not being brought up right now? is it to protect romney? and you know that i'm telling the truth, i'm telling you right now, it is incest at its worst. the state of utah. >> i you trying to make a correlation? >> hold lot. >> are you trying to make a correlation between that and more men isn't. >> you put rev. right out there. you will not say anything negative about the mormon church >> she is trying to wreck a correlation. >> that's obviously what he's doing. despite i think the odious implication there from the caller wanted thank you for his

military service. gosh. i don't really even know how to respond to that. i've been to utah number of times. it's a great place. mormons are some of the most moral, nice, wonderful people that i have ever met my entire life. he is just making assertions. i don't think that is a serious point that deserves really a serious response. i mean, if you can point to mitt romney attending a church for 20 years, let's say, that openly preached incest, that would be one thing. does not the case. and so the rev. right analogy is not apt. i prefer to move on from that one. >> let's talk about how governor romney chose to open up his experiences, to the media over the weekend. we saw some reporters watch him and his family at his church. we also saw a big profile in the "washington post" yesterday the king of the role that religion and community services played. what do you think about that

decision and have you think it will play out? >> it is interesting because we have now on the two major tickets only one sort of traditional protestant, and that is barack obama. you have to catholics, the two vice presidential nominees, and then a mormon at the top of the republican ticket. i think that the romney campaign , my suspicion is that doing something of a dance here where they understand that some people are going to try to exploit the governor romney's faith to tap into some confusion about the faith and maybe some bigotry that does exist out there, but they also wants, to some extent, to demystify. just treat people as well who -- there are not people you need to be afraid of if you're living somewhere and you don't know much about mormon isn't. governor romney, multi millions of dollars spent on negative ads about him across the country over the last four, five, six

months. this greedy, corporate way to outsource jobs. tell women with cancer, all these horrible things, many of these times have been to bunt by independent fact checkers, and i have a piece up a town hall dot com. it's still available, of course. going through rate of the major arguments. we will get to that at some point. readdress some of those things. i think some of the untold stories about mitt romney on these tales of profound and really almost extreme generosity throughout his life. there is one that was highlighted in an ad about how when he was managing bank capital one of his partners dollars went missing in new york city. there was a suspicion she had been kidnapped. romney shut down bain capital, moved everyone down to new york city, set up the nerve center,

offered rewards, walked the streets looking for this girl. in that bind aggressive real life. there is a great piece, i believe it was in the daily a few months ago. goes through some of these stories that the romney campaign has not been telling because i don't think that mitt romney is necessarily interested in bragging about degeneracy is. he has been an extremely personally generous individual to charities and giving prodigious amounts of money to charity, but also on an individual level helping people who need help. >> this piece that you did. eight arguments that you probably heard against mitt romney. go through and catalog what you think of the truthfulness. number one, mitt romney seems secretive because he won't release more than two years of his personal tax returns. mostly true. talk about why he could release them to what some of the arguments are in the history of that debate. you also go through with the use they are false like during his time at bain capital he shipped american jobs overseas and was a

pioneer in the practice of outsourcing, may have committed a felony by lying to the sec. i guess cat bentsen says no. .. the president of the united states who has four years of a record to run on, or in his case not run on. the main strategy i can see from

the obama campaign is to disqualify mitt romney. there was a report that showed the internal workings of the obama campaign and their strategy was to make romney politically toxic, and they're trying to do so by going -- eight major attacks on governor romney. and i thought as long as they're spending $100 million on the attack ads and the american public is being subjected to them and introduced to these questions about romney, let's see how many of them are based in fact and how many are not. i think that's an important case to be made, and it says something about the people making the allegations and the person against whom the allegations are direct. >> political it e -- editor of townhall.com. we'll hear from the representatives of the huffington post throughout the week. today we're looking at town

hal.com. tell us about your offices, exclusively here in washington? what is the work place like? like a typical old school newsroom that we think of? or because you have a conservative focus, is it different? >> guest: i wouldn't say it's a traditional old style newsroom, but we definitely have newsroom. we're based in the d.c. area. our editorial team is actually relatively small and definitely relatively young, energic, conservative, great colleagues at town hall. we have the sales side because we have to make money and pay the bills. we have folks in california and elsewhere who are on the team, and then major part of townhall.com is aggregate columns and some of our biggestfair names are thomas sole and michelle and ann cowl temperature and -- ann coulter

and some people say, how die get in touch with ann coulter? she doesn't work for us. but in terms of the in-house editorial team, including interns and the whole group, it's maybe at its peak 10-12 at a given time. so we run a tight ship, and as you know, covering everything that's going on is at times a daunting task, and my goal is to get a little bit of sleep after november 6th. >> host: republican caller in kansas. >> caller: good morning. i would like to talk to you and mr. benson about, as a privatized war ask the effect it's having on this country. are you there? >> host: we are, we're listening to you bunny, please continue. >> caller: okay. i have been trying to get this across to senators senators ande president, and he has agreed to

bring home 33,000 troops. but the problem is, we have more people coming home in body bags from suicide than we do having been killed in the war. this is not a good time in any way at all where you're not chosen to -- two really good candidates for president and we're still continuing with this war. i haven't heard anything from mitt romney about the war that would be -- an end to it. when we had world war ii, we conscripted everyone from the president's sons in the navy to every man and every woman from our nation. everybody was involved in collecting rubber so they could have tires for their equipment

that needed tires. we collected all kinds of foil paper. i don't know what that was for. we could not wear nylons because they needed that for parachute. we were all involved after day of our lives, and today we're not involved at all. >> host: we're running short on time. before we get a response, the candidate talked about afghanistan for the first time. we heard mitt romney and congressman ryan weigh in mitt romney said in manchester he would support the transition to afghan control of forces but he is worried about things happening that to make afghan like it was pre9/11, and then congressman ryan talk beside letting the military decide how to pursue a course of action. president barack obama talked at his press briefing about the situation in afghanistan. is it getting enough attention

and are americans feeling the sacrifice that oney recalled from past wars? >> guest: it's not getting enough attention, and i think to some extent those in the media take some play. for example, it's my beat to talk about the presidential campaign but sometimes we tend to forget in the midst of this campaign, there's a much more dangerous fight, if you will, happening overseas where men and women are at risk in harm's way. i'm not sure if her statistics were right on suicide verse combat injuries or what have you but i think we can all agree that when there are service men and women wearing our flag around the world, and deployed in a war setting, it's something that is if the utmost importance and deserves a lot of scrutiny and discussion among our leadership, our political leadership, and it was appropriate to hear from both governor romney and president obama on afghanistan, because the caller is right, it has taken a back seat in some sense

over the recent months. >> host: eric, in concord, california. welcome. independent caller. >> caller: yes, hi. to the previous call, four years ago i voted for john mccain because of his beliefs about the surge and things like that, and obama -- i want you to continue to push but as far as keeping the same secretary of defense -- as far as the presidency this time, i would as soon see obama go in. congress is going to stay with the republicans, and just like when reagan worked with the democrats, we'll finely get everybody to work together to solve the problem. that's all i got say. >> guest: good luck with that. i mean, i have not seen very much evidence of this president displaying the leadership skill friday and the where withall or the desire to work with

republicans and ideas he didn't particularly care for, and his signature accomplishment is obamacare where republicans were shut out of the room and their ideas were ignored and there's a reason that piece of legislation is enduringly unpop because it as a very partisan exercise, the president is running an extremely partisan re-election campaign on the attack, and the idea, if he were to win ask and the republicans controlled congress, i think there's chance we would have futurer callers on future future editions of the washington journal, bemoaning the gridlock in washington, dc. one way to have gridlock is a split government. if you believe that we need to get something done in this country, if you believe that there are policies that need to be enacted to extricate us from our current malaise and certainly to save us from the coming set tsunami, you need to

look at actual solutions being put forward by the various candidates and vote based on that rather than relying on some hope and dream about an eventual meeting of the minds with the current president and the republicans on cap hallil about that has nose worked out too well. >> host: the magazine town hall comes out monthly. thanks for being on our program. >> guest: my pleasure. thank you so much.

>> they thought the president was not going to be a strong defender of american values and american principles, human rights, democracy, free trade, free enterprise. those words of apology and statements have emboldened those who find this as a weakened enemy. >> next, from the american bar association's annual meeting, supreme court