u.s. the freedom works president will talk about the march on washington. >> the flag over the capital is at half staff on this eighth anniversary of 9/11. every year on this day we are all in yorkers, declares barack obama. -- we are all new yorkers, declares barack obama. president barack obama has a statement on 9/11. he writes that as president, my greatest responsibility is the security of the american people. is the first and i think about when i wake up in the morning, is the last and i think about when i go to sleep at night. that responsibility is at the heart of the policies my administration has put in place. no one can guarantee that there

will never be another attack by what i can guarantee and promise is that we will do everything within our power to reduce the likelihood of an attack and i will not hesitate to do what it takes to defend america. eight years later, are we safer? . host: "on this anniversary of the terrorist attacks in new

york and the pentagon and in the skies over pennsylvania, it is important to recall why we are fighting and what is at stake. august was the deadliest month for u.s. soldiers there since the conflict began, and a resurgent taliban has regained control over large parts of the country. president obama said 21,000 more troops there this year, but american commanders say that still might not be enough. meanwhile, nato allies are we reading of the fight in seem more reluctant to send additional troops of their own." this is how the editorial concludes this morning. "stealing the country to see this conflict through to the end may well turn out to be the greatest challenge of mr. obama's presidency. we cannot afford to let our guard down, and how well the president is able to keep the nation's eighth will test his leadership in ways that may make his efforts to secure health care reform, fix the economy, and push through other major domestic initiatives seem almost

easy by comparison." that is in "baltimore sun" this morning. if you want to send us a tweet, c-spanwj is our address. "because the terrorist threat continues, the national emergency declared on september 14, 2001, and the powers and authorities adopted to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond september 14, 2009. therefore, i am continuing in effect for an additional year the national emergency the former president declared on september 14, 2001, with respect to the terrorist threat. this notice shall be published to the federal register and transmitted to the congress." we have the tweet hear from cindy. "hard to believe that eight

years later our borders are still not secure. i grew up in new york and will never forget 9/11." our first call is from washington, d.c., carolyn, democrat. are we safer eight years later? caller: good morning. i have a real concern, and our concern is really as far as our health care. host: carolyn, why do you think we are safer? caller: well, i think we are safer, and i would like to say why we are not safer. but i think we are safer because we are more alert now, and a lot of things that were taken for granted, you know, as far as like the planes and everything like that, and i really think we are safer. but please let me get this in because i have been waiting for so long to get this point in. but i think if we do not get health care, that is the security risk because the rich do not fight in our wars, ok?

the children did not fight in our wars. is the poor and middle-class fighting our wars. so if we do not have health care for all, who are going to fight our battles for us when the enemy comes to try to attack us or whenever? host: michael in palatine, illinois. republican, are we safer than we were years ago? caller: know. there are seven reasons -- no, and there are several reasons. i wish this was a debate because i would like to talk to cindy. we have forgotten about the possibility of nuclear attacks. we have not address the issue of someone coming over the border and building a bomb here. we have not addressed anything other than security at the airport. frankly, i fly a lot. i happen to smoke cigarettes. i have been on at least 90 planes in the past eight years,

and i have a cigarette lighter in my pocket all the time and they never take it away. so i think it is more apparent than anything, and honestly, -- i think it is more appearance than anything, and honestly i think he is afraid to do what it takes to stop al qaeda and any other terrorist organization. host: gym in spokane, washington, independent. what do you think? are we safer than we were eight years ago? caller: i have been to iraq and i served in the guard. we are not safe at all. being over there, coming back home here, i notice that the news media does not really tell what is happening over there. we basically ignore afghanistan

to the point to where al qaeda is in the arms reach of a nuke. we have a thing here called the patriot act which is doing more to suppress the average american than making them feel safer. that is very dangerous, and republicans and democrats have not gotten together to put together a worker program, which is helping a lot of people from mexico to feed their families in mexico. host: michael from los angeles, a democrat. caller: i respect the last element's service -- i respect the last gentleman's service, but i believe we are safer now. we have a president trying to work on very difficult problems like health care, but the main

reason we are safer and the main reason we have been at risk in my opinion is that our former president got us into a situation in iraq and afghanistan now that has been making us much less safe, and especially his vice-president, one of the most dangerous people that never held office in the united states. the fact that those two are now out of office i think is leading to our future and for their safety, so i feel much safer now than i did with george bush and especially dick cheney in office. host: mike, you mentioned afghanistan. carl levin, the chairman of the senate armed services committee, and nancy pelosi, both expressed reservations about sending more troops over there. do you agree? caller: i absolutely agree. i am very supportive of president obama and everything he is doing except afghanistan. i have never been in the

military, but i pay attention to politics and what is going on. i am 55 years old. i voted republican all the way through from richard nixon until this last election. i did not vote for george bush, not for a democrat, but i voted for obama and i am glad that i did. regarding afghanistan, i think we need to get out, get out of iraq, get out of afghanistan. we are never going to resolve the issues there. it is time to come home. host: this is from the "philadelphia inquirer." "9/11 museum solicits the public's stories." "the 1 people worldwide 27 9/11 images, video, and personal stories to the institution's web site. the unrestricted digital archive at 911history.org permits

anyone to contribute material. offensive content may be flagged by others viewing the site. the memorial ground, scheduled to open september 11, 2011, will fill 8 acres, or half the original trade center footprint, and will feature 400 oak trees surrounding two memorial reflecting pools approximating where the two destroyed towers stood. planners intend to open the museum on september 11, 2012." that isn't "the new york times" this morning. a couple of other things going on around the country at sites where planes crash, "volunteers are taking center stage today at ceremonies to mark the eighth anniversary of the september 11 attacks. more than 100 volunteers who worked at the world trade center site after the 2001 attacks will read victims' names.

president obama plans to meet with their family members for a ceremony at the pentagon. former secretary of state colin powell will speak at a ceremony in shanksville, pennsylvania, where united flight 93 went down. and today has been declared a national day of service. federal sites have lowered flags to half staff." we will move on to henrietta in hammond, indiana. democrat -- i am sorry, independent. henrietta, are we safer than we were? caller: no. obama and his administration have destroy the morale and everything about our intelligence and the fbi. no, we are not safer. i am afraid every day, and the borders are still open. they are letting everybody and.

host: scott in new york city. democrat. caller: thank you for c-span. we are safer because we are more aware, but, you know, i do not know if you have heard this before, but i do not think we were that unsafe to begin with. i am in new york city and i was here on 9/11 and i experienced it. when i look at al qaeda, this group of ragtag terrorists, who can be dangerous and deadly, i will fight them, and i am a democrat. if i have to go to fight for this country, i will pick up a gun, dreamy, and i will fight. and i cannot stand -- train me, and i will fight. i cannot stand when republicans characterize us as week.

obama will continue to fight. he will continue to fight come very similarly, if not the exact same way, george w. bush -- he will continue to fight, very similarly, if not the exact same way, george w. bush did. obama will be strong and he will continue to fight. when he needs to take action, he is already listening to the generals and military, perhaps even more so than our former president. so, again, obama will continue to fight and republicans should get behind this president because he is not afraid to fight these guys. thank you for c-span. host: scott, what do you think of some of the measures that have been taken here domestically, some of the patriot act measures, some of our airline security measures? caller: i think it is all common sense. in new york city, we see the

hercules guys at the top level police force. all of a sudden, they are here, they are there. bloomberg is doing a very good job. you get the sense of security in new york city. but i cannot state again that democrats are fighters when we need -- but i can't not state again that democrats are fighters when we need to date. obama will continue to fight the fight and listen to the general, and he will listen to the military, and we should not be partisan. republicans should not go off the wall and start talking about socialism, even with the whole health care debate. obama wants the best for the american people. he is not trying to hurt the american people. he is not trying to take health care away from seniors. host: what about more troops to afghanistan, your party's leaders -- nancy pelosi, carl

levin -- a little hesitant? caller: we never should have gone to iraq. we need to fight in afghanistan. there are problems in afghanistan. we had a global coalition going into afghanistan. we need to continue to fight these guys, but not necessarily the way we have been fighting them. again, you have to rely on the military experts. we have west point, we have the best military minds who advise us against these operations early on, if you remember. george bush did not pay attention. they told us not to fight a war with less than 500,000 guys. we went in with 1002000, cheney signed off on it. -- we went in with 150,000, cheney signed off on it. again, thank you for c-span.

president obama is going to fight the fight. host: next caller, are we safer than we were eight years ago? caller: yes, we are safer, but we will never be safer until we get rid of this regime. the previous caller, understand that he is from new york and all that. i do not know if he does his homework. i do my homework. i am not one of those people that gets home and sits down and watches tv. i like to read a lot and investigate. we will not be safe until we get rid of this government. how many people die a year because of the normal flu? we have not found a cure for that? host: we are talking about 9/11, a lot of security measures, a lot of money has been spent in the last 80 years. we want to know whether or not you feel safer -- in the last eight years.

we want to know whether you feel safer. "usa today" editorial -- " college sheikh mohammad, the reputed tactical mastermind behind the attacks. the military has eliminated about qaeda training camps in afghanistan, and predator drones have taken out dozens of terrorists along the afghanistan-pakistan border. one gaping piece of unfinished business stands out. osama bin laden and his partner, i meant al zawahiri, remain at large. unrelenting pursuit is essential. for islamic extremists, osama bin laden's death or capture would deprive them of their charismatic leader. for the nearly 3000 people who died on 9/11, it would bring justice. charles in richmond, virginia, independent.

caller: yes, sir. host: are we safer? caller: yes, we are much safer. we have a new president who is bringing forth a new mind and a new peace between the people. host: so if we had asked this question a year ago, two years ago, you would not have said yes? caller: no, i would have. because i feel in my heart and my mind that our president at that time, who respect because he was the commander in chief, he was more dangerous to this country than the taliban because of his mind set. he was not focused on saving us and protecting us. he was on going after these people because they almost killed his father. host: john in memphis, tennessee, a democrat. caller: first of all, i think the question would be moot if we

had done three simple things. first, not allowed people to bring box cutters on airplanes. there were simple rules that were made that were pushed aside by the bush administration because it would cost too much money. if we have had a recount in florida, i think none of this would have happened. i foresaw a great deal of this coming. host: gary in philadelphia, are we safer than we were eight years ago? caller: yes, we are. there are 1 billion muslims in the world, and if they want to hit this country, we have homegrown muslims, american muslims in this country. i do think it helps that we have a president who was born a

muslim because the perception around the world is that he is a muslim, but he says he is not because he never formally renounced his religion, which is what you have to do. i do find it objectionable, having lost family members in 9/11 myself, that the president is calling for something other that -- for him to say now to the american people we are going to have a service, young people who were not even born yet, they will think that the easter bunny is the reason that we celebrate easter, or millions of were not slaughtered in the holocaust by the nazis. he is watering it down. i do not like this service day. we might it be safer on the -- we might be safer on the periphery, but if the muslims want to do something here or

attack us again, and that is what it is -- the muslims terrorists attacked us -- i do feel safer flying, and thank god for george bush, but i still say that there are so many of them in the world -- in england, in europe, and here -- they can create terrible terrorist attack. host: obama is phasing out on party on afghanistan -- oh, is facing -- "the u.s. speeded up the training and equipping of more afghan security forces. the comments by the senator carl levin, chairman of the armed services committee, illustrate the growing skepticism president obama is facing in his own party as the white house decides whether to commit more deeply to a war that has begun losing

public support, even as american commanders acknowledge that the situation on the ground has deteriorated and its burden falls, vermont, on our independent line, what do you think? caller: al qaeda is largely a fiction perpetrated by the saudis, invented by the republican party, who always need to fight. afghanistan is to protect the natural gas pipeline, iraq was to put oil companies in a better position. everything in the media is being done now to read legitimize -- to re legitimize the republican party. host: michael, are we safer than we were eight years ago? caller: i believe we are not. the one thing i want to say to the callers it is that we are

all americans. my son is about to leave -- excuse me -- on his third deployment in iraq. my son is an american who happens to be a democrat. he is an american first, and i am very proud of him. thank you. god bless america. host: sammy in jacksonville, florida, republican. caller: good morning to you, and thank you for taking my call. no, we are not safer because obama -- look at what he has done with investigating the cia. he is decimating the cia that keeps us safer. look at iran, nuclear weapons. he is not doing anything about that. north korea test fired missiles. obama is just a failure.

he cannot get his health care passed. he is blaming bush for everything. he is just a faike going down as a failure, and the country is going down, too. host: but, sammy, it has been eight years, and president obama has only been president for a few months. caller: i disagreed with bush on a lot of things. he did not control the border. but he did keep us safe for eight years. you can give him credit for that. but obama came in. he wants to dismantle everything that bush did to keep us safe. so if we are attacked, it is

under obama. you cannot blame bush, it is under obama. host: kansas, independent line, are we safer than we were eight years ago? caller: when a lot of people need to understand is that intelligence is very important, but right now we are dealing with a country that, i mean, alexander the great tried to make his way in there, because it is historically known as being a difficult country. but what is more important is hearts and minds. since we had bush and cheney and rumsfeld and all those guys, you know, running our country for the past eight years, now that we have brought the same obama -- barack hussain obama in the white house, i believe we are much more safe now because we are more concerned with hearts

and minds that we are with intelligence. what i would like to see is a lot more callers from new york to call from new york city and manhattan, because what i want to know from them is, after eight years -- eight years -- you guys still have to drive by ground zero and still see a hole in the ground. that is what i want to know about. i really appreciate if you guys would take more calls from new york city if they are calling in. host: thank you. this is a tweak we had -- eight a tweet we have gotten. and this is the "financial times," "pelosi joins legislators concerned at troop levels." and "the new york times," if you have been following the story about stephen farrell, the reporter who was rescued, a

british soldier who was killed, this is "the new york times" report. "british rescue was reckless, media club says." "afghan journalists on thursday blamed what they call their reckless rescue operation by british commandos for a kid and colleague's debt and said foreign troops had a double standard for western and afghan lives. the death of sultan mou naughmui could aggravate anger among asked in a sense -- among afghans. condemning the taliban for kidnapping the reporters, but the journalists also said they held nato-led forces responsible for launching a military operation without exhausting non-violent means for freeing them. lewiston, illinois, robert, a democrat.

caller: i want to make a comment on that, but could i make a brief statement about something else real quick? host: what is the topic? caller: well, i am a democrat. every time a republican calls in to complain about something, there are always democrats calling in to play the race card, and i wish you would have a mute button in when people start saying that the reason someone does not approve of something is because obama is a black man -- i will tell you, i am getting sick of it. host: are we safer? caller: you know, anybody that thinks we are safer is ludicrous. we have 17 million undocumented illegal aliens in the united states. we have acorn, which is telling illegal immigrants how to avoid deportation. we have two borders which you can walk across in the daylight

at any time, and anybody that thinks we are safer -- we have no security systems on trains. our ports systems, we only inspect one out of 1000 crates. you would have to be ludicrous to think we are safer. until those issues are addressed, we are not safe. and i wish that the government would do something about these illegal immigrants. they are bankrupting the united states. host: we will leave it there. this is in "the wall street journal" this morning. an act and fellow at standard, who institution, an arm op ed that he has this morning in "the wall street journal." this is the conclusion. "eight years ago we were visited by the furies of arab lands. we were really awakened from a decade whose careers and pundits had announced the end of ideology.

we discover that on the other side of the world mastermind of terror and creatures and their foot soldiers were telling of america the most sordid of tales. we had become without knowing it a party to a civil war and the arab islamic world between the autocrats and disaffected children, between those who wanted to live a normal life and warriors of the face bent on imposing their will on that troubled arc of geography. our country to answer that call, not always billy lee, for we are fated to be strangers in that -- not always brilliantly, for we are seeking to be strangers in that world and thus ceded to improvise and make our way through unfamiliar alleyways. we certainly have not been kept safe by the crowds in paris and berlin, or by those in ankara and cairo who yearn for our undoing."

joey in fayetteville, north carolina, a republican. caller: first of all, as a veteran of iraq, i would like to say i think president bush will go down as one of the great presidents. anybody that says he can look back at the last eight years and say what ever they want, he has kept us safe. host: how did he keep us safe? caller: after 9/11, when was the last time the united states was attack on our soil? we were not. host: but specifically, what was done in your view to make us safer? caller: where we attacked after 9/11? were we attack on our soil? i do not think so. we took the fight to them. anybody else who thinks so are idiots. me as a soldier, we took the fight to them, and anybody that

thinks we failed are idiots. that is how i feel. host: joey, are you at fort bragg? caller: well, i am disabled, so i am not. but anybody who thinks that we failed and bush failed are idiots. host: in "the washinton post" this morning, "iraq war deaths, total number of u.s. military killed." last year's poverty rate was highest in 12 years, reports the census bureau. that is our discussion next with isabel sawhill. >> is there more than one definition of conservative? saturday, sam tanehaunhaus on

the death of conservatism. >> this weekend, the role of conspiracy theories in american history and politics with the author of "real enemies," history professor kathryn omestad. >> 1.7 million new immigrants each year are followers of islam. sunday, reflections on islam and the west, christopher all -- christopher caldwell on c- span's "q&a." if recession for justice sonia sotomayor -- the first session for justice sonia sotomayor.

>> would we be doing more harm than good broad ruling in a case that does not even involve the traditional nonprofit corporation? >> hear the argument in its entirety saturday on c-span. starting october 4, an extensive role at the traditions and history of the court from its justices during supreme court week. >> "washington journal" continues. host: isabel sawhill, what did the census bureau report yesterday? guest: the census bureau reported the data for 2008. they do this with a lag, so this is not this year's data, but last year's data. it does begin to reflect the effects of the recession on family incomes, are ready rates, on the number of americans who have health insurance. it showed, as you would expect, that the poverty rate was up and family incomes were down.

host: how large -- how big did the party rate jump? guest: did not jump a huge amount, but it still jumped more than we expected. it is now at a very high level, by historical standards. i mean, if you look back at history, we have lower rates of poverty in the 1970's than we do right now host: and we will get to why in just a minute, but give us some facts and figures right now. how many americans, according to the census bureau, live under the poverty level? guest: first of all, maybe we should explain to people what "parte" means, how is defined -- what "poverty" means, how it is defined. if you are a four-person family and have an income of under $21,000 a year, you are considered poor. i would say that this somewhat

of a stingy standard that has not been adjusted for some time. but even by that standard, we had something like 37 million americans who are living below that level. host: so about 15%? guest: and one out of every five children in this country are living in a family below the poverty level. that strikes me as most problematic. host: so about 15%. guest: roughly. the last figure is 12.5%, to be precise, and is now over 13%. host: why do you call that figure stingy? guest: think about if you had to live in new york city and support four people on $21,000 a year. i think anybody can just look at that and say that would be very tough. one problem with that standard, that poverty line does not a

vvary geographically. still, it is not a very generous definition of poverty. if we compare ourselves to a european countries, for example, they have much more generous standards. host: what are the rates in europe overall? guest: they are lower in general, particularly lower in working age families and children. we do pretty well by our elderly, the elderly in the u.s. are actually not poorer than they are in other countries, and the elderly have lower poverty rates than other age groups in our society. host: so has that led to more income disparity in this country? guest: well, we have seen, over the last few decades, a big

increase in income disparities, and i think they are a related phenomenon. in other words, there are a lot of people stuck at the bottom. but some of the growing income inequality is not relate to the fact that we have quite a lot of poor people, it relates to the fact that the people at the very top of the income distribution has been doing extraordinarily well, at least until very recently, until the financial meltdown, some of the super rich are only kind of rich now. host: so you say this is the report on 2008. is it going to get worse in 2009? guest: i think it is definitely going to get worse in 2009. we have done some projections based on historical relationships between unemployment rates and poverty rates, and our projection suggests that the poverty rate is going to go up to somewhere in the neighborhood of 15%, that the number of poor people will

increase by something like 1/5, and that that will not -- it will not peak, the problem will not peak until 2011 or 2012, so we have a long ways to go here. so what we're seeing right now is the tip of the iceberg. host: why? guest: well, and unemployment is a lagging indicator. even after the economy turns around and spending and output began to grow, it takes a long time before employers start to rehire people, so the unemployment rate tends to stay high. the poverty rate in turn is linked to people losing their jobs or not being able to get jobs. so for those reasons, even after the economy has turned around, it will be quite a long time before the on and on the rate or

the poverty rate come down to anything approaching where they were in 2007. host: what are the types of jobs that have been lost in 2007 -- since 2007? guest: there are very few sectors that have been protected, in education -- its i think there's a lot of lo- wage work that has disappeared, and there are a lot of people in the bottom of the income distribution who have someone marginal skills, they are less competitive -- who have somewhat marginal skills, they are less repetitive -- less competitive, and having more difficult time in an economic decline. host: the u.s. has consistently had a pretty steady poverty rate, correct?

guest: it goes up and down with the business cycle. host: but it is always above 10%, it isn't it? why? guest: the lowest it has ever been is around 11%. you are never going to get rid of all party because there are always going to be some people at the bottom, and there are people who are temporarily pork. they might have lost -- who are temporarily poor. they might have lost a job, got sick, gone through a family disruption of some sort. they might have serious health problems, including mental health problems. they might have substance abuse problems. there are all kinds of reasons why people may lack in come. i think that there is a subgroup within the overall population -- the overall poverty population that is

chronically poor. most of them are basically lacking in education and skills, and some of the other competencies that a modern economy needs. host: so you have a new book out, "creating an opportunity society." how do you create that? guest: we argued that you do it in three ways, focusing on education, focusing on work, making people -- making sure that people are working. thirdly, we are concerned about family stability. a lot of the high poverty you have in the united states is that we have a lot of single- parent families. their poverty rates are very high compared to unmarried parent families. we are getting more and more of them, so as the number of single-parent families has grown, so have the number of children in poverty. so we want to turn around the

education system, the labor force, and families in a way that will take this problem on a little bit more seriously. host: what about the minimum wage? is it enough? guest: we could have a debate whether or not it is the right level, but i do not think it is necessarily the only or even the best way come back -- to -- the earned income tax credit does something similar to the minimum wage, but it is a refundable tax credit that you get at the end of the year if you are working but if your wages are very low. the current administration has put into the stimulus plan and would like to make permanent the

extension of this current tax credit. we have an extension right now, the making work pay tax credit. those types of policies can help. they are better than the minimum wage because the minimum wage can come if you push it up too high, x-er -- discourage employers from hiring people. host: isabel sawhill is our guest, a senior fellow at the brookings institution, former vice president of the -- ph.d. from new york university. i presume in economics? guest: that is correct. by the way, i am not at georgetown any longer, that is a previous position. host: we are talking about economic data that has come out from the census bureau, and the current economic situation in the u.s.

mike, your first up. caller: hello, isabel, you sound like a very qualified woman. guest: thank you. caller: i worked 14 years in materials management and became disabled. i am now on disability, and my country has given me $900 a month to live on. well, they give me $1,300, and then they take $440 off the top for medical care, which they do not really provide much of. and i am stuck in paint and home. -- in pain at home. i would like to start using the internet because it is something i can do from home. how am i supposed to dig myself out of a whole, living on

basically $900 a month? guest: well, i am not sure what to suggest. we have some programs for people who are disabled, and you could argue it -- you could always argue that they could be more generous. i am not an expert on these particular programs and then a little reluctant to weigh in on that. anybody can sympathize with his collar -- what this caller is talking about his situation. host: but what about the overall safety net? what percentage of americans get government assistance? guest: what you have to think about when you think about the number of americans to get assistance is that our biggest assistance programs are not targeted on people who are either disabled or at the bottom

of the economic ladder. they go to ordinary middle-class people who are over 65. this is where we spend huge amounts of money. almost half of the federal budget at this point is social security, medicare, medicaid, and medicaid, although it helps the poor, is heavily directed to people in long-term care or nursing homes. those programs are growing extraordinarily rapidly. if you're worried about tax problems in this country and the size of the budget, those are the problems we need to worry about. what we spend on low income families is very small by comparison. host: according to "the new york times," continuing in a year trend, the number of people relying on government insurance programs, including medicare,

medicaid, each of deposit insurance program, rose." caller: i have social security disability and i have fiber myalgia. i am a retired mars. -- i am a retired nurse. health care and education, education be number-one, really helps to reduce the poverty problem. i do not think we have enough outreach programs. i do not think we support. i do not think we educate the poorest of the poor.

the people that do not have the power always get demonized in some way. it is like a drug addict trying to get into rehab and all of the rehabs have sprung up. the big interest companies have taken over them, and these private corporations alone all the rehabs over the country that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for somebody to go to, and the shortage of beds in public hospitals and public- funded rehab centers is gone. host: isabel sawhill? guest: well, i totally agree with you about the importance of education, and i think if we had a better educated public for this country, we would have a lot less of a whole set of other problems, including substance- abuse and various other social problems. i think that we would like to

think in the u.s. that we have a great education system, but we are increasingly falling behind other advanced countries in the way we educate our kids. we have widening gaps between children from more affluent families and those from less affluent families between minority children and other children, so i really think education has to be at the top of the list of things we need to not just spend more money on but do a better job of reforming the education system. we talked a lot about things that can be done there. host: in creating an opportunity society, "supporting

and encouraging work" is a chapter in your book. guest: it is important because i do not think the public likes the idea of spending money. they really would like people to behave responsibly, and we put a big emphasis on our book on personal responsibility, and we say everybody who can -- obviously there are those who are disabled or for other reasons cannot work -- but if you can work, even a low-wage job, we say is important for you to be working, and then the government can step in with some assistance for things like child care, some wage supplements. but we want to get rid of people just being on welfare and not doing anything for it. host: does the government get in the way when it restrict child

health, etc., and sets limits on income? in your view, does that get in the way or is it helpful? guest: you mean when benefits disappear or get more income? it can be a problem. i think when we design programs, we have to try to do it in a way that builds in certain incentives, so that that does not happen. that is the intention with the notion that we do not want to also be having income assistance go too high up the income scale because that becomes too expensive. host: isabel sawhill, there are signs out there that the economy is recovering, that the stock market is going up and there are indicators saying that the economy is recovering. are the jobs coming with it? guest: well, it is hard to say. i do think the green shoots are getting a little bit taller, and there is quite a bit of

indications of that. one of the things we should think about is that when the stimulus package fades away, which it will toward the end of 2010, then we could be back in the soup again. also, a lot of the extra supports that were supplied in -- that were provided will also disappear by the end of 2010 or 2011. that is going to be a problem because, according to our projections, we are still going to have a lot of people in trouble. host: long island, stephen, republican, you are on. caller: i would like to ask you about your statistic. i think they are very misleading. first of all, 50% of americans do not pay federal taxes. the people you are talking about the so-called poor, they get

everything free -- health care, child care, education. a lot of people work off the books where they make 20,000 or $30,000. people in new york where i live that make anywhere from $100,000 to $200,000, where taxed 50% to 60% of our income. when we retire, we will not have social security. medicaid, they give disabilities out to anybody who wants it, ok? why don't we instead of what the liberal democrats do in this country, which is to take from the upper middle class, give to the port, and let the super rich not pay anything -- they pay 35%, 30% come up with all their tax breaks, charitable deductions, they do not pay anything. why doesn't president obama advocate that henceforth they will not have any of those deductions?

that the super rich will pay their fair share? they cannot. we have a country where the poor people keep the democrats in power while the middle class is being choked into oblivion in states like new york, connecticut, and new jersey, and connecticut. guest: i agree with some of what you are bringing out here, and i think it is important to talk about it. first of all, you are right that the official statistics that the government uses that we have been talking about here do not include some of the benefits that low-income people get. for example, if you get food stamps or child care, that is not part of your income, but it is still important and it makes you better off, and yet we do not count it right now when the measure income or poverty. on taxes, you are also right that taxes -- income taxes

anyway -- are not paid by people at the bottom of the income scale. they do pay payroll taxes if they are working, and those payroll taxes can be quite a high chunk of their income. i also agree that the sort of super rich have ways of getting around the tax system that ordinary upper-middle-class people have more difficulty with. so those are all factually correct. on the other hand, i would disagree with you that the group that needs the greatest help in our society is people making $100,000 to $200,000 a year in new york. host: texas, richard. caller: first i would like to say that the people that get on disability in the united states

are not just handed out -- i am a disabled firefighter and i spent 2.5 years getting on disability, and the government fought me left and right with doctors on their side, and my doctors, both saying i had a permanent disability. another thing what i would like to say is people on disability -- we do not like to be on disability, i am stuck in a circle to where i have to have the insurance and the income, but some visibility just to survive. -- but some disability just to survive. i am stuck in a circle that i cannot get off of. guest: well, i wish i could be helpful here. i certainly sympathize. i do think i hear a lot of

people who are disabled who would really like to contribute to society in some way, and i think we could do a better job of providing opportunities for them to do so. certainly, if those who are disabled have very low resources, we should be doing something about that. there is always going to be a debate about where the line is, as your own case illustrates, between those who need the assistance from the rest of us and those who could actually be contributing more than they are. host: the president has proposed a green society in a sense. it is that a job creation proposal? guest: you know, i do not know, peter. i am all for green jobs, but i do not know how many there are. it is not an area that i have looked at in any detail.

host: last call, st. louis, bill, a democrat. caller: i think this country has gone down the drain since 9/11. we have spent $10 billion a month in iraq. we have murdered iraqis based on a lie, and you people want to know why we are in poverty now? host: isabel sawhill, what would you like people to take away from "creating an opportunity society"? guest: i think i would like to understand that americans care about opportunity more than they do about even poverty or the distribution of income. they like the idea that everybody should have a shot at the american dream, and the theme of our book is not that we should be redistributing income, it is that we should be helping people climb up the ladder through education, through work, through forming stable families. host: isabel sawhill of the brookings institution, thank you very much.

guest: thank you. host: coming up, we'll be talking with matt kibbe, the president of freedomworks, the group that will be holding the key party on the washington mall. we will also be talking with james kitfield of "the national journal." he just talked to spain's counter-terrorism expert about al qaeda, and we will be talking about the future of al qaeda with him. at about 9:15, 9:20 this morning, we will go live to the pentagon for the 9/11 ceremony will president obama will be speaking. we will be right back after this news thaupdate from c-span radio. .

>> barney frank is working to getre regulation -- to get re regulation motions on the floor. top lawyers say the obama administration is committed to closing guantanamo by early next year. the general counsel was asking for patience as the administration seeks to balance the guidelines of dealing with detainee's what the same time protecting americans from al qaeda. meanwhile, two nato troops have been killed in eastern afghanistan. a u.s. serviceman was killed yesterday in asin attack on a

patrol. finally, general motors hopes to jump-start its business by guaranteeing car buyers that it did not like their new chevy, buick, gmac or cadillac, they have 60 days to bring it back for a full refund. that starts monday and is called "mader's carlyn." >> "washington journal" continues. host: this is in the wall street journal this morning. other papers also have a front- page stories on joe wilson. politico has a front-page story on joe wilson as well as the hill. you know the story. we want to hear your reaction to what joe wilson said to the president out loud at his speech. there are the numbers. send us a tweed.

we have about 15 to 20 minutes here to hear from you. joe wilson spoke with reporters about his remarks and then contacting the white house to report -- to apologize. >> by last letter from the leadership that they wanted me to contact the white house and state that my statements were inappropriate. i did, and i'm very grateful that the whiteç house in talkig with them, they indicated that they appreciated the call and that we needed to have a civil discussion about the health care issues and i certainly agree with that. host: here is the cartoon in a and "washington post" this morning. "clown hall meeting" is how they phrase about. and here's another one, young

joe wilson, sitting in the corner all by himself. we want to get your reaction to what mr. wilson had to say. west palm beach, fla., anthony, independent, good morning. i applaud caller: what representative joe wilson did. -- caller: i applaud what representative joe wilson did. i think someone needs to stand up to this president. i think he gets up in the morning and does not really know what he is going to do that day. i have to say that more people need to be vocal. this health plan is going to destroy the welfare of our children and grandchildren. i used to be a democrat and went over to the republican side and now and i am independent. we do need someone health care reform in america, but i do not thi -- >> host: what about the issue of decorum?

caller: i have to say that the united states was being fed propaganda by president obama the other night and it takes a very tough individual to stand up and call the president a liar, and he is a liar. host: and here is another story from "washington post." in the article in the "wall street journal" this morning, "you lie" residents back home. a marine corps veteran had received 14,000 contributions totalling $500,000. that figure is now up to $700,000. the next call from louisville,

kentucky, republican, what do you think? caller: i agree with joe wilson. i cannot recall how many times president bush has been called a liar. [unintelligible] host: braddock on the democrat'' line from florida. caller: good morning, i would like to know what happened if demagogic a democrat had called bush a liar in one of his joint speech such asessions. people in the press are able to call people a liar and different

stuff like that, but you did not hear anyone calling the president a liar when he was speaking. there is a difference. they gave him respect. i do not know why they cannot show this man respect. he deserves respect as the president of the united states. and just like this guy who called previously from kentucky, he is one of the guys who thinks it is okay to treat people who voted for this man and the rest of the people like rep. since 9/11 and the wars that have started, bin laden's number one thing is that he was going to destroy this country. well, they have spent so much money so far during these wars, we have helped destroy our economy. now they want to destroy the country with secession in different countries -- not countries, different states. now they are helping destroy

this country. host: bring them all back to joe wilson. caller: if you get up there and you stand in front of congress and on television, you know, and you basicallyç bring in the ton hall meeting atmosphere, it is like you are not allowed to do that. let's say, you go to a business meeting for c-span, if you stood up and did that at your job, they would call you aside and discipline your reader fire you. i could not do that at my work. i could not do that at my library. i could not do what he did, or any of these do of a truck -- town hall meeting. i couldn't even do that in a courthouse. if i am not allowed to do this even in a movie theater, people should not be allowed to do this in any kind of governmental affairs. host: we got the point of a a.

thanks, brad. peggy in connecticut. caller: i am disgusted by the outburst. i do not know what he was trying to accomplish. now he is the most famous man in the room, isn't he? i'm so glad that obama stood there quietly and let him look like the full that he is. -- like the fool that he is. i do not know what he is trying to accomplish. and the apology, i have seen that screen and it was not very forceful, and obviously he has no remorse whatsoever. and obviously he is back stealing again. i think obama showed some restraint with that and i'm just glad that i crossed party lines -- but by crossed party lines

and voted republican last time. i will not make that mistake again. >> and in the "new york times" to travel to joe wilson's district. the district also includes parris island and hilton head island. paris island is a marine corps training base. hecklers district mostly supports the outburst is the headline in the "new york times". some republicans noted that george w. bush drew derivativde" during his state of the union address. -- derisive statements during his state of the union address. but mr. wilson overwhelmingly exceeded the bounds of decorum and to the rest of by admitting it.

mr. wilson hit a nerve on the issue of illegal immigration. even south carolina at supporters of a health care over all expressed concern about extending coverage to illegal immigrants. that is in the "new york times" this morning. american hero joe, that is his torture address. now our next call on the republican line comes from indiana, about 10 miles north of fort wayne, indiana. go ahead, george. caller: to i think it is hilarious when mr. reed to turnaround and write a column and say that george bush does not know what he is doing and he is a liar. all of these people get offended by words. we have free speech in this country and everybody wants to

take that away. all of these left-wing liberals talk about rights and freedoms, but as soon as people speak of, oh, that is out of control. mr. obama has lied and is line and it is great to see an american patriot stand up and say, sir, you are a liar. and if these little sticks and stones hurt these people and they trumbull's a much, what are they going to do when the truth shrine's free? this man is lying about illegal immigration. if you know what we should do? if he is not a liar, prove it. you by the time he proves it, it will be too late -- by the time he presents, it will be too late. host: let's leave it there. at from usa today, the iraqi hero journalist will be showered with gifts, including a four-bedroom house and look at -- and at least one potential by

upon his release from jail. ç-- one potential bride upon hs release from jail. a little bit more about joe wilson here. this is in the politico this warning in case you are interested in going online for yourselves. democratic leaders pushed for wilson's center. republicans risk being defined by fringe acts. those are two paulick -- articles in the political this morning. david, how are you? caller: good morning, how are you? i used to work on capitol hill, by the way.

they have lost all sense of decorum and self-respect and it just seems now that the likes of sean hannity or roesch selamat have become the de facto leadership. i also believe the republican party is in a state of psychosis. i cannot believe that they will not support this eloquent leader. i guess their modus operandi is to just burn the house down. everybody knows that the former president lied when he took this country to war. and nobody dare call him a liar in front of that great chamber. i truly believe, you know, we sometimes have to apply, next to it, but i think obama is a gop kryptonite there are hidden

messages here and we all know it is pretty obvious. the is an african-american president, and therefore, he must fail so that none other can rise again. host: 8 tweet in -- the line here is the front page of the hill curator lou leveaux, ga., , independent, what do you think? caller: first of all, if we're supposed to be respecting the seat of the president, whoever holds that seed -- when bush was in there, and i did not agree with pretty much anything he said -- when he was in there, the democrats still showed respect to this man and i did not agree with that.

this man should be censored, or he should resign. he showed total disrespect to the seat of the president of the united states. the rest of the world is watching the spirit we're supposed to seem united. -- the rest of the world is watching. we're supposed to sing united. host: representative wilson has first amendment rights like every citizen in the u.s. per the constitution. that is from david ryan who supports ron paul in 2012. well, there is a rally going on on the mall tomorrow and we will be covered -- covering it live. matt kibbe is next, president of freedom works. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> is there more than one definition of conservative?

saturday, san tanenhaus on the death of conservatism. and for the complete "book tv" online at booktv.org. >> this weekend, the author of real enemies, university of california davis history professor. >> 1.7 new million -- 1 prinz 7 million new emigrants each year. sunday, reflections on immigration in europe and the west. >> this week during a special session, the supreme court heard oral argument on campaign çfinance, the first session for justice sonia sotomayor. >> wouldn't we be doing more harm than good by a broad ruling

in a case that does not involve for business corporations and actually, that not even involve the traditional non-profit corporation? >> hear the argument in its entirety saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. and starting october 4, and extensive look at the royal and traditions and history of the court from its justices. >> "washington journal" continues. the group's host: freedom works has put out and have. we wanted to show it to you before we start our next segment. >> had enough of the out-of- control spending? bailouts, aspiring taxes, big government liberalism? let's send a message to the politicians, we are going to vote you out of office and take our country back. join the two-party express onta gambert 12 as guilty party across america.

join our cars -- our cause at teapartyexpressed.org. host: matt kibbe, you are responsible for that ad, aren't you, as president of freedom work? guest: actually, that is a completely separate group. in fact, that is the first time i have seen that out. host: as about the march tomorrow. what you hope to accomplish? guest: i think is going to be exciting. we have tens of thousands of people organized. the we had buses all over the country with about 1500 people yesterday talking about issues like health care, cap and trade. we had a delegation from hawaii, the west coast from all over the country. it was quite remarkable. we expect tens of thousands of people to march on washington tomorrow morning. in the on the west front of the capital. we have a stage set up right

there on the lawn. we're going to have a number of very short speeches from americans all over the country. it is important to note that not a single person was paid to be here. not a single person was subsidized to be here. it is remarkable that you have so many people coming from all the country, paying their way, taking time off from work, leaving their jobs and families for a day and to protest what is going on with this government. host: and what is going on with this government that you want to protest? guest: what i hear again and again from folks is that they say two things, i have never done this before, never gone to a town hall meeting, never talked to my congressman before, but this government is out of control. they're talking about government spending to of bailouts, the attempt by the government to take over the health care system. and this is not so that started in january. i would argue the start of last

year when president bush was bailing out irresponsible homeowners and, obviously, wall street with the bailout. host: in your view, is this an organic rising up? guest: i think it is incredibly organic, witnessed by the fact that the tea party express has put together this bus tour from the west coast. and every stop along the way, they pick up more and more people, thousands of people at every stop they go. there is another group that has been an important party, the tea party patriots. these folks have organized by community in a lot of these key battleground districts and a lot of these key states, and they do it on facebook. this is not a national coordinated effort. it is a very organic, grass roots up. host: what do you hope to achieve? guest: have a saying that freedom works out government goes to those who show up.

i believe this is the best tradition of american democracy. people showing up at town hall meetings, people coming to d.c. to petition their government. i cannot imagine a better thing for them to do. they're interested in what is going on and in gauging their legislators. that is a good thing. host: what you say to people that are critical of your effort and saying that you are being obstructionist? guest: i love the charge because i think it is ridiculous. people showing up at town hall meetings, people voting, people visiting their congressman, these are the ideals that we haveç celebrated and that both parties have word that and not enough people pay attention. now that people pay attention, come to town on meetings and washington d.c., just because they do not happen to agree with the current leaderships point of view, they are casting all sorts of nasty aspersions at these folks. i think is ridiculous.

host: at the end of the day, what happens? guest: at the end of tomorrow, will allow a had a very successful in march and by predicting a large gathering of fiscal conservatives -- the largest gathering of fiscal conservatives here in the nation's capital ever. perhaps that is a little bit misleading because usually with this group, fiscal conservatives do not usually gather in one place at one time. they have jobs, families, they essentially what the government to leave them alone so they can produce and take care of their families. but you are going to see tens of thousands of people -- and i think the next step will be either holding legislators accountable if we can convince them on health care and some of these other issues about our position, or there are going to be -- there is going to be some accountability back home. host: all of these two boards have been held across the country. who sponsored those and hold --

organize all about? guest: a lot of different groups, depending on the city you are talking about. it could be a mom working from her computer. i know the one in sacramento is an actual organization called vt party express. there are organizations in atlanta -- called the tea party express. there are organizations in atlanta. these things have cropped up all over the country. certainly, at freedom works, we have organized some tea party product -- protests as well. the idea that there is a national organization pulling the strings on this is both misleading -- and if the democrats believe this, they sorely miss understand what is going on. host: has helped to have radio host lembeck promoting this idea? guest: -- glenn beck promoting this idea?

guest: absolutely, he has a big footprint. sometimes people get this confused with his march on washington, and they are two separate things. host: let's take some phone calls. dreamworks was -- freedom works was founded by dick armey? guest: he actually joined us after we ran organization. host: first call from minnesota. caller: i support for the works and i also support joe wilson. i wonder if there is a rally here in minneapolis or st. paul that coincides with the freedom rally? guest: i believe that there is. unfortunately, i cannot tell you of the top of my head, but i recommend that you go to freedomworks.org to see if there

is a listing. there is a side to tell each other what is going on in various cities. host: columbia, south carolina, a democrat. caller: if we have gone against the verge of mr. isham with this war, we would of saved a lot of people -- gone against mr. bush with this war, we would have saved a lot of people a lot of money and lives. a lot of folks died in this war and are going to suffer from this war. why are you doing that sort of thing during this bush administration fiasco that we had? guest: there are certainly -- there certainly were large anti protests -- anti-war protests during the bush administration. and certainly, we have borrowed a page from the community organizers on the last on this stuff. i would say to go back to last fall, when president bush, who by the way, was joined by

senator obama during the wall street bailout, we very much went after president bush on this. this is not a partisan thing. this is about good policy. i think is wrong to characterize it as against president obama exactly. host: what you say you took some of your tactics from the left wing, as you put it? guest:ç again, our model goes - our model is thmotto is that government goes to those who showshow up. if you ever go to a congressional town hall, the august ones were exceptional because at a typical town hall, there are fewer people that show up. but if you ever go to a town hall meeting and you look at the citizen that shows up with the facts and understand how to conduct himself in front of a microphone, he has a profound impact on what the congressman thinks his district is thinking.

it is important for people to show up. i think our democracy depends on it. just look at the struggle to get information on this health care bill. the internet has changed the game in that sense because i think it's fair to say that scores more citizens have actually read this health care bill that actual legislators. host: you action -- you also mentioned cap and trade is an issue that you are protesting. guest: yes. host: why? guest: the bottom line is that citizens showing of tomorrow feel that the government is spending too much money and they actually have no record of the success. capt. trade is a massive tax on energy that is going to go to the -- cap and trade is a massive tax on energy that is where to go to the government. it is not clear who the somebody is, but we know that politics is a very efficient way to

redistribute wealth and people are constantly seeing special interests lining up at the trough and getting out. it happened on the stimulus bill. it is happening on the health care bill. the president himself -- i mean, he accuses our side generally of being in bed with the pharmaceutical companies and the evil health insurance companies. the well, he is the one meeting with them in secret meetings at the white house. he refuses to release what those deals are and who he has been meeting with. it has been very clear to the american people that there is a deal going on. host: so, this is a partisan group? guest: it depends on how you define partisan. these people are very devoted to a set of principles. they do not trust big government and they do not like the idea of $1.5 trillion deficits. but it is not an anti-democrat thing. it is an anti-big government thing.

host: matt kibbe is with us. if you are participating in the and one of these protests, we have a separate line said apartheid for you. -- we have a separate line set aside for you. robert, go ahead. caller: what do you mean by your group taking our country back? and another thing, the use think obama is a legitimate president? and i have a comment. host: robert, go ahead, why you ask that question? caller: he is saying that they do not organize. they send all types of stuff out on the internet to get these people with their little groups to say what they want them to say and then to say he has nothing to do with these people coming together, that is a strip out lie. and you can look straight in the

picture like you are dumbfounded, but you know what you did. you know what your conservative groups do every day. you get paid for this. stop lying. guest: i guess calling people liars is in fashion this week. i do believe that president obama is a legitimate president. he won the election. and i think we alex -- respect that office. -- we all respect that office. what the activists mean by taking this country back is quite simple. they want their legislators to respect them, to take an interest in what they have to say, and they also want the government to live within its means. and again, you will not believe this, but it is absolutely true that they're holding both republicans and democrats accountable for that. spending is out of control. we have got to reign in and we expect every member of congress to have that responsibility. host: as a former chief of staff

to longtime congressman dan miller, what do you think about joe wilson? guest: i thought it was bad protocol, but i do think -- and you heard it from the last callerç. i think the old debate has been very vitriolic, very course. -- a a caorse. at my tunnel meeting -- -- at my town hall meeting.com, it was very -- back at home, it was very distracting from of the real issues on health care. this is a big, important issue and they are talking a redesigning 16% of the american economy. affects everybody. -- it affects everybody. host: speaking of debate, most of the tweet i cannot read out loud on the air. or i choose not to.

but here is one, ask your guest to talk about the leaked memo that caused disruptions. guest: absolutely, and i would use the word "lie" because it was the center for american progress the first associated for works with this memo. joe wilson had no relationship with freedom works. we checked our database and he was not a member. i asked everyone on our staff and none of us have met the guy before. and frankly, it is offensive to him because he has a little group and he wrote this memo. i would encourage everyone to read it. and what it does is it goes straight through saul lelinski i's notes to radicals and

encourages everyone to take over the media. i think everyone should go to a town hall meeting and i think that you should get to the microphone and i think you should be respectful. host: where does freedom works get their funding? guest: we do not discuss our donors, but so many untruths have been said. we have not received a single dime from big pharmaceutical companies or a single dime from the health insurance industry. and i challenge the center for american press to say the same thing. host: legally, you have to disclose any of your donors? guest: know. -- no. host: hartford, lisa, you are on. caller: it is very nice that

this conservative group is conducting these marches and such, but it is a little too late, do you think? we are already $10 trillion in debt and we have not seen your group for the last eight years. how come you have not done -- been moving forward on this before? guest: i think we are probably getting more attention right now because it has been cast as a partisan fight between a conservative grassroots group and a democratic majority. we have been fighting this fight long before president bush was elected into office as well. i encourage everyone to go to freedomworks.org and look at some of the stuff we wrote about the bush administration over spending. you can look at a seriouseries f articles that our chairman roawe in the last two to three years.

the effect of the matter is, you fight every fight, republican or democrat, but we are facing an unprecedented challenge and the deficit or the next 10 years has gone up two trillion dollars since president obama took office. he said that he inherited a $1 trillion deficit. it is now $5 trillion. that is not a thing anyone wants to embrace. host: matt kibbe is a graduate of george mason university. a a indianapolis, mary, democrat. caller: i have a couple of comments. first, i would hope that everyone understands that the health care reform is trying to avoid the what i call titanic effect where only the rich survive. nobody knows better than their pour how reform is needed so that everyone is -- nobody knows betterç than up or how well

reform is needed so that everyone is christ -- is covered. like the lady that just called, where were you during the bush years? when we were in the black and then he to get to $9 trillion in the red. where were you protesting? you tell me to go to your web site and you say, well, you wrote a couple of memos. where were the protests? shouldn't his protest if it is really about fiscal conservatives, or spending, that you need to go down to texas and protest in front of bush? guest: i do not know what to tell you. we have been protesting the government for 20 years. we have been protesting republicans. now we have been protesting democrats. our situation today is extraordinary, but again, i would point to the tea party movement and many of the people showing up tomorrow.

they started protesting against a republican administration when they jammed through in an unprecedented legislative takeover the $700 billion tarp program. and you will recall the first votes on the paulison plan failed against everybody's expectations. that was these folks protesting, calling the members of congress. we stopped at once and then they came back and passed it. host: a participant in the tea parties, bennie, from part -- from poughkeepsie, new york. when did you or are you going to participate? caller: first, i want to address the protesting of president bush. they protested when they stopped voting for republicans and where i live, we used to have a republican as a congressman.

the beginning of march was when i was out and it was because it was called jobs stimulus. there were several projects in the job stimulus that do not create jobs. over $20 million went to rosas house in hyde park. i actually -- roosevelt's house in hyde park. i actually stood out there and held a sign. if you go to a website you will see a couple of projects in there. there is a walking bridge over the hudson that we spent over $11 million that the federal government did not have any role in. as a matter of fact, this bridge caught fire in the '70s and now they are doing this for the party that we're going to have. the average was over $11 million that we spend, you and i.. host: denny, have you participated in a tea party? caller: i was my own tea party.

there were two other projects, if you do not mind. host: very quickly. caller: we are spending $1 million for a party, like i said, is celebration of the hudson river. and $1.5 million for a ferry that goes between beacon york and new burk new york for 238 people and it would take 28 years for those 230 people to pay back. host: we will leave it at that. guest: first of all, the stimulus, by both the process that they passed it -- it was but a legislative panic and the oversight, and frankly, the economics, but let's leave the economics aside. it was a bad idea in the first place. the way they did it, even a good keynesian would say this is an awful bill.

the day after the bill was passed, the chairman of jurisdiction, chris dodd, said, i do not know the -- i did not know the provision was in there and he is the guy who put in there. and i believe that he did not know it because they did not go through the normal process. as a result, you're not seeing big and little corrections. -- you are seeing big and little corruptions. these things like big payoffs to congressman than it does any sort of rational public works program, which was the rational for doing it. >> killeen, texas, john, republican. caller: what did the guy mean by take the country back? he just annoys me. i am african-american and i did çnot vote for barack obama, but it annoys me when they call and ask what you mean? they mean the same thing that democrats mean when they say it. davon to take the -- they want to take the contract for

officials. they always break it down to a race thing. you cannot abuse barack obama unless you're a racist. it is old and tiring. thank you. host: matt kibbe? guest: i agree and i do not think this has anything to do with race and has everything to do with public policy. host: we're going to go to the white house and justice second for his moment of silence with president and first lady obama. but first a tweed -- guest: there are so many things to do to rein in spending. i would just start with a discretionary cap on -- but with a cap on discretionary spending. but you also have to do entitlement reform and you cannot do entitlement reform while you are trying to create a massive new entitlement. the president has proposed cutting $5 billion out of

medicare to fund a new health insurance program. medicare is already $47 trillion in the red. it is a completely broken system. and we need to do something about that. but you need to deal with those issues first, and we have a lot of ideas about how to take on medicare and social security. i would love to have host: that: matt kibbe, -- i would love to have that debate. host: matt kibbe, president of freedom works. the march will be tomorrow, right? guest: we will be marching down pennsylvania avenue and the rally starts at 1:00 p.m. host: at 8:46 a.m., the president and mrs. obama will be walking out into the south lawn of the white house to honor the first -- eight years ago, the first plane hitting the first

tower. we're going to go to the moment of silence and will be back with james kitfield after.

[bell tolçls] three times]

[♪ "taps"]

host: the president will be at the pentagon about 9:30 a.m. this morning, speaking, giving remarks at a memorial there. will be bringing that to you live. in the meantime, james kitfield, who has been on this program for the past eight years talking about al qaeda and the war and afghanistan and 9/11, he is with us with this new article from the "national journal." one of the quotes from his article is -- what does that mean? guest: it means is still out

there, still plodding, still training, still trying to attack the west. what i try to address in the article and what has interested me and a lot of other counter- terrorism experts is that we would have thought there would have been a lot more successful attacks on the west. and there were a rash of successful attacks -- the london bombings, the madrid bauman from the bombings in istanbul. but they have tapered off. attacks on the west have not been successful since 2005, and they are limited attacks. the question in a lot of people's minds is why. maybe we are doing something right. maybe we have been lucky. the idea behind the story is to put one of these failed plot under the microscope and to see what it taught us about what we're doing right. host: we will get to that in just a moment, but on the maur macro level you write this-

that said, what has that done for the war on terror? guest: that was the original move -- mujahedin, a lot of them trace their experiences back to the experience is against the soviet union. there were very experienced, hardened people. they have had to recruit to replace those guys, and they have been able to, but you cannot replace experience. they're having a quality control problem. as you bring in less experienced people, the era of less good at operational security, less fluid at moving in the west, for instance. we still see these al qaeda facilitators the train in these camps and then go to europe and other places and try to initiate local cells, but these guys

are not as good as the originals, apparently. the fact that a credit is in pakistan trouble areas means that intelligence is focused like a laser on communications and cummings and goings in the pakistani trouble areas. theseç guys, more often, before they even get to their place where they want to initiate a plot, are being followed. host: why did you go to spain to report on al qaeda? guest: i wanted to put a failed plot under the microscope to see what we could learn from that. in the barcelona a plot that they exported from last year, i'd have striking similarities between daud and his successful madrid plot of the -- of 2004 where they killed almost 200 people and injured 1700 more. the similarities were striking and in both cases, bin laden initiated it. both spots were for the same motivation, trying to peel off spain from the military coalition in iraq of 2004 and

afghanistan in 2008. they both involve one of these facilitators who came directly from an al qaeda training camp to spain to initiate a local cell by radical preacher or a local mom. they both involve the suicide bombings. they both involved communications through cyberspace. yet one was successful and one was not. i thought it made a good case study to see what we did in the second case that we were not able to do in the first. guest: absolutely, i mean, these guys study each plot, the ones

that are successful, the ones that are not successful. they go through their own little dissertations and case studies to see what worked and what did not. madrid was considered a spectacularly successful terrorist plot. the accomplished peeling off of our military alliance coalition -- the peeling off of spain from our military alliance coalition. and 9/11, that to them was a very successful operation but they have been unsuccessful in trying to repeat either instance. host: international efforts? guest: the intelligence sharing is obviously far better than it used to be. our allies in the west and in the east have set up these counter-terrorism centers that are now talking to each other. we have passed laws and bilateral agreements for intelligence sharing. in this case, it was clear that one of the plotters was actually

an informant for french intelligence. in the past, the french by not have been chairing that in real time with the spaniards. in this case, they did. -- might havenot have been sharing that in real time with the spaniards. in this case, they did. host: so many of the terrorists in the field barcelona applauded were from pakistan. guest: right, and you saw this also in madrid. in that case, a lot of them were from algeria and morocco. before long time, we have said that a lot of the great old abilities that we have are the 15 million muslim immigrants -- one of the great and vulnerabilities that we have are the 50 million moslem immigrants in europe. that has long been seen as a vulnerability. in this case, there were some 15,000 pakistani immigrants that live in barcelona. host: 15,000? guest: yes, and they are able to move pretty freely within that sea.

what was interesting, though, is that someone fingered them. in talking with the spanish top counter-terrorism people, they say they are getting a lot more tips from the muslim community and that gets to my final point in that article, which is a al qaeda is suffering a crisis of legitimacy amongst a lot of muslims now. there's a lot of dissatisfaction with al qaeda. for a couple of reasons. the primary reason is the wanton slaughter of muslims. that strategy was first adopted by al qaeda in iraq to kill shi'ite moslems as a way to start a war with sunni muslims. but they have carried it on and had bombing parvin -- bombing parties in jordan and in saudi arabia, the most holy land in the region -- religion. a lot of the imams have come out against the spirit of --

against that. every time bin laden or al- zawahiri have issued these threats and cannot follow through, they are seeing as an -- they are seen as not successful. we will put our allegiance as elsewhere. host: is it important to send more troops to afghanistan? guest: it is a related, but different subjects. let's put it this way, the success you have had in keeping out on the defensive in the smaller region of the pakistani trouble areas, if afghanistan fails and the taliban retake afghanistan, there is no reason to assume that al qaeda will not have a larger, more successful century in afghanistan than they did before 9/11. i think failing in afghanistan -- a larger more successful sanctuary in afghanistan than they did before 9/11. i think failing in afghanistan is something to focus on. host: capturing bin laden?

guest: it would certainly be nice, wouldn't it? i would love for them to catch him. but i think the movement would go on. he has created a movement and movements do not normally die with a single person. but having said that, he is the figurehead. it would be a substantial blow against al qaeda if he were captured or killed. host: i want to go back to your comment and a statement from your article about muslims in europe. "officials do not discount a cut is unmistakable focus on young muslim men in europe and the u.s. guest: and that makes the point that i was referring to. we are torching a lot of these plots, but we are also seen -- we retorting a lot of these plots, but we're also seeing

not just instantaneous action from local cells. a lot of these cells have local immigrants involved in them. two intelligence services, the british and the dutch, both revealed, as with the barcelona and madrid plots, that all of these plots have facilitators with direct ties to al qaeda and have trained in terrorist camps in either afghanistan or pakistan. so, they are still trying there is a lot of smoke up there with these failed plot. without much smoke and i were there was going to be fired. -- with that much smoke i worry there is going to be fire. there was a plot to bomb jewish centers in your, iraq -- a plot to bomb fort dix and other plots of thwarted in the u.s. host: were those homegrown

plots? and how sophisticated were they? guest: you have to put each one under a microscope. those were seemingly homegrown plots. you have to really wait until those things -- the really nice thing about the spanish system is that they try these things in open court. you can learn a lot more. some people say it is better if you do not learn those things because intelligence secrets come out. the other argument that is that you can actually understand what happened. i am not sure if there was a facilitator in from outside in those american plot. there certainly were in almost all of the european plots in recent years. host: james kitfield has been running about national security intelligence and the wars for many years. and has written a book about it. "prodigal soldiers" is another book he has written. he has been awarded for his

coverage of the iraq war. how many times have you been to afghanistan and pakistan? guest: my focus was iraq until recently and i have been there four times. host: first caller is from indiana. caller: i wonder if this would have taken place earlier if bill clinton -- if the bill clinton glitch had not been involved and whether donald rumsfeld is still grinning from ear to ear, and dick cheney, if it is going to take something like what happened in 2001 on this datq4to cause an uproar in afghanistan. . .

of their nuclear weapon talk, that is supposedly a threat, i wonder if you had

any thought fz al qaeda is involved if that. is iran going to be involved? why have we military encircled them. also, i think it's pretty interesting russia has tie was iran. guest: an interesting question. on al qaeda's relationship with iran, it's not a natural alliance. iran is shia, al qaeda is suni. this is included.

bin laden's son stayed there and went back to afghanistan and was killed by one of our predator strikes. iran uses hezbollah for it's terrorist operations. it is in bed with hezbollah but not a natural friend. >> we have taken away in terms of the tail taliban to the east which is why iran is feeling strapy right now. all of its regional competors we have taken out. caller: i wanted to express my

deepest sympathy. i have friends who lost their daughter on one of the flights into the twin towers. they were on the anti-war march. they were well aware that the strike on that day had nothing to do with iraq. mr. kitfield, i wanted to ask you, the core excuses. but al qaeda, their core issues. when are their objections? our military basis on land in that part of the world to protect our access to oil. what are their core objections to the west? >> guest: sure. that's a very good question.

they want to establish an islamic surrounding by strict sharia law. they want us to withdraw all support from israel, saudi arabia and egypt so that they can take over those countries. very much like the taliban had in afghanistan before 9/11. they see us and our money and support for these regimes as thwarting that. >> christopher called well will be on c-span q&a, sunday at 8:00

p.m. is the muslim population in europe a threat to you? guest: it is a potential threat. when you have people who are s dispoe sesed and angry and some iman can say it's these western culture. . they will listen. i think our own muslim population is pretty well inter he greated in the united states. we have to keep our eyes on and make sure there's not a d

dispossesed muslim population that feels like they are discriminated against. guest: spain has decide the the best way to try these is in open court. there may be military ways to do that. there is something good that comes of the public being able

to see in open court just what really evil people these are. host: democrat, you are on the air. caller: the only true way to measure whether we are any safer is to try to find out how to measure the intensity and determination of the people who want to attack us. is it any less today than eight years ago? are they as determined today as they were eight years ago?

more americans have died under the bush-cheney regime than all other presidents combined. guest: you get to the debate of what should have been the response? >> what was his first point? guest: the level of intensity. that's a good question. the ultimate level of intensity.

the core still fighting are still as devoted as ever. the question is are they swimming in a see of discontent they have having a harder time recruiting. people that can recruit aren't as good, there aren't as many. the suicide bombings we are eeg everyday show that. host: when is the role of a social imam pushing a terrorist forward? guest: they've been forced to

rely more and more on the local cells. they are young, dissatisfied muslim men who go to acsz radicalized mosque and it is preached that the west is its enemy. they decide, you know, we are going to do something about this. host: if al qaeda was dismantled -- guest: if it went away, we would be much safer.

that means they were a direct threat. i imagine there was some hope that these conflicts were localized. if they have now identified pakistan as a weak link. we have to worry about anything that might suggest it would fall into the hands of radical islamists because they have the atomic bomb. host: do you think we are safer? guest: absolutely. host: but why? guest: we have put them on the

offensive. we have focussed now. we understand the problem. we understand you have to make out reach to muslim population in europe. we have to watch who comes and goes from tribal areas of that area. host: have we made mistakes? guest: of course. host: where? guest: i'm in the camp that thinks iraq was a huge mistake for starters. the original strategy was to defeat the west and to withdraw support from all these regimes. the fight was afghanistan.

iraq was a huge i do version of resources. caller: my heart goes out to all the fooinl victims. i'm wondering do you think we are safer now than we were. also bush and chepy have been criticized so much for the war. why, why has the vietnam war -- they have not been ridiculed for

this. my husband was in vietnam. we lost all our friends in the vietnam war. what's going on here? what's wrong? every time the current president opens his mouth -- george bush is not president anymore. the bush administration can rightly be krit sdiezed for a lot of things. >> it is a mixed bag.

if you take poles now, it shows muslims are turning away from al qaeda. part of the reason is because they don't view america so poorly. the screenings we all go through in the airports. it's a mixed bag in this town. host: round lake, illinois. phil caller: my question is.

as far as safer, i don't think you are right. they killed a couple people the first time and kimmed over 3,000 the second. with the findings to make us safer, we don't really know who is coming in and out of our country.

we still have 100,000 migrants coming into the country. i just pray the american people keep us safe. bush didn't keep us safe. we kept him safe. guest: we are not safe. i didn't say we were safe. he makes a good point. securing the boarders is probably impossible. we haven't done it very well. we'll tried. all these thwarted plots show we have made progress could another

attack happen? absolutely. host: secretary of state, robert gates will hold a memorial. the president will be there in about 10:00. after this call from austin, we'll take you live to watch. austin, texas. caller: thank you. it wasn't the greatness of all kieda that caused fooim. the f.b.i. lady knew they were flying planes. we never did follow up on that. there was a document out that bin laden had planned he was going to do something to attack us by planes. host: what about intelligence

sharing within the u.s. guest: he's exactly right. there were terrible intelligence lapses that lead up to 9/11. we have developed this intelligence czar and we have worked together an intelligence center where f.b.i. and secret service can work together. host: here is the most resent article. thank you very much. guest: my pleasure. host: the president and secretary gate also both speak. we thought we would give you a chance to look at some of the

activity. this is being held at the pentagon memorial. this is some of the things happening before the start of the ceremony at 9:30. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> we are live at the pentagon awaiting the sr mowny to remember the eighth anniversary specifically the 184 people that died when the floit crashed into the pent he gone. this is the park built outside of the pentagon built in anx remembrance.

♪

♪

>> please direct your attention to the pentagon flag pole in remembrance of the people lost. ladies and gentlemen, the national anthem of the united states. ♪ ♪tbs

♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, admiral michael mullin. >> good morning and welcome. i offer a special honor to those who died in the attack on september 11, 2001. we are here to reflect and remember.

who among us can ever forget where we were? when we saw? how we felt as citizens and as a nation? i myself remember the shutter and the smoke, the ship mates i lost and how the whole world changed that day. as americans, we share a common sore owe for the 185 lost here and some in new york and in pennsylvania. some young, some not so young. all of them taken from us, stolen from us right before our eyes and well before their time. our grief is real and it is warranted. if i may, let me ask and urge that we look upon this day not only with sorrow that we have

gratitude for the life they wanted us to live. let us face the future with the same resolve our men and women in uniform encourage. they struggle to ensure another day like that day never happens again. america has sent her armed forces forward with that task. in harm's way, you have deployed them. they stand for you and for each other. many of them, more than 1 million have enlisted because of 9/11. they volunteer to defend their country and fight for something bigger than themselves. from afghanistan to iraq and 1,000 other places, they areíkc

doing just that. they are supported by extra ordinary families who work and worry and wage too much. al qaeda and the extremist allies would like nothing better than to strike us again. eight years of war has changed our troops and families but it has not vested them. when i visit them in the field, in hospitals and here at home. rather than reach forewords i do not possession, i will turn to those of the poet william earnest henley for what i believe speaks best.

"in the fell clutch of circumstance, i have not winced nor cried allowed. under the blujonings of chance, my head is bloody but unboued. beyond this place of wraj r wraj and cheers loose by the horror of shade and yet the menace of the years finds and shall find me unafraid." mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, the men and women of your military stand before you mournful of our lost, respectful of our duty but una fraftd task of menace of these years. join me now in a moment of

silence and reflection. >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen, the secretary of defense, the honorable robert gates. >> mr. president, madam first lady, distinguished visitors, among all, family and friends, thank you for being here today. on september 11, 2001, the pentagon, world trade center and a field in pennsylvania absorbed the worst attack since the war

of 1912. speaking during the openings months of world war i said the stern hand of fate has centered us to an elevation that leads us to see the every lasting things of a nation. the key things we have forgotten, honor, duty and patriotism and the ar row of sacrifice pointing to the heavens. we honor the dead today and speak to the survivors whose lives were changed on that day eight years ago. words are inadequate to remove the pain of that loss. we can find some solace because they lived and because of the great sacrifice and thousands more since that day. we remain a strong and free

nation. they are represented by the men and woman they see around you. the program that begins today is being run by lisa dolan who lost her husband on 9/11. she and other 9/11 family members have added something to this program. we are grateful and honored on this day that the president and first lady who has made the welfare of military families her personal pry or theed is here to remember this anniversary. it's here i am proud to introduce the president of the united states.

>> secretary gates, admiral mullin, family and friends of those we lost this day, michelle and i are deeply humbled to be with you. eight septembers have come and gone. nearly 3,000 days have come and past. almost one for each of those taken from us. no turning of the seasons can diminish the pain and loss of that day. no passage of time and no dark skies could ever dull the meaning of that moment. on this day at this hour, once more we pause and prays a nation and an a people in city streets where our two towers were turned to ashes and dust, in a quiet

field why a plane fell from the sky and here where a single stone fell from the building and is black ned by the fires. we remember the names of those we have lost. we read their names and press on this day that marks their death, we recall the beauty and maening of their lives. men and women and children of every color and creed from across our nation and even others. they were innocent going about their daily lives. they now dwell in the house of the lord forever. >> we honor all those that gave their lives so that others might live.

men and women who gave life to the simple statement i am my brother's keeper. i am my sister's keeper. we pay tribute to a new generation. young americans saw their nation in an hour of need says i will do any part. wednesday more we grief you and your families, no words can fill the space in your heart, the empty space in your home. on this day, we pray you find solace in the faces of thoughs you love and know you have the unending support of the american people. skrip tur teaches us a truth. the mountains may fall and give

away the flesh may fail. after all the suffering, god will restore you and make you strong, firm and sted fast. so it is, so it has been for these families. so it has been for the nation. let us renew our resolve against those who plot against us still. in defense of our nation, we will never waiver. in pursuit of al qaeda, we will never faulter. let us renew the commitment in defense. all those who protect us here at home. mindful that the work is never finished. we will do anything in our power to keep america safe. not the human capacity for evil

but good. not the desire to destroy but the impulse to save and build. this first national day of service and remembrance, we can summon once more that the ordinary goodness of america to serve our communities and strengthen our country and better our world. most of all, on a&pá di when th sought to sap our confidence. let us remember how we came together as one nation, one people as americans united not only in our grief but in our resolve to stand with one another, stand up for the country we all love. this may be the greatest lesson of our day. the strongest rebook to those

who attacked us. with such sense of purpose need not be a fleeting moment. it can be a lasting virtue. through you, the men and women leave a legacy that still shines broitly in the darkness and calls on all of us to be strong, firm, united. that is our calling today and in all the septembers still to come. may god bless you and comfort you. may god bless the united states of america. [applause]

>> at this time, president obama will pay special tribute to the 184 lives lost at the pentagon by playing a wreath at the zero age line of the memorial. ♪

♪ ♪

>> ladies and gentlemen, this concludes our ceremony. thank you for your attendance. ♪

>> this will wrap up the pentagon honoring the 184 people that died on september 11, 2001. vice president biden presiding over ceremonies in new york city. a moment of silence coming up in the u.s. senate this morning in about 45 minute this is morning live on c-span 2. on wednesday, the u.s. house marked the memory. among them, a flabbing dedicated to the victims of u.s. fly 93.

officials speculate officia-- ts about 20 minutes. >> lady and gentlemen, please welcome the speaker of the united states senate, nancy pelosi. >> it is a privilege for me to welcome all of you to the

capitol. >> as true heroes of september 11, 2001, all of whom we are deeply indebited to. on this plaque, the memories of those people will remain on the walls of the capitol. everyone who visits here will see those names forever more, edged on the wall of the capitol. the names edged forever i know in the hearts of the friends and

especially the families and loved ones and now here in the capitol. i hope you will visit frequency and that will be a comfort to you. these are truly their memorial. their bravery and sacrifice and willingness to put their lives on the line to protect victims unknown to them and families unseen. for those of us who work in the capitol, it might have been the target of flight 93, we believe it was. we remain grateful, not because they saved our lives but they prevented the speaking of democracy to be vie lated by these acts.

may god bless their memory, may god bless all of you and all of us with the strength to accept that and may god continue to bless the united states of america. i want to introduce representative shuster of pennsylvania. the author in the house is the author in the senate. [applause] >> thank you madam speaker all of the families and passengers of flight 93 here today. eight years ago, we watched on our tvs, i watch frommed an office across the street. i was in my first year of my first term in congress.

i watched the reports of the first plane and live i saw the next plane go down and then the next plane. the men and women of that flight came together from different backgrounds, creeds, ethnicities and unified as americans and sacrificed their lives. flight 93 is believed to have been heading here to this capitol on september 11th. many of those in attendance would have been in mortal darning. it is fitting that we offer a sacrifice in this building that

is a symbol of freedom. those 40 were the first line of defense and they demonstrated to the world. they launched the first counter attack. their faces will never be forgotten. we mark it forever with this plaque. i'd like to thank senator conrad forgetting this plaque through the drawing board to be a reality. i would like to thank the men and women in the military and in law enforcement and their dedication to making this a safe place to live and work. may god bless you and continue to bless the united states of america. thank you. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, the united states senator kit conrad. >> thank you for this opportunity. special thanks for the families of the people on flight 93. we honor very much your relationship to those we honor here today. i remember 9/11 so well. i came into the capitol complex and security people evacuated us because the pentagon had been struck. we went back to our offices and there we saw the horror of the world trade center being hit. then, security people rushed into my office and told us we were to evacuate our office

because there was a plane 15 minutes out. they thought the capitol might be the target. that was flight 93. i think we all thenó learned o the extraordinary bravery of the passengers and crew on that flight. i introduced this resolution in 2004 because i felt that those brave men and women should be remembered forever here in this symbol of our freedom and democracy. when visitors come to our great capitol, they will see this plaque. they will be reminded of that tragedy and triumph of flight 93 and the extraordinary acts of courage by the men and women on

board. more than 2,000 years ago, the greek historian wrote, "the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go to meet it." that's what the passengers and crew of flight 93 did. they saw the danger and they rose up to meet it. we honor their courage here today. we also honor the families. we recognize their sacrifice and we do it in this very building, the capitol of our nation. i am humbled to be here with you. we thank you for your service and sacrifice as well.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, mr. gordon felt, president of families of flight 93. [applause] >> if not for the courage of 40 brave souls, our course of events may have veered off in another path. madam speaker, families and friends, guests, it's truly an honor to stand before you today representing the 40 crew and passengers of flight 93. forever held in the hearts of families and loved ones it is a humbling experience beyond

compare. it could have been any one of us on the air ore here, i think back to those days following 9/11, i am immediately reminded at the moment of time when the actions of our family members becamee+ítangible. while exiting the white house while spending time with president obama, our families were shown grace by the capitol. it was at that moment through a fog of my loss that i sensed the broad implications of the efforts taken by our loved one. it is with great pride that i remember those actions of our loved ones. many lives on the ground here in washington as well as this great

symbol of our democracy could have been loss furthering those who question the resolve of the american people. it is only appropriate that i thank our leaders in washington for the commitment to forever memorialize the heroes of flight 93. the tragedy is eased by the thought that had an opportunity to fight the evil that faced them that morning. like so many citizen soldiers in our history, unafraid to fight for our freedom, life and thank you. [applause] .

>> thank you. before we unveil the stat u, i want to take time to honor the leadership we have with us. republican leader mitch mcconnell, harry reid, majority leader of the senate, from illinois, senator jon kyl of arizona. senator bob casy of pennsylvania senator from new jersey. senator rollin burris of illinois. representing the administration

great patriot, secretary of the interior salazar. senator barbara boxer of california. and the majority leader of the house. john bainer, the republican leader of the house. hx senator isaacson of georgia, senator graham of south carolina, senator from new hampshire, senator franklin of minnesota. the newest member of the senate.

senator feingold of wisconsin, the senator from ohio, senator murfly of oregon, senator enzy of wyoming -- you should be announcing these names. senator altmier of pennsylvania, the senator of new york. senator reid of rhode island. we've never had this many senators ven tour to this side of the house. actually, we are on