pelosi, who is also a very strong supporter. it looks like the congress and is more in line with moving slowly. there has been concern that the military is engaged in war right now. >> what about the debate between liberals and the more moderate wing of the party when it comes to defense authorization? what are you looking for? >> the additional funding that president obama will ask for -- the progressives have been very clear they will not vote for additional money for war. this is a vote that will be carried by the republicans and more conservative democrats. it will be those who support the military operations. >> there is no question it will pass? >> there is a big question.

>> what will pass? >> the defense authorization. >> i think it will pass. i think you can see, on a number of grounds, where it will be very difficult for them to get this done. there will be reduced that recommend getting rid of this and that. there will be natural part oral questions involved. i would disagree with roxana. you cannot stop an amendment from being offered in the committee. i think there will be built to pass it. -- votes to pass it. there will be a fight over it and it will be delayed. the democratic party is certainly not all in line here. >> i do think there is a certain weight when it comes to don't ask, don't tell. he did play a big role in

crafting the law. he opposed lifting the ban to begin with. i think it does carry a lot of weight with the military and the way the whole debate is going to be played out. >> roxana tiron and rick maze, then you for your questions and insights today on "newsmakers." [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> i describe myself as a recovering congressmen. >> he was president and ceo of goodwill industries, an actor, and, since 2003, has been hurt every morning on wmal talk radio. he is our guest tonight on c- span's q&a. >> president obama traveled to boston to campaign for u.s. senate can it martha coakley.

the massachusetts attorney general is running in a special election against joe kennedy and scott brown. from northeastern university, this is about half an hour. >> thank you. thank you to the church family for welcoming our family today. it feels like a family. [applause] thank you for making us feel that way. to pastor and his lady, thank you for welcoming us here today. congratulations on jordan denise. [laughter] aka cornelia. [laughter] michele and i have been blessed with and knew that you this year. -- a new nephew this year.

maybe at the appropriate time, we can make introductions. if jordan's father is like me, that will be in about 30 years. [laughter] that is a great blessing. michele and malia and sasha and i are thrilled to be here today. i know that sometimes you have to go through a little fuss to have me as a speaker. let me apologize in advance for all of bus -- the fuss. we gather [no audio]

[cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] >> how is it going, boston? [cheers and applause]

are you fired up? [cheers and applause] thank you. thank you. thank you, everybody. fired up. fire it up. [cheers and applause] first of all, i want to sing michele a happy birthday. i love you back! you know i do. let me begin by thanking thyou for the wonderful introduction.

give her a big round of applause. nice job. i told her on the way here, -- she said she was going to rock the house. you did it. i wanted bank northeastern. -- i want to thank northeastern. [applause] thank you. thank you so much for the hospitality. i thank the mayor of boston, who is in the house. [applause] governor doyle patrick. [applause] and the great senior senator.

i know where we are. the senator kirk of massachusetts, john kerry. [applause] i want to thank the entire kennedy family. they have been great friends for so long. [applause] to all the outstanding members of congress who are here today, thank you. we are so than all to the pastor -- thankful to the pastor for reminding us of the incredible obligation we have to help the people of haiti in their extraordinary time of need. [applause]

it is good to be back in boston. [cheers and applause] i love this town. i spent three years here, trapped in a library, trying to graduate. i still had a little fun. [laughter] i had a good time in were scared to -- in were registered -- in worcester, too. i came back up years ago, gave a little speech, it turned out pretty well. you have always been good to me. [applause] even though, i have to say that, i was going to wear my white sox jacket today.

[audience chatter] you want a guy who is loyal to his hometown team. i love boston. i have come to talk about one thing. i have come to talk about two things. on tuesday, you have the unique and special responsibility to fill the senate seat that you chose ted kennedy to bill for nearly 47 years. [applause] i am here to tell you that the a person for the job is attorney general martha coakley. [applause] now -- [cheers and applause]

now -- now, there's been lots said in this race about how it is not the kennedy seat, it is the people's seat. the first person who would agree with that was ted kennedy. [applause] the only thing he loved more than the people of this commonwealth was serving the people of this commonwealth. he waged a personal battle on behalf of every single one of you, even if you do not know it. for seniors who are living off of fixed income, families struggling to get health coverage for their children, for students, those who dream of a college education. [applause] he fought for the working men and women, longshoremen in new

bedford. he was always on your side. for so many battles, he led this commonwealth. martha knows the struggles massachusetts working families face because she has lived those struggles. their stories are her stories. she was one of five children. her dad owns a small business. her mother was a homemaker. she worked her way up. nothing was handed to her. she became a lawyer, not to cash in, but to give people a more perfect state. [cheers and applause] she became all lawyer to fight for families, like the one she grew up in, the families who are the backbone of this state and this nation. that is what she has done.

look at her record. as a prosecutor, she took on cases most of us do not want to think about. putting murderers and child abusers away. as attorney general, she took on wall street and recover millions for massachusetts. she took on predatory lenders who were taking advantage of massachusetts families. [applause] she went after big insurance companies that misled people into buying coverage, only to deny them when they got sick. she went after big polluters who put the health of your family at risk. time and again, she has taken on those who take advantage of the system at the expense of hard-working middle-class people. [applause] that is the kind of leader of the people of massachusetts need now more than ever.

[applause] >> innocent blood! [audience boos] >> that's all right. we are doing ok. thank you. we are all right. no no, no. we're ok. we're ok. we are ok. [audience boos and chants]

[audience chants obama, obama] >> we are doing fine. listen. [inaudible] >> now, where were we? all right, let's go, everybody. now, listen.

now, more than ever -- that's all right. hold up. now more than ever, you do not need just another politician to solve problems. you not deemed -- the people yelling at each other. we have somebody with a proven track record, a leader who has walked the walk. she is somebody who has fought for the people of massachusetts every single day. i do not need to tell you we are in tough times right now. we are still dealing with an economic crisis unlike any we have seen since the great depression. it has done a lot of damage to so many people. even before that storm hit with its full puree, middle-class

families were working harder and harder just to keep up. people are frustrated and angry. they have every right to be. i understand. progress is slow. no matter how much progress we make, it cannot come fast enough for the people who need help right now. [applause] here is the thing. you know how politics is. at times like this, there are always some who are eager to exploit that hate and anger to score a few political points. there are always folks who thinks the best way to solve the problems are to demonized others. unfortunately, we are seeing

some of that in massachusetts today. i have heard about some of the advertisements that mark the's opponent is running. -- martha's opponent is running. he is trotting around the commonwealth. he says that he fights for you and he will be an independent voice. i do not know him, he may be a perfectly nice guy. i do not know his record. i do not know whether he has been fighting for you up until now. >> oh! >> i do know that i want somebody tossed a senator who is going to put the interests of working people across massachusetts first, ahead of parties, and had a special interest. i know that martha has done so and has a track record of doing so. [applause]

i know -- i know there are things on which she and i disagree. she does not just call herself independent. she has the character to be independent. so, i hear her opponent is calling himself an independent. we have to look under the hood. what you learn makes you wonder. as a legislator, he votes with the republicans 96% of the time. he says he is going to be significantly and and from the republican agenda -- significantly independent from the republican agenda. it is very clear he is going to do the same thing as republicans

in washington. forget the ad. forget the truck. everybody can buy a truck. here is the question you need to ask before you go to vote on tuesday. when the chips are down, when the tough a boat is coming -- tough vote is coming, who is going to be on your side? that is what this race on tuesday is all about. [applause] it is easy to say you are independent and you're going to bring people together and all that stuff, until you actually have to do with. when the vote comes on ev nergy, whose side are you going

to be on? mark that is going to be on your side. when the vote comes on taxes and there is a choice between giving more taxes to the wealthy and corporations that ship jobs overseas, and businesses that create jobs here, who is going to be on your side? >> martha. >> you will hear a lot about taxes. you always do, every election. i kept the campaign process -- campaign promise to cut taxes for 90% of working americans. [no audio] [applause] these members of congress voted to cut taxes here in the commonwealth for individuals and small businesses. we cut taxes for middle-class families. that was part of the recovery act. [applause] you better check under the hood, because the opponent would

have voted against those tax cuts. he would have voted against those tax cuts. when it comes to taking on the worst practices of an insurance industry that routinely denies american people the care they need and leads too many families one serious illness away from bankruptcy, who is going to be on your side? >> martha. >> you know she will, because she always has. when the ball comes on financial regulatory reform and a choice between standing up for wall street or common sense reforms that will protect consumers and our economy, who is going to be on your side? >> martha. >> we learned the answer to that one this week. democrats in congress voted for tax cuts. what we're proposing is to make sure the taxpayers get their

money back from the rescue that we had to engage in at the beginning of this year. we asked martha's opponent what he was going to do and he decided to park his truck on wall street. it was your tax dollars that saved wall street banks from their own recklessness, keeping them from collapsing and dragging our entire economy down with them. today, those same banks are once again making billions in profits and handing out more money in bonuses than ever before, while the american people are still in a world of hurt. we have recovered some of your money already. i do not think most of your money is good enough. we want all of it back. [applause]

that is why i proposed a new be on the largest financial firms, to pay the american people back for saving them. martha's opponent is already walking in lockstep with republicans, defending the same people who are getting rewarded for their failure. to give you a sense of who the respective candidates are going to be fighting for, despite the rhetoric, despite the television ad, despite the talk, martha is going to make sure you get your money back. [applause] she has your back. her opponent has wall street's back. [applause] let me be clear, bankers do not need another vote in the united

senate. they have plenty. where is yours? that is the question. it would not be just any vote. we know that, on many of the major questions of our day, a lot of these votes -- a lot of these measures are going to rest on one vote in the united states separate that is why we -- in the united states senate. they want to keep things just as they are. i think long and hard about getting in that vote. it might not take you where you want to go. where we do not want to go right now is backwards to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place, when we have just started to make progress cleaning it up. [applause]

>> we have had one year to make up for eight. it has not been quick or easy. we have begun to deliver on the change you voted for. think about what some of these members have talked about and what we have done over the last several months. we have started to see that economy grow again. we have given tax cuts to small businesses. we are forcing banks to start lending again on main street, not just worry about profits. we made sure that police officers, teachers, critical workers across this commonwealth have not been laid out -- off. we have so much more work to do. so many families are out there hurting.

i get 10 latter's cost and letters out of the 40,000 i received -- i collect 10 out to read every night. they are heartbreaking --people talking about losing their jobs and homes. sometimes it is young children who are writing. mr. president, can you help my dad who lost his job? mr. president, can you help? my brother is sick and we do not have health insurance. we have so much work left to do. as much progress as we have made, i cannot do it alone. i need leaders like martha by my side, so we can kick it into high gear, and finish what we started. [applause] you know, we always knew that

change was going to be hard. we also understood, i understood this the minute i was sworn in office, that there were going to be some who sit on the sidelines, who were protectors of the big banks and big insurance companies, who would say, we can take advantage of this crisis. it is going to be so bad, even though we helped initiate these policies, there is going to be a slight of hand here, because we're going to let democrats take responsibility and make the tough choices. we will let them rescue the economy and then we can tap into the anger. it is the oldest play in the book. but everybody here knows that the choices that have to be made, in order to get this economy moving, to make sure people are actually working in

jobs that pay a living wage, that we have a great energy an economy that is bring our cells from foreign oil, that young people can afford to go to college and look forward to graduating and careers that are building this country-that those things are going to happen not overnight and are not going to get there if we look backwards and try to re-institute the same failed policies we had over the past decade. that is not going to work. we have been there and done that. what martha's opponent is preaching, we have already tried, and it did not work. understand what is at stake here, massachusetts. it is whether we are going forward or backward. it is whether we're going to have a future where everybody gets a shot in this society, or just the privileged few. if you were fired up in the last

election, i need you to be even more so in this election. it is the final days. i need you to knock on doors and make phone calls. talk to your friends and neighbors and tell them that every vote matters and every voice matters. if you do that and are willing, not only to cast your vote bank for martha coakley, but if you are willing to campaign, you will carry on the past progressive 4-looking values of this proud commonwealth and to send a leader who will work tirelessly every day to turn this economy around and move this country forward. she will keep the american dream alive in our time and for all time. this is what she is about. we need you. thank you. thank you,

northeastern. . ♪

>> martha coakley's opponent is scott brown. he also held a rally today in boston. you can visit his web site for more details. and we continue to look at tuesday's special senate election in massachusetts and other political news of the week. this is from today's "washington journal." the apps store.

washington journal continues. host: our sunday round table with karen finney and kevin madden. we were talking about massachusetts politics. what is happening? guest: democrats took for granted they were going to win this one and they are coming out in force. they had about 2200 volunteers on the ground yesterday and knocked on doors and were running phone banks. they raised about $1 million in 24 hours so now the machine is turning itself on and pulling it out. they may have missed the signal that we saw and it may be a marker of this season which is that people do not want to be told who they are supposed to vote for. there is a strong anti- establishment sentiment. it is not partisan. it is a mood in the country and for coakley to be presented as a shoo in, was wrong.

guest: if you look at the elections in new jersey and virginia this year, those were bellwethers for what was going to happen throughout 2010. this is the first race of 2010. karen is right, there is a very strong anti-incumbency disillusionment with washington now. it has to do with a washington that is in partisan, chaotic, and is not a solution-oriented. instead, boaters are determined to send a message to washington and send a message to incumbents karen and i were talking earlier. republicans have a lot to learn from this because we should not confuse this with a new real support for republicans, necessarily, but we happen to be the alternative now. that is what a -- that is what is driving scott brown.

he is a vehicle to send a message to washington host: there was one ad that has been getting a lot of attention as one of the reasons why scott brown could break through to the voters. let's show it to our audience >> the billions of dollars this bill will place in the hands of the consumer and our businessmen, will have the media and permanent benefits to our economy. >> every dollar relief from taxation that is invested will help create new job and a new salary. these new jobs and new sellers can create other jobs and other salaries and more customers and more growth for an expanded american economy. i'm scott brown and i approved this message. host: kevin madden, effective? guest: very effective. people remember the kennedy legacy as being allied with middle-class sentiment, middle- class frustration and anxiety. the tone and tenor as well as

the specifics in that ad help scott brown successfully connected with the voters. john f. kennedy when he was elected president in 1960 was a revolutionary figure. he was someone was going to usher in a new level of optimism and a new effort to challenge the status quo. i think that was something that's got brown tapped into. guest: part of the people are frustrated and it was being called the kennedy seat. this ad broke through. i do think that it is also ironic that you have republicans trying to recast themselves as populists on the side of middle class, hard-working americans when it was a republican president and republican- controlled congress that passed tax cuts that favor the wealthy over the middle class. there is a lot of irony going on

here. guest: president kennedy was a tax cutter. guest: i would remind you that the economic situation we find ourselves in was one that we were left with by a republican president rid our president is trying to do the best he can. it is ironic that you have a republican running as a populist, breaking through on a middle-class message when it has been republican policies that have hurt the middle class. guest: one of the mistakes that attorney general coakley made was that she tried to make this a referendum on the past. fundamentally, these contests are exactly that, they are contests about where you go for the future, making a choice of vision for moving ahead. i think that was a mistake she made was trying to make this about the past instead of scott brown tapping into voter desire

to see washington changed. guest: kevin and i agree on many things. in 2006, one of the things that was said was that democrats have been given an opportunity to earn people's trust. ike leggett is exactly that. we have to take that opportunity and shave off -- i think we have to do exactly that. we have to take that opportunity. the parties to come together and present a stronger revision. . >> a lot -- i recovered assets. i approve this message and i ask for your vote on january 19. i will be accountable to you.

>> kevin madden, how effective are the ads and how important is a get-out-the-vote campaign? guest: in a special election like this, you're not going to give every single voter by knocking on doors. everybody knows that that is the most effective way to get your message out. more importantly right now are the contacts telephones. these last 72 hours and a special election, you need to get as many as those voters motivated to show up at the polls during a special election. the resources going and knocking

on doors is probably most important. guest: your strategy has to have all this. you cannot do just television or radio door knocking. you have to do all of them. you have to meet with them everywhere that you can. guest: as a communicator, you have to be sure that your grassroots people are carrying the exact same message to voters. one of the names that we've noticed -- things that we have noticed is that the electorate has become very participate. they know that they have ownership in the outcome. you have to incentivize many voters. it is a lot like in movie promotions. people are more inclined didn't

go see a movie because they heard their neighbors say that it is going to be -- to see a movie because they heard their neighbors said that it is one to be good. host: the telephone numbers are below. you can also send this atwater comment. you can also send an e-mail. this is from the "new york post was ". guest: i think that that puppet charges -- from the new york post, the photo with chuck schumer -- he figures so prominently in new york politics. one of the reason that gillebrand was appointed is because she was a chuck

schumer's choice. he lobbied hard for her. he cleared out a number of people who are now in the new york delegation that were in the premiere. he also has a vast fund-raising network that is helping to support kirsten gillibrand. as far as ford's candidacy, it is somewhat quixotic. just a few years ago he was trying to make the case to the people of tennessee that he deserves six years in the senate, now tried to make the same case in new york to the people. he has stumbled out of the gate because in "the new york times" profile, he talked about new york as if it were only the five boroughs. i suggested this to my hometown into yonkers and he will find out who will become increasingly

lesser known all the way up to places like clinton and erie counties. guest: that reflects her strength. she was a congressman from the upper, middle part of new york state. one of the things i find a little offensive about some of the characterizations of her as a puppet is a they are little sexist. it undermines her records and things she accomplished on her own. she is popular upstate which is a key to winning new york. you have to show strength -- rochester, buffalo, some of those other counties upstate. she has been popular. she came to the senate in a precarious way, to put it mildly. but she has done a good job. given this anti-establishment and anti-incumbency attitude of their it is not bad to have

howard their testing waters so voters in new york the of feel like it is a foregone conclusion to have gillibrand as their candidate. i don't think he will run. if you do the market will see that she is quite popular. doing so would not be worth the damage it could do in a primary. host: we're joined from north carolina caller: i hope i'm not cut off. i wanted to tell karen that i believe you are the weakest democratic representative. you always a agree with what republicans say. the problem is republicans have lied about what is in the healthcare bill. including c-span. one is the last time that c- span challenged the president to debate issues host: are in error jill, we did not send a

letter to the president, but rather to the house and senate leadership. we asked them to open up the proceedings to be shown on tv. caller: ok, republicans don't want health care, just like they don't to help people in haiti. no republican represent them has spoken out to help people in in haiti. rush limbaugh and others have, to state they are against helping people in haiti. there were two polls, one from south boston showing her a couple of points ahead, another showing her 15 or 20 points ahead. you are only discussing the when the shows a couple of points ahead. it is typical. it is an orchestrated movement to bring down obama. i wish we had democratic strategists with a backbone to stand up and fight for the president.

let me tell you, there are plenty of americans out there who are for the president is doing in healthcare bill. host: [unintelligible] guest: maybe people need to see the green room conversations where karen finney destroys my argument. guest: i just want to make one point. one of the things somber tone we have these opportunities for discussion -- i absolutely am a very strong democrat. we just discussed that i feel strongly republicans have not done a good job for middle-class americans. where there is agreement we need to be able to discuss that. we're not credible if we only take talking points. we should be able to say when we have done well or mistakes. it is the same when republicans

have done something right. if people want a true analysis, we have to be credible. i try not to make it into just these either/or arguments, but to get to real issues. host: here is a message from twitter. guest: maybe she should look at the town hall with lugou dobbs. guest: karen finney is a worthy foe. host: the unwary. they're coming after you next. [laughter] host: let's go to mark from cape cod, independent line. caller: good morning. this collection on tuesday is scott brown huge. we -- he was out doing a tour

yesterday. i could literally hear him from 1 mile away. you'd think that it was a ball game. host: you are calling on the independent line. are you truly an independent voter? caller: yes. unlike the other caller, i think that people are dissatisfied with the democratic party totally dropping the ball on this. deval is not like much for massachusetts and with coakley going hand-in-hand i think people really to give for granted. even until yesterday i don't think that coakley thinks it is really important. she seems only meet in december. -- meek and somber. i think that scott brown is a

steamroller here. it will be a message. i don't know who i will vote for. the one thing i did not like about scott brown during the debate -- he seemed a little condescending. maybe a little overbearing. i did not personally like it. other than that he has run a great campaign. he deserves to win, but coakley does not. come to find other issues from north adams and i did not even know that. host: ok. guest: i were to some notes here. i think that the caller makes a good point. it is always troubling and karen would agree -- going into the last 72 hours contending that

enthusiasm gap. the last few days and this week and have shown that the republican campaign scott brown's campaign, is very confident, aggressive, going on the offense. coakley's campaign has been flailing. it is never a good sign. what mark saw in massachusetts is an enthusiasm gap which is hard to overcome in the last few days. as an independent voter, that is one of the things as republicans we do seek. an incredible opportunity that many independents lining with republican sentiment against spending and deficits and the washington status quo. we are beginning to return once again, republicans, to the mantle of being the reform and ideas party. democrats are starting to be seen as defenders of the status quo. lastly, attributes the matter so

much in campaigns. mark pointed out that he felt she was from wisconsin, someone who is not him. that is a fundamental question -- does this candidate understand the problems, anxieties of people like me? scott brown is winning that race right now. with a very strong indicator of white coakley got herself into this problem. host: this reporter says amidst the ceaseless campaign commercials at the brown campaign is managed with overriding cheerfulness. coakley by contrast is attacking so relentlessly that they risked undermining her own support. at what point do negative ads hurt yourself? guest: there is always a fine line. you are trying to define yourself and your bottom. you generally define your point with mostly negative that spring and she is obviously running from behind a little.

but i think enthusiasm is ginger. the democratic machine is turning itself arm. he got the benefit. when you are behind you can go one of two boys. you can go-to catch up, or stay positive. clearly he has done some very smart things. he has done a good job of positioning himself and tapping into the anchor people feel -- anger people feel. as democrats we are the party in power, the establishment, whether or not that is a fair moniker. i think we are undoing the policies of the last eight years -- but it does not matter. it is always a better position to be challenging the status quo at a time like this. host: one of the problems of the negative ads is your fingers are on the crime scene. early on let surrogates define

your opponent and paint them negatively early on and then make your closing argument. host: this is the one-year anniversary of barack obama being sworn in. here is a headline from the paper -- the magazine. guest: that has been the central charge, if not one of frustration that many republicans have had. that there is a cult of personality around president obama that has helped to build him up. he has really never been about substance, but mostly about style. that he has never had the scrutiny many other candidates have had that whwho ascended toe presidency. i have not read the article, but that is a frustration out there. guest: one of the things about

president obama important to remember -- is trying to do things differently. will obama change washington, or washington change obama? that is always the question. people were so excited when year-ago -- one year ago when he became president and they want change. unfortunately, it has been harder to make a check and then he would of expected or like to bring up some of it will bear out in the 2010 elections. he came to the presidency at a time when it any one of the issues he is dealing with on his plate our presidency-defining issue. the economy, afghanistan, iraq -- the charges with global warming and the environment. these are all such meaty issues. he is trying to do things differently. i thought of it will be effective or successful, but i

hope so. it is what he campaigned on. we have so many polling mechanisms and pick everything apart. i do we don't get a chance to take a step back and look at what is really going on. we or so in the minutia of the day to day and up and down. host: a new poll out there, the from page of "the post" -- showing disappointment. john writes that you're into is presidency obama faces the polarizing bashan and soured public assessments of his efforts to change washington. guest: that is where i would disagree with karen's

assessment of the president said he would do things differently and change washington, and he has not. he has been reflexively cynical, actually, and that every time he has faced a bump in the road he has become very partisan. he hasn't looked back rather than been a visionary. he has not unified. it happened with the stimulus bill and now with healthcare. the american public had high expectations which were driven largely by president obama himself. the obama brand so to speak was a unifying, post-partisan brand about one man who could help to change washington. because the challenges are so much greater than what one person can tackle themselve, he

over-promised and under- delivered. guest: i disagree. when you have republicans who said their objective was to destroy the obama presidency and have time and again stood in a way of progress, and not be willing to be all opposition party and come to the table with table-- instead from the beginning it was about republicans figuring out the best strategy to take down obama. at first there were concerned because his poll numbers were so high. then they felt they found an opening with healthcare be in their waterloo. congress bears some responsibility. republicans have abdicated their responsibility with healthcare reform. republicans never did care about passing health care reform. if they had it would have come to the table with real ideas and

the beginning, not waited until the end to say they need more time or needed chance to read it and throwing out ideas that would not move the ball down the field to solve the problem. guest: let we disagree with you and the previous caller who said the republicans do not care about health care reform. i don't know anyone on capitol hill who does not want reform but the differences are on the fundamentals and that the specifics. we have a vision and said the democrats. the president had an incredible reservoir of goodwill with the public. the public essentially gave him a mandate to help to change washington. as soon as the process had a bump, as it always does on capitol hill, he returned reflexively partisan as did his party. the reason health care has had so many problems is because

within the democratic caucus they have a hard time convincing moderates that the trillion dollar plan is the way to go. i do not agree with the assertion that republicans do not care. if anything it encourages more rhetorical extremes by both parties. gues guest: i don't think republicans made it clear that passing health care was a priority, but the use it as an issue against the president was a priority. guest: this sums up the entire process. you have a trillion dollar health care bill, and that is the public perception. host: we will go to pete on the republican line. caller: its claim to blame the republicans for the financial meltdown, when the community

reinvestment act laid the groundwork for this whole plane. in your for getting chris dodd and barney frank, they're great work with freddie mac and fannie mae. and you make it seem that the republicans are against the average person, when they're against drilling for oil, you've always been against that. and getting middle-class people to pay more for everything that they buy. i don't see how you can make that statement that the republicans just ignore it when the republicans were simply the root cause, when you have democrats urging home loans everything that you neglected to mention. drexel is it there and think

that the democratic party had no input or no cost to this whole financial meltdown and we almost incurred. guest: i do have clients in the financial-services industry. but i disagree with the caller in that i did not say that it is all on the gop. i did say that with republican policies like the bush tax cuts that were harmful to middle- class americans. the financial meltdown has a lot of dirty hands. members of congress quite frankly are using will street as a whipping post. a lot of the same members helped to repeal these measures. i hope as we get through this process by phil a., we learn more not only about what was happening at the banks, but also what congress and the fed were and were not doing. where were the regulation, were they being enforced properly?

i think we will find there are a lot of people who are to blame and have some fault. i hope this process in the senate and then through a conference committee, and again with this commission, hope to get to the bottom of what really happened to make sure it does not happen again. i always thought the idea of too big to fail seemed ridiculous. it is true that president bush signed the tarp plan. that is not me lang it at the feet of republicans. that is a fact. on issues like energy president obama has showed leadership on green jobs and alternative energy. president bush did not pursue that interest over his eight years. he privatized social security, but did not make any inroads on alternative energy, not only for the cost issue, but now we're

bogged down with iraq and afghanistan we have national security issues at stake. host: here is the front page with the new politician in office. it gives republicans reason to celebrate across the country. guest: his campaign served as a template for republicans going forward. he was focused on economic issues. he had an optimistic message. his message focus also on non- traditional republican issues. what republicans learned from that particular campaign is one we focus on our core fundamental values, beliefs and take that message and make it an argument about substance rather than volume to an electorate

increasingly center-right, and take the arguments many would say are conservative but make, them into a big make that we could win elections. the guys up in boston right now have taken heed. you are seeing a play out similarly there. guest: then again, the other thing republicans candidates did most is not to cast themselves as republican establishment. sarah palin did not go to campaign for them. they refused other republican incumbents campaigning for them. they did not focus on an attack obama. but in virginia they tried to tie christi to national democrats. they understood this was an

anti-establishment of. time to be seen as an independent republican -- whether that is true remains to be seen. mcdonnell actually praised obama as a couple of stops. he was very smart and reached out to the african-american and hispanic communities. that is not something traditionally done. he did not necessarily pick up support, but repressed turnout for christie. guest: it also appealed to those in the middle. host: our guests are still with us until the top of the hour. xm radio and also c-span radio available. here's a comment by twitter.

laverne from san antonio on the democrats' line. caller: i have been watching the show for a long time. the young man from georgia was talking about the cost of energy and what he sees as the president not been willing to look at energy. let's look at change. tell us what was going on in the closed door meetings. i am sick of these polls. no one has ever asked what i thought. greta was on one day talking about how 60% americans were against the healthcare bill.

how can the number of people speak for me? look at the money spent every day on these wars. iraqi here. the majority of those fighting this work our national guard and reserve this. the american people have no idea about the cost of this war. not only now what it is, but in the very near future. guest: i agree with the caller. in some ways in 2008 i thought it was one of the untold stories, not only for the brave men and women overseas, but when they come home the cost to them

and their families in terms of of their injuries many of which will require long-term care. we heard stories about parents coming out of retirement to help support perhaps a son or daughter coming home injured. the ripple effects will something we will learn about four years and years to come. there have been studies, particularly with the multiple deployments on the children. suicide rates in divorce rates are up. there is a mental health component. there is a health-care component, but also what are we doing to help them when they return home to reintegrate? we're not talking about it enough. host: let's turn to haiti in this miami paper. help on the horizon. now is the chance to get it

right. here are some comments from former presidents clinton and bush. >> there is an unbelievable spirit among the haitian people. while the earthquake destroyed a lot it did not destroy their spring of the people of haiti will recover and rebuild and as they do they know there will have a friend in the u.s. >> it is still one of the most remarkable, unique places i have ever been. they can escape their history and build a better future if we do our part. host: kevin madden, as you saw -- guest: it was an extraordinary message to the world about collective efforts by americans to happen this time of need. it echoes another importer and point that this is not the time for partisanship, but for

everyone to come together to help. it is also an important lesson about the u.s. efforts in development to run the web. i work with a lot of groups in my private sector job who are concerned with development s to the importance of helping them to build an for structures so they are more stable population, that and around the world with developing nations. i hate to view it as an "opportunity" but americans will see it as a chance to improve our image around the world as the humanitarian that we are. guest: it is incredible story.

when you watch it on television you cannot grasp the full devastation. it is important for americans to see that the highest levels we can come together. despite partisan fights and disagreements that when it is really important we come together. i would like to see more republicans calling out for aid to haiti. the most important thing is to seek two former presidents along with the current one come together i thought president bush was great yesterday. i laughed aloud when he said it to send cash. that was his blunt, direct style. in this case his right. they need money.

the one thing about haiti -- and i completely agree with kevin concerning development -- i hope that we learn from this opportunity as to what we can do in the future to get resources to people. it is frustrating to hear stories again as we did after hurricane katrina, 9/11, when you have the outpouring of support, but they cannot get it to people. host: from the atlanta paper they write that the red cross received $45 million within three hours, $5 million came from those using cell phones. guest: it is a testament to how technology is helping to connect with people around the world, similarly disposed towards helping. it is also a sign we need to continue to look for ways to

streamline bureaucracy to be more effective. host: kevin madden, a republican strategist, former communications director for mitt romney. karen finney the work for john edwards in it 2004. under a contributor to msnbc. dean joins us from san diego. caller: good morning. i'm a disabled veteran. the young lady sitting there, was wondering whether washington would change of, or obama will change washington -- i think that washington will change obama. i'm disappointed. we're all christians. but only god knows who is christian and who is not.

republicans when they were in office put this country in the worst situation that we could be in. this guy sitting there talking, he realizes what the republicans did to this country. how in the world can you sit there with a straight face it and say what you say? i told people that obama would get some jobs in hear. the republicans -- the republicans did not do a day's work since they were in office. we are paying them some $100,000 per year to a creek. how many jobs did the republicans make? not one. guest: i think that he is emblematic of many people's an ger out there when they look at

washington as a dysfunctional entity good with democrats and republicans. as a political strategist a think both karen are aware that the american public has increasingly desired fast results. it is one of the down sides of technology. people are looking for the instant reaction and also for the instant solution. dean's point also, the public is increasingly tilted by president obama's having over-promised and under-delivered -- feeling increasingly jilted. he has become as partisan and as he has become as partisan and as interested in instant

host: we are moving to a variety of issues. did you want to respond? guest: i think president obama has a lot on his plate and he is trying to take us through it as much as he can, as quickly as he can. as strategists we know that change takes time. we also know that the electorate is months ahead of that. they want change much more quickly than we can deliver it. and again as i mentioned, so many more mechanisms for polling and numbers up and down, so we do not know yet what the story of this presidency is. it has only been a year. people have very high expectations because people have been suffering for a very long time. you cannot under estimates that when it has been bad for a long

time, that that wears people down. i am glad that the president is going to focus on jobs in the economy this month in his state at the union. because kevin knows that regard to haiti, this comment by twitter -- let's get to david on the republican line from virginia. caller: good morning. it shows the state of the country's psychology when the lady is the one getting hammered and not the gentleman. secondly, it is true. it is true that she has taken the brunt of the calls this morning. what part in the massachusetts election the as the out of control corruption play in washington? there are sleazy deals,

kickbacks, the louisiana purchase -- what just happened with the union? the people despise this congress. the face of congress is harry reid and nancy pelosi, and i wonder what part that plays in this massachusetts contest? thank you both for your comments. guest: one thing i have said publicly time and again, i cannot imagine if i were someone who have lost my job, were working two, trying to keep my family together, and i turn on the television to see both republicans and democrats fighting like teenagers. i would also be pretty angry. i don't blame the american people for being angry. that is why i say president obama is trying to do something differently, but cannot do it on his own. in general, i have heard that congress has become increasingly partisan.

senators kennedy and mccain have said they're used to be more camaraderie. you new and hung out with one another. now it feels much more antagonistic. as the party in power we will take the brunt of that. that is okay. we are tough and can take it. i wish we could have really fundamental change in congress along with the change in the white house so we can release the what would happen. host: the interim senator from massachusetts will join us over the next hour. guest: karen makes a great point. there is a column from the boston globe today where she talks about how this anger is at a beacon hill washington and effectiveness. joan's pont was that coakley has become the incumbent, is the

face of incumbency that also includes the very unpopular deval patrick and the unpopular massachusetts state house. many voters both democrats and independents are crossing over to support our a republican in a traditionally democratic state. people want to send a message to both institutions. established institutions are under assault. host: today, running scared, running hard -- this headline. democrats and republicans are both driven by the idea that scott brown could win. paul, westminster, md.. caller: i am calling at least partially in rebuttal to someone who called earlier. i'm calling on the democratic line. i have been a republican since far back and voted for gerald ford, ronald reagan, bush i.

i got so disgusted with the party. one of the things was that this cannot constantly the right wing talk shows -- clinton did not repeal glass-steagall. the bill was introduced by the republicans and every single republican voted to repeal it. amazingly enough they voted as a bloc. the next thing after bush was elected that they did was the bankruptcy reform act. it was meant to help the credit card companies. then they went to reconciliation to pass the budget. and it has been going on and on like that and i would like your comments. guest: i think the caller, he felt like he had left the party -- the party had left him.

that is something republicans need to be mindful of, and i think that we are. in 2006/08 we were no longer the party associated with reform and ideas. to reconnect with the dispirited base, we have to get them back and re-fashion ourselves around ideas in reform. i don't know the history of the glass-steagall act as well. my understanding is that then- president clinton signed it and bears as much responsibility as those who passed it on capitol hill. i did not know the point about the credit card fees. guest: have you looked at your credit card bill lately? guest: believe me. as you ask your wife -- i'm just kidding.

she knows more about the credit card bill then i do. host: this is an editorial cartoon. it is from the boulder daily camera in colorado, the google search engine and behind it a tank similar to tenement square, listed chinese.cyberattacks. guest: this is one of the more interesting stories going on and if he had not happened we would be digging in deeper. this transformative power of technology. we saw that earlier with iran where by twitter and online people could it out the real story. the chinese government has been afraid of that for some time. frankly, it appears abused -- google, and hacked in. they had actually used it to go

after people they see as enemies of the state. it is a fascinating discussion we will have about what that means. what google should or should not do. at the end of the day, i find it fascinating and inspiring that people are going to change this world. technology is another tool, like the printing press. information is power. host: google says they will leave china. is that a political ploy in terms of a threat they not carry out, or are they serious? guest: it might be designed to gain leverage. but karen is right that information and technology are so powerful. it has to do with people's self- interest whether in china or here. they will do what they can to

protect their own personal freedoms. they will find in their quest for information and freedom -- it is insatiable. that will be a powerful element in this debate as we watch the progress. host: the next call comes from tom on the independent line. caller: my question is regarding energy policy. i would like to know where the common ground is between the democrats and republicans on energy. why don't we see a program to replace old, inefficient boiler systems and federal buildings with new ones that pay for themselves and a few years? guest: wow, now that republicans are acknowledging that global warming is happening at think we have more common ground than before. we know that there is a

component that is about national security. we need to reduce dependence on foreign sources of for them varmint and for our security. you have seen former vice president al gore, taliban pickens and others talking about wind, solar, hydropower. some favor clean coal. that is a murky topic. there are multiple sources of alternative energy that both parties are interested at looking in. i hope over the next several months we can find more areas of common ground. not just because it is smart, but because it is the right thing to do. it could potentially create millions of new jobs. host: bill joins us on the republican line. caller: karen finney, i saw you

talked before and you sit there and kukulie like the rest of yor democratic leaders. you said the republicans did not bring it plans to the table. when you can get to the table, how are you supposed to bring plants? how can you talk about behind closed door plans -- what about the jobs you say you have treated? you sit there and lie. obama said it would be an open situation. is this what you call open? i think not. guest: all right. i don't feel like i need to respond to that. we obviously have a disagreement. i do not consider myself a liar.

we obviously have a different version of the facts. when republicans start a health care discussion by saying, let's make this president obama's waterloo, there is not a willingness to come to the table with ideas. to say our mutual goal is to pass health care reform. that is not for the conversation began. democrats said we need to pass reform and republicans said no, we do not want to. basically trying to hold up the effort every step of the way. host: he indicated he is not interested in running for mayor of chicago. he is expected to remain for one of the year. that is his english, not mine. guest: this is one of the best chicago reporters in the business. i have not read the article, but

i am sure it is very good. a lot of the people forget just how hard that job is to be chief of staff. it is probably as physically grueling as it is mentally grilling. -- mentally grilling. i find it amazing that the golan than 365 days. it takes a lot of time away from your family. everyone on capitol hill wants to call you and every reporter once insight. it is an extremely tough job of would not wish on anyone. would not wish on anyone. host: then kevin asked whether >> to model a discussion