to see. >> congresswoman bachmann you'll get a vote on this issue. what governor romney outlines is a deal to balance the budget. if you can't get that in the short term and those negotiations are continuing, what is your price tag? what is your price tag in a first wave of cuts? if you don't get it would you say to the house republicans, no? let the government go into default? that's where we need to stand? >> i already voted no on raising the debt ceiling in the past. and unless there are serious cuts i can't. i want to speak as someone who is far more eloquent than i. someone who said just dealing with the issue of raising the debt ceiling is a failure of leadership. and that person was then senator barack obama.

we have to have serious spending cuts. >> i appreciate that. let's get down to joshua on the floor. >> i was wondering what your definition of separation of church and state is, and how it will affect your decision making? >> the protections between separation of church and state was designed to protect people of faith from government not government from people of faith. we are a nation founded under god. we have a right from our

creator. in 49 of the 50 states, there is language where it says this. we the people of minnesota, grateful to get away, for our religious liberties. the founding fathers understood that the plus and that we have visitation comes from our creator. we should stop and say thanks and have gratitude for that. [applause] >> what role does faith play in your political life? >> i believe that you approached issues using faith and reason. if your faith is pure and your reason is right, he will end up in the same place. the key to the success of this country, how we all live together, because we are in a

very diverse country. we allow everybody to come in and make their claims in the public square. to be heard, have those arguments. because you have strong faith convictions, your opinion is invalid. just the opposite. we get along, because we know that all of our ideas are allowed in. that is what america -- that is what makes america work. >> fate has something to do with the character of the people represented. we should not expect -- faith has something to do with the character of the people represented. it does not talk about church

and state. the most important thing is the first amendment. congress shall rise no loss -- they should not. the expression of your christian faith in a public place. [applause] >> the next question goes to mr. cain he said he would not appoint a muslim to your cabinet. >> the statement was what i'd be comfortable with the muslim in my administration not that i would appoint one. a would not be comfortable, because you have peaceful muslims and militant muslims, those trying to kill us. when i set up and not be

comfortable, i was speaking about those trying to kill us. i do not believe in some real long in american courts. i believe in a real loss in american courts -- law in american courts. there have been instances in new jersey where most listed try to influence the important decisions. i was saying that american laws in american courts. >> what mr. kaine is saying is he would have a loyalty test. he would ask a few questions before he would hire them. >> you are restating something that i did not state. >> when you interview a person for a job, you look at the work record, there rest of may, and

then you have a one-on-one personal energy. during that, like in the business world, you can get a feeling for how committed to that person is to the mission of your organization. >> i asked this question the other night. he said you knew you would have to ask those questions to a bustling, but you did not think he would have to ask that question of a christian or a jew. >> i want to make sure people are committed to the constitution first before they were in the administration. >> should one be treated differently? >> we are not going to have some real long -- surreal law practice in american courts. we recognize that people of all faiths are welcome but in this country. some of our earlier patriots

came to this country. anyone who would come into my administration would be someone i was comfortable with and would honor as their highest close, to protect the constitution of the united states. >> pakistanis who emigrated to the u.s., became a citizen, constructed a bomb, was asked by a federal judge, how could he have done that when he swore an oath to the united states. he said, you are my enemy. i lied. i am in favor of saying to people, if you are not prepared to be loyal to the apartment -- to the and other states, you cannot serve in my administration. . . -- period.

there are some bad people that would like to infiltrate our country. we have to have the guts to stand up and say no. >> boaters here are asking questions. you can ask on facebook and twitter. deep dish or a thin crust? >> deep dish. [laughter] [applause] >> we will be right back.

[applause] were getting to know some of our candidates. >> spicy. bruins up 4-0. [applause] >> there you go. to theet right down state of a union leader. >> we will start you with a serious subject. new hampshire is one of the five states where individuals that are gay can marry legally. it is a question of conflicting issues. what influence would you use from the white house to try to overturn these state laws

despite your own personal belief that the states should handle their own affairs whenever possible? >> i believe in the 10th amendment and self-determination for the state. i believe that marriage is between a man and woman. i believe that for children, the best possible way to raise a child is to have a mother and father in their life. my parents were divorced, i was raised by a single mother. many families are of troubled situations. we have broken hearts work at risk kids. we took 23 foster children into a home because of that reason. >> to facilitate a repeal a law that, what would you comment from the state of new hampshire and campaign on behalf of a repeal law? >> i am running for the

presidency of the united states. it is not the role of a president to go into states and interfere with their state law. [applause] >> this is an important issue. let's try to go through it. a constitutional amendment like george bush or dick cheney? >> it is the state's decision. >> the federal government should be involved. when we saw this ongoing debate about marriage, we know what it is all about, what does it go to the church and the individual?

they should get a license to get married in the church. >> i helped author the defense of marriage act. if it fails, then you have no choice but to go to a constitutional amendment. >> the states will be involved in the process. there needs to be consistency on something that is foundational about marriage. >> i support a constitutional amendment on marriage between a man and a bomb, but i would not go into states to overturn their state law. >> the obama administration wants to repeal the don't ask don't tell, so gays will be able to serve openly in the military.

if that happens, would you leave that policy in place, or would you try to change it? >> and never would have overturned it in the first place. now that they have changed it, i would not create a distraction by trying to overturn it. we have too many things that are more imports into or about. >> i would look at the commanders and take my cues from them in terms of going forward. >> i would not work to overturn it. rights, as individuals. it would be behavior that would count, not the person that belongs to which group.

>> we should be talking about the economy and jobs. tellieve don't ask don't should have been kept in place until the conflict was over. >> it is powerful as many are opposed changing it. if i met with them and they said it is not working, it is dangerous, and we should go back, i would listen to the commanders whose lives are at risk for the men and women that are trying to protect. >> you would try to revert back from what ever the obama it measures and put in policy? >> of wood. i want to know how it is -- and i would. i would want to know how it is

being implemented. >> the it should be repealed. the commanders should have a system of discipline put in place that punishes bad behavior. >> you are staunchly pro-life. government from a used to support abortion rights until the changes here a few years ago. was that a political calculation? should this be an issue in the political campaign? >> to get any candidate and would get the authenticity of that candidate and what their record is overtime. that is a factor that should be determined. you can look at my record and i have been consistently pro-life.

it is a factor that should be considered when you looked at what the president will do when coming to office. the issue of pro-life, the sanctity -- not just on the issue of abortion, but welfare reform and the entire life -- but those issues will be top priority issues for me. [applause] >> if there is someone that question to authenticity on the issue, please comment. >> i think people understand that i am firmly pro-life. i believe in following the constitution. i believe in the sanctity of life from the beginning until the very end. >> is this case closed?

ok. >> i have a question for represented michelle bachman. do you oppose abortion rights with certain exceptions and deleverage problem with the position? >> i have given birth to five babies and had taken 23 foster children into my home. i believe in life from conception until natural del -- death. i believe in the sanctity of human life. the creator and out as with an enviable rights. government cannot take those rights away. only god can give and take away them. i stand for the right of life.

very few cases that deal with the exceptions are the tiniest of fractions of cases, yet they get all of the attention. the real battle is on the genuine issue of taking an innocent human life. i stand for life from conception to natural death. [applause] >> this is a great example where we can look at records. based on results, not just words, the as governor of minnesota, and bring a conservative court for the first time. we pass pro-life legislation including women's rights and positive alternatives to abortion legislation and many others.

i have not just talk about these things, i have done them. >> there is a question. >> i am with a naturalized citizen who moved from minnesota. she has a question about immigration. >> as a naturalized american citizen, i would like to know how you plan to prevent illegal immigrants from using our our health care and educational or welfare systems. >> i am the son of a legal immigrant in this country.

s brought a great strength to our country. the federal government should not require states to provide government services. i believe -- my grandfather came to this country because he wanted freedom. people who come here, for the opportunities. we should not be offering government benefits for those that overstay their visas. >> compassion sometimes comes up against law. if a child came in, would that

child care? >> we should think about protecting our borders. there was a time when we did not depend on government for everything. >> should taxpayers get care? >> the catholic church is trying to fulfill their role. people are not coming over as much because our economy is weak. meza is an economic issue here as well. you want to believe in freedom. it has solved these kinds of

problems before. >> another issue that has come up is the birthright citizenship. two immigrants that came in this country illegally, should they be a citizen of the united states? >> immigration is four problems, not one. secure the borders. enforce the laws that are already there. clean of the bureaucracy. imparities states to do what the federal government has not done, will not to do, and cannot do.

we are a compassionate nation. of course we will get care. let's face a problem -- face the problem. >> part of the employee forssmann the law has been upheld. -- enforcement law has been upheld. >> if the federal government will not do its job, securing our borders, but others do it. , the state, and they will. when asked governor's to volunteer their national guard to go to the borders to reinforce operation jumpstart our border, and was one of the few that did it. reinforcing the border works. that is what we need today. this brings up the importance of conservative justice.

we have standing language in the constitution. >> precedent bush said this. there are millions of illegal immigrants in this country. if you were to round of them all up, one person would have said, kick them out. but i do not know where the money would come from in this environment to do that. should we have some past the status for those willing to admit they are in the shutters? >> one reason the country is in the trouble is we are determined among our political elites to draw a catastrophic alternatives.

we cannot legalize all of them. that is nonsense. obama cannot get a comprehensive bill passed through with nancy pelosi and harry reid. you control the border. we can ask the national guard to go to iraq, kuwait, afghanistan. we would have done more for american security if we had the thumb of the border. you do not want to use the national guard. take half of the carrot to permit of homeland security bureaucracy, a transplant to texas, arizona, new mexico. you would have more than enough people to deal with it. [applause] no serious citizen concerned about solving this problem should be trapped into a yes no answer.

they are a humane and practical steps to solve this problem, if we can get the politicians to deal with that honestly. >> this is where you, congressman paul. it relates to a specific new hampshire issue. there is a popular bill that is being considered by state legislature to seize private land to build a power plants. should government at any level be able to use any their main for major projects that would reduce america's dependence on foreign oil? >> the loss will vary in

different states. it was never meant to take it and give it to corporations. this goes back to property rights, but should be supported by people. -- the courts should get out of the way as well. they should not have this rate -- right to take land to provide privileges for other groups. [applause] >> you are a property owner, but her up for reducing dependence on foreign oil. how do you feel about that?

>> it is a right used to foster a public purpose, ownership. the right answer for us to have energy independence is develop our own energy in this country. we are not doing that. we have clean -- we have coal in great abundance. it is time for us to have a president that cares about it in america on track for energy security. >> the senate is going to vote on abolishing the ethanol tax.

this move would remove tax credits worth $6 billion. do you support abolishing? >> i think we can oppose the credit. i also proposed in terms of helping in that transition. one of the issues is distribution. of a take-out of the credit every year and use it to expand distribution in various parts of the country. it would be shut down. the ethanol industry has matured greatly. we have done well going forward

underneath that plan. we have a category called this or that. coke or pepsi? >> coke. before we go to break, show us what you think the opinions are. seven republicans want to be your next president and are debating. keep it here. [applause]

>> osama bin laden is dead. we have been in afghanistan for years. isn't it time to bring of troops home? >> it is time for us to bring them home as soon as we can, consistent from the board of the original that we can hand the country over to the afghan military. thanks for the sacrifice of your family in your son in defending the liberty that we have and of our friends around the world. thank you for what you have

done. i think we have learned an important lesson in our experience in a can stand. of what ever troops to come home based on the conditions on the ground determined by the general. albert troops should not fight a war of independence for another nation. only afghanis can win afghanistan independence from the taliban. >> i served in the military, so i have a little bit experience. i would not wait for the general. i am the commander in chief. i make the decisions. i tell them what to do. i bring them home as quick as possible. i've would quit bombing yemen. i would quit bombing pakistan.

i would start taking care of people here at home. we would save hundreds of billions of dollars. we have no purpose there. we should learn the lessons of history. the longer we are there, the worst -- the worse things are. our presence there is not making friends. >> a growing number of republicans are skeptical of these foreign involvement. >> he said no bombing in yemen. the strikes in yemen have been targeted at al qaeda operatives. they are viewed as serious a threat against this nation. d you agree with paul or obama? >> thanks to the sacrifices you have made, and the burdens you beer.

everyone across this country is grateful to you. thank you very much. [applause] on september 11, 2001, 3000 of our fellow americans were killed. they would have killed 30,000 or 3 million, or 30 million if they could have or had the capability to do that. as soon as they get it, they will try. our job is to make sure this nation is safe. if there is an individual that we have intelligence on in yemen that present a threat, we will continue those bombings. [unintelligible]

>> i but like to know your opinion on the involvement with libya? >> should the president have a more the u.s. presence? >> i do not believe that is right. he could not identify the vital national american interests in libya. of policy is substantial. president obama's own people said that he was bleeding from behind. the united states does not -- leading from behind. the united states does not lead from behind. we are the head, not the tail. the president was wrong.

the president was not leading when it came to libya. we were not attacked or threatened with an attack. there was no vital national interest. we do not know who the rebel forces are that we are helping. there are some reports that they may be al qaeda or north africa. what vital american interest do we have? the president was wrong in his decision. >> the governor said he did not think so. he said, we cannot afford it. should the price tag of be a factor when you are commander of the united states? >> shore.

abraham lincoln and reachsure -- sure. abraham lincoln and george washington understood this. after 9/11, our intelligence was so inadequate that we did not know how many libyan rebels were al qaeda. we need to rethink fundamental way about our strategy in the region we better find new and different strategies, because this is too big a problem for us to deal with american ground forces in direct combat. we need a new strategy for the region.

>> how would you like a deer responsibilities? , but -- at your responsibilities? >> look at the intelligence. is it in the vital interest of america? if the answer is no, then we do not go in. the these are not simple situations. it is a mess. there is more that we do not know then we do know. it would be very difficult to know exactly what we do until we learned from the commanders in the field. >> greg lives near manchester. what a short question? >> we are in debt up to our

eyeballs. we have nation-building going on around the world. we have military bases all over europe, asia -- 900 military bases all of the world. is there a candidate willing to shut down these bases that are not vital to our national security and use that money to pay off our national debt? >> what we are dealing with is a failure of leadership on the part of the administration, to confront our enemies. they are round the world. we must have the ability to confront those threats around the world.

we need the base. we have to be able to attack when we are attacked. it is not just due to a threat. we have to engage our allies the president has not done that. he has turned his back on american allies. he has embraced our enemy. we have a foreign policy that we will need more of a presence for. it is a result of america's sexless less. >> we have to take our last break up the evening. you can see the conversation on facebook and twittered.

we would be right back. [applause] >> we are in the closing moments of our presidential debate in them -- new hampshire. let's go down to the floor. >> public opinion polls consistently result in low approval ratings where congress as a whole. it shows a lack of enthusiasm for some candidates. touldn't you pay attention public sentiment, and aren't these a direct reflection of

what the voters are and are not looking for? >> i believe that they do represent a barometer, because it is way too early. many of the people do not know as yet. it is still really early in the process. i think they will find this is a good field of candidates. [unintelligible] [applause] >> and is likely that if you win the nomination, you have to make a choice and pick a running mate. looking back at 2008, senator mccain made a pick and so did obama. who made the best choice? [laughter] >> senator biden has been wrong on every major strategic

decision. look at his judgment about partitioning iraq? if vice-president biden would have had his way, we would have had more mayhem in the middle east. i think governor palin is a remarkable leader. she is qualified to be president of the united states. she is equally qualified and would have been stronger than joe biden. he is wrong on everything. [applause] >> any one of the people on this stage would be a better president than president obama. he failed in getting the economy growing again, mr. can the government, and having a coherent and consistent foreign policy. this hit or miss approach has

met some successes such as getting osama bin laden, but a lot of mrs. richardmisses -- misses. >> if you could only hire one of the candidates on this stage, which would it be and why? >> we may have to have another to attack american i a" contest and let the audience decide. -- maybe we could have a "american idol" contest and let the audience decide. [unintelligible]

>> they have not told me how they feel about the federal reserve yet. >> [laughter] >> what have you learned in the last two hours? >> i was very impressed and we have a great field of candidates to pick from. >> i have learned more about the goodness of the american people from the questions of john, his three sons serving in the navy. >> i do not mean to interrupt, but we have to move along. >> [unintelligible] [applause] >> new hampshire is proving that the issues people care most about is getting this economy growing again so we can have a

rise in housing prices. >> i have learned some disagree on some issues, and we can talk about it and be civil with each other. [applause] >> if you trust the people, you can have a bright future. >> all of these candidates share one thing in common. it is not about us, but the children and grandchildren. >> i want to thank our candidates and the union leaders for having us. i want to thank everybody here. anderson cooper continues our coverage right now.

[applause] >> it tomorrow, our live coverage of the 2011 republican conference in new orleans. it wraps up with buddy roemer, marcia blackburn, and others. it is live at 12:50 p.m. eastern here on c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] --2011. on to attack washington journal", -- on "washington journal" we will speak with erik telford.

it begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span has launched a new easy to navigate web site. you can see the latest events from the campaign trail, twitter feet and campaign updates. visit us at c-span dot org/cam paign2012. we want to focus on the succession of the ninth congressional district leader. is david wasserman. but we appreciate your time on c-span. thanks caller: for having me --

guest: thanks for having me. host: i know it is early, but what names have been mentioned to replace him? in guest: amazingly enough, this will be the third special luncheon in new york state in recent years. to we have had two sex scandals that have already created a special alexians in republican leaning seats in -- specialty elections in republican-leaning seats in upstate. now it is a democrats turn to defend a seat in queens. interestingly enough, this will be more of a tribal election than the of state elections we have seen, which is, the partisan policy dictates of the

chair of the political party of the democratic party in queens will be selecting nominees. there will be no primary election. and governor cuomo will be setting the date for the special election. everyone is watching joseph crowley. he is share of the queens democratic party. he gets the call on who the democratic nominee will be. they will start out with an advantage. but keep in mind, this is the least democratic district in nyc. this is not a foregone conclusion and democrats cannot take the race for granted. host: and his cousin, elizabeth crowley is a councilman. guest: that is true. and there are other names in the house as well. one thing we will be watching is whether, crowley -- is whether

crowley has the credibility to mount a campaign. it is a very diverse district. here is the ranch in this, n.y. is losing a few seats in redistricting, and this is a district that everyone has been looking at since the scandal broke as one district in the city, will most likely have to go. crowley would like to take on more of queens. currently, his district is in the bronx. he would like to take on more of his home base near el morris to. he would benefit from -- neera elmhurst. he would benefit from redistricting. many speculate that he would

move into wiener's territory. we do not know of the names that have been mentioned -- you know, linda calves, it for more city councilwoman, or his cousin. of the names that have been mentioned, we do not know who would be willing to be a caretaker of the seat, but also led a vigorous campaign in a special election against potential republicans. host: you indicated that the governor has wide latitude when it comes to determining when he will hold the special election. when will he know about the newly drawn lines in new york state? guest: we will now know about the lines, most likely, until run against the filing deadlines of the summer of next

year. governor cuomo, shelley is over, the assembly speaker who is a democrat, and the minority leader -- or rather, majority leader in the state senate will all have to hammer hard a deal on redistricting. -- hammered out a deal on redistricting. it will be a situation where most people would expect to run for a seat for a lame duck session as a member of congress before it may be eliminated. as we found out in new york's 26th district, the last time the scandal broke, drawing conclusions about the special election at the outside -- outset of the elections can be

hazardous. i do not think that the county clerk what ultimately win that race and how the county can be preserved by redistricting. there is a greater chance that will be eliminated, but we will have to see whether republicans can mount a credible campaign that puts the democrats in a tough spot. host: david wasserman, who tracks the house of representatives and the politics of congress for the "cook political report." the headlines outside of washington d.c. putting him the winner on the front page.

"washington journal" begins live on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> the supreme court is now available as a enhanced the book and tells the history of the justices themselves. this new edition book has the newest supreme court justice. and there are more to media clips. it is available now where ever

ebooks are sold. >> we will look at some of the presidential candidate speeders and a month. you will hear from ron paul first. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. [crowd chanting "ron paul"] thank you.

i have great news for the cause of liberty, the country is coming our way. [applause] i have always been an optimist. i have always believed the cause of liberty would win, but three or four years ago i would never have predicted that we would have made as much strides dybbuks and we have today. if there is reason for us to be encouraged and keep the fight, because that is what america is all about. the loss of the land can be found in our constitution and we demand respect for them. [applause] there are four categories i would like to mention in my opening remarks. these are where we have made strides. probably where we have missed the least amount of strides is in our civil liberties. the american people are sick and

tired of losing their privacy and being prodded by the gsa at airports -- tsa at airports. another area where we have made a lot more strides, and you can see it in the recent debates as well as the recent votes in congress, they are coming our way because the american people are sick and tired of the analysts note win wars around -win wars -- no \-wi and around the world. there can be no doubt that there is too much spending, too much debt, too much borrowing, and it is time to stop the spending brigid's -- stop the spending. [applause]

how did you know that was my fourth item? i do not know how you knew it. this is wonderful. this is where we may have made our greatest strides, for the american people to realize you can not print money in secrecy by the federal reserve and pretend it is a creation of wealth. we have gotten the attention of the people dealing with our monetary system. it is time we not only on that the federal reserve, but also get rid of the federal reserve in due time. [applause]

a few years ago it was very evident there was a financial bubble, especially the housing bubble. the bursting of the bubble was on our doorstep. the free-market economist predicted it and it did arrive. this has given a lot of credibility to the views of us who look at the federal reserve as the culprit in creating the financial bubble. when the bailout came, congress intervened, of course, and spent nearly $1 treen bailing out the people who were making a lot of money that we're bankrupting the reserves. they should not have been bailed out. [applause] what a lot of people did not know and a few have difficulty understanding, it was a much bigger bailout by the federal reserve.

they created about $5 trillion out of thin air and then they bailed out the banks and big corporations in total industry -- in total secrecy. guess what? all of those derivatives and assets that were worthless that nobody could sell on the marketplace -- guess what? we, the taxpayers, but those with money printed out of thin air to the tune of about $2 trillion. the federal reserve during that time -- and the reason we have to address this subject -- making create and spend more money than the entire congress. curtailing congress is one thing, but it the people in the congress do not curtail the federal reserve, you will not touch the problem. that is why it is so important. [applause] we have had some hearings.

my subcommittee on the financial services -- we have got more information than ever before. we have found out that all those trillions of dollars created by the fed -- guess what? one-third of those funds went to foreign banks. it makes no sense. we find out that some of those funds actually went to banks partially owned by gaddafi. yet that makes any sense, i do not understand it, but i think the people, once they know about this, will be outraged and are outraged with what has been going on with our monetary system. but today we are facing another crisis. the next crisis is a result of the veterans are creating all this money. that will be the inflation tax. when they create money they inflate the currency.

prices will rise. that is a tax. that will come. it has started and it will be much worse next year. it will be a big issue in next year pottery campaign. some of you might remember the stagflation of the '70s. it will be worse because the economy is weaker now than it was. for us and for the sake of america, we have to deal with this problem. i have said many times we have to do something. we cannot dump this on our children and our grandchildren. i address it slightly differently now because it is the current generation -- it is us today who are suffering. we do not have jobs. we are getting hit with inflation. we are suffering from the overextension of the wars around the world. it is today -- we are suffering from this and, therefore, not only should we worry about the

next generation, but we have to worry about today's generation. the most precious thing we can do for our next generation -- the debt is a concern, but the most valuable thing we can get the next generation and allow this generation to have is to have our freedoms back. [applause] i have talked a lot about foreign policy for a good many years. it is very important. the foreign policy originally of the republican party of nine intervention, a battle of neutrality, minding our own business. what the founders taught and what the constitution says -- do not get involved in entangling

alliances or internal affairs of other nations. do not get into the business of nation-building. besides, we do not have the money. if somebody is interested in looking at this in detail, one of the most significant pieces of writing about this subject came from ronald reagan. everybody knows how he stood up -- stood out in standing up to the soviets. but in the early '80s, reagan put some troops into beirut. 241 marines were killed. it was a real tragedy. it bore heavy on ronald reagan. read what he said in his memoirs. what he said was, "i would not turn tail and run." but when he found out how irrational politics was in that region, he decided it was necessary to get out. he said, "if i had followed a

policy of neutrality," he is admitted, "those 241 marines would still be alive." he was courageous enough to admit the mistake. robert mcnamara, he was the one who built up the vietnam war, what a tragedy. i was in the military for five years in the 1960's. i did not have to go to vietnam, but i was in the service. it was such a tragedy. republicans wanted to stop the war in 1968. 30,000 americans died after we were elected to stop the war. we lost over 60,000 americans and a mcnamara was the champion of the war.

before he died he wrote a book. he was interviewed. the interviewer said, "mr. mcnamara, would you like to apologize to the american people about what happened?" he said, "what good is an apology? the only thing that counts is that we look at policy and change our ways." that is what we have to do. how long will we allow our presidents to go to war in an improper manner? how long will we let our governments go to war and the congress be derelict in their duties? we have not declared war since world war ii. i say if we have to go to war, declare it a war, when it, and get over with. -- win it, and get it over with. [applause]

>> right now we are in libya. congress was not asked for informed about it. republicans and democrats got together. in the war powers resolution was meant to restraint presidents from going to war like this. but our current president explain to us that this was not a war. this does not qualify as being controlled by the constitution, the congress, or the war crimes resolution. he said they are not shooting back and we have not been killed. evidently if we go embalm people and they do not shebat it is not a war. that is how silly -- if we go and bomb people and they do not shoot back, it is not a war. [applause]

a lot of people will ask us as candidates, what would be the first thing you would do? there is always a limit. everybody knows my opinion on monetary policy. the president cannot get rid of the federal reserve. he might legalized competition like the constitution says. [applause] but the president has a lot to do with foreign policy. he is in charge of the troops. he is in charge of the navy. i bet there are not too many in this room that read a recent story this week of where our navy just went with a missile cruiser. they went up into the black sea and right up on the borders of russia. russia is on the way.

what would we say of china came into the gulf of mexico right up to the shores? i know what the texans would say or the people in louisiana would say -- we do not need you here. one thing i encourage people to do, especially when they questioned some of the things i say, always put it in light of a foreign policy golden rule -- what would we think if people did that to us? [applause] although many reasons have been given for why people hate us and what to come here to kill us, the truth is, they tell us the truth. they tell us why they hate us. bin laden told us the truth. the truth is, they cannot stand

occupation and control of their land as we would not either. [applause] bin laden had a plan. he was going to get us very angry and he was going to drag us into a war. he wrote this. he said, "i am going to drag the americans into a war just as we dragged the soviets into a war -- into a war." if we were one of those who said the soviets did not have a right to be in afghanistan. bin laden says he is more to drag us into the war, bond us down into an endless war. he said, "you know what? we will drive them into bankruptcy." this is serious stuff. we are bankrupt and we are bogged down. we are in five wars.

you have to remember what was said many years ago about war -- war is the health of the state. it the state is the enemy of liberty, the bigger of government to run your life and run the economy, the last liberty you have. we have endless wars and they are continuously going on. they have ended up because a military confrontation. we did not have to confront the soviets. we let them self-destruct because they spent too much and got bogged down. i would say it is time for us to give up that obligation of being bogged down against the many countries of the world. [applause] we are now in over one of the 30 countries. -- 130 countries.

we have over 900 military bases. we will not be leaving iraq, afghanistan, or pakistan. we are going to expand our presence there. we are going to build embassies in all those countries. the embassy in iraq is bigger than the vatican. do you think we are going to leave and leave all of those bases? no. we are there because we are going to argue the case, at least behind the scenes, that we have to protect our oil. what are our political enemies of recent years doing? the vietnam -- the vietnamese as well as china? china has become the manufacturer of the world, selling of students, and we borrow the money -- selling us goods, and we borrow the money. the chinese and money in the bank. or the invading countries and having their people get killed? no, they are making money.

they are buying up oil interests. they are making deals. unfortunately, our foreign policy has driven so many countries into the hands of the chinese, the coalition has gotten to be india, russia, china, and iran. to is the close but the knell of iran? iraq. we toured iraq over to the shiites. our policies, no matter what the argument may have been, have totally backfired on us. we need to change the foreign- policy. we need a pro-american foreign policy. [applause] ng "ron paul"}n

we are steadily losing our liberties. we cannot use our property unless we pay our taxes and follow the regulations from not only the government, but the un coming down and telling us what we can do with our land. it is a very good reason that would support our bill to get us out of the un, the imf, and the world bank. [applause] the good intentions always get out of control. there is a good intention done by the food and drug administration. make sure your food is safe. everybody is for safe food. what the fda is doing and what they feel so compelled to protect you, they will arrest you if you start drinking all milk. what is so dangerous about you

making your own choice about whether or not you can drink raw milk. i think we ought to vote for the right to drink raw milk. [applause] there is another good intention. the good intention that people not use drugs stupidly. there is a lot of that that goes on, but there is a lot of stupid use up research in drugs -- use of prescription drugs. up until 1937, smoking marijuana was legal. it was still stupid, it was legal, but all the sudden we decided we would outlaw it. more people smoke it now than ever before, but some states, and i am not familiar with this state, but some states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons. how compassionate -- should

people be allowed to make that choice? as a physician, i can tell you there have been people dying with cancer, they cannot hold their food down, and they are taking chemotherapy, and they get benefits. but we should not be afraid of people making their own choices. let's disregard that for a minute. [applause] but because marijuana is illegal and because the plant looks a little bit like hemp, we are not allowed to raise hemp in this country. if you want to get high on hemp, you have to smoke a cigarette as big as a telephone pole. [applause] yet, they are hysterical about it. hemp is a fantastic product.

it makes better alcohol -- it makes better ethanol than corn. it makes clothes. it was very helpful in world war ii. so many of these jobs went to canada. they make these products and sell them back to us. then we wonder where our jobs are going. let's legalize hemp as well. [applause] because of the over bordon of laws in this country, always tell -- overburden of laws in this country, always telling us what to do, we have more prisoners than anyone else in the world. 1% of our population is in prison. we have 5% of the population, but we have 25% of all of the world's prisoners.

i do not think the american people are that bad. i do not think we need that many prisons. ishink we have too many losaws what the problems are. [applause] today in the economy, that is what people concentrate on. we cannot separate that from foreign policy, but 48% of the american people say they expect we will very likely have a depression. those people are unemployed for three years already have a depression. we have been in a severe swap -- slop for 10 years. our population has grown by 30 million people, but we have not added any new net jobs. that is that it is.

we are slipping and sliding. it is always moderated by more handouts and more entitlements to make people feel a little better. it looks like we will be doing that for a long time, but it eventually ends up in bankruptcy. what are we going to do with all this debt? we have a pretty good history to know what will happen to the debt. our debt, gris's debt, everybody's debt -- greece's debt -- itbody's is easily liquidated by the debt -- by the government. he gets 50 cents on the dollar or 25 cents of the dollar. that is what is happening today. we are fast liquidating our debt, but the economy has not picked up in these last two years. we got into trouble because we believed we could spin. we had the reserve currency.

the world would take our money. we would get the goods and our debt would go up. we spent too much, we borrowed too much, we regulate too much, we printed too much, and we got into predictable trouble. guess what we have been doing for three years? we are regulating more, we are spending more, we are borrowing more, and the federal reserve has unlimited amounts of money flowing into the system and they think it will call -- it will solve the problem. it will not solve the problem, let me tell you. [applause] we need to restore our confidence and belief in a free society at how markets work. we as conservatives are supposed to believe in the free enterprise system. that means we want to get the government out of the business of regulating the us. -- regulating us. if i had my way, the federal

reserve would quit printing money because it only benefits the rich at the expense of the port. the money from investment has to come from savings. will there have enough savings? yes, if we change our tax code. we should not be taxing savings. we should not be taxing the elderly saving money. [applause] we should not under current condition today because the banks get the money for free and they make 2% or 3%. if you are elderly or retired, you get 1% or 2% when the market rate is 6% or 7%. it is criminal. it is really bad. [applause] we should not tax savings. we should not tax dividends. that is where capital comes from. over $1 trillion worth of capital is sitting overseas

because companies are global and they are able to channel the funds all. they pay other taxes, which are lower. if you want to repatriate that money, they do not ask you again. but we do. there is over $1 trillion overseas that a loss our companies, but they will not bring it home. let's stop taxing repatriated money and let them bring their capital home brigid's -- bring their capital home. [applause] then you have to change the environment brigid's you have -- you have to change the environment. the corporate tax is not a corporate tax. it is a failed tax. corporations and cannot function unless they pass it on to the consumer. the sales tax, we should stop best of the they put the money into investment.

the corporate tax rate should be as low as possible. the regulatory burden should be lifted from their shoulders. one thing i have promised, it by was president of the united states, -- [applause] my goal would be to freeze the federal register and then stars -- and then start shrinking it. no new regulations. [applause] when did we as a country capitulate and say the executive branch in the form of the bureaucracy has the right to write laws? the courts do not have the right to write laws, neither should the executive branch. [applause] when you allow courts to write

even at that legislation like roe vs. wade which tells states what they can do to protect human life. i would repeal roe vs. wade as much as possible. [applause] let me close by talking a little bit about what a free society should be all about. a lot of people do not quite understand when i talk about people being allowed to make choices on their own lifestyle. that worries them because they might make a bad choice, which is quite possible, but what happens when government makes the choice for you? they get involved in your education. i want that responsibility to be put back to the parents in charge of their kids and their education. [applause]

but the thing -- you are challenged on this, what you should think about is the first amendment. we have a first amendment and hardly anybody argues with me about the first amendment. it legalized freedom of thought. even communist teachers or allowed to exist because it is political free-speech. we do not have a first amendment so that we can talk about the weather. it is not that. it is to legalize freedom of speech, but nobody says that if you legalize freedom of speech, you endorse the speech they use. you do not endorse what they say, you endorse the principle that they have the right to say it. [applause] this is what responsibility is

like when it is on the individual. you have a responsibility printed it is your life and your liberty. it comes to you from your god, not your government. [applause] where is the responsibility on good behavior? it is with the individual, it is with the family, it is with the parents, it is with the church. believe me, the government is not a very good source of teaching good values. but freedom, freedom is something that america's -- america has been well known for. in the last several decades we have lost our way. we care less about freedom than we do about the government taking care of us from cradle to grave. they will protect us. it is ok to sacrifice a bit of your liberty for security especially cents 9/11.

i did not buy that. i do not think he said sacrifice any liberty for your security. -- i do not think you should sacrifice in the liberty for your security. [applause] freedom brings people together with different values because it is not confrontational. people are not allowed to force anything on you and government should not be allowed to force anything on you as well freedom brings people together. that is the magnificent part about a free society, it is not authoritarian. whether it is personal habits or economic habits, the liberals love to tell you what is fair or equal economically, but the principle states the same if someone comes along and says they do not want you to do this or that. a free society -- the great part

about a free society that we have forgotten about, it is the most productive society. yet we are not productive if we are not wealthy. [applause] which means that we are less free and that is one of our major problems. the ideas of liberty lardon need. we have had the greatest experiment in all of history, but i get a thousand years of history, we have only had a couple hundred years of testing it. 95% of economic growth and well- being for the people have come with the advancement of the freedom of people. we are about to give up because we have lost our convictions and understanding of health freedom works nl it depends on you as an individual. everyone of us is unique. we do not get our rights because we belong to a group. if we get our rights because we are individuals. individuals or the one to claim

rights, not groups. -- are the ones who claim rights, not groups. when you live in a free society, there are restraints on the use of force, but -- you do not have a tremendous growth and prosperity in a communist society. it's oppresses everything. we are being overburdened l more than ever before with big government at all the rules and regulations, but we are less productive. a free society allows creativity. on a personal basis, it gives you the opportunity to do what is your personal responsibility. from my viewpoint, the purpose of life is to strive for virtue and excellence. that should be the goal. [applause] now, there will be many on both ends of the spectrum but will

say, "yes, but government should do that, too." when government tries to make all the definitions and say what is fair, economic distribution is they cannot do it without undermining your liberty. the key is to understand the value of the individual life and to take that responsibility. without the responsibility being assent, it does not work. john adams warned us about that. he said, "you have a free society. you have a republic. but if you not assume these responsibilities, it will not work." we are not willing to assume its, but we are certainly moving in that direction, which makes me very happy about it. samuel adams said that -- a lot of people worry about how we get a majority to agree. we do not need a majority.

we need what he said was an irate minority willing to start the brush fires of freedom in the minds of man. [applause] and this -- [crowd chanting and this i report to you is where we're making great progress. there are many, many thousands of brushfires going on in this country. i would like to think i contributed a little bit. one thing i can't tell you is that i -- i cannot -- i cannot

tell you that i know how many there are because every place i go, i find out there is another brushfire here and here and more organizations and individuals who have caught on. samuel adams ha one more bit of advice about this fight and he was in a much tougher fight than we are today. he gave us one advice, he said no long faces. they were in tough times and they were very pessimistic and he said, yes, no long faces. which meant if you come and say oh, what are we going to go? it's not going to work. but there's every reason not to have a long face. let us join ourselves. we know what america is all about. we know what freedom can deliver for us. and we know momentum is with us. one way we know momentum is with us, all of a sudden i notice

others running for leadership are starting to use our language. great. good to see everybody!

>> ladies and gentlemen, pennsylvania senator rick santorum! [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you very, very etch. i appreciate that. and appreciate all of you being here. it is nice to be back in new orleans. i was here the last conference, and it was the energy and enthusiasm in that room. obviously carried over all across this country and we had a great election victory. but our job, i remember saying

at that time back in 2010, that this was the most important election of our lifetime. but now i have to say that, that is no longer true. because even then i said it was the most important election because it was going to stop if we were successful, stop more bad things from happening. but if we really wanted to change things, we really wanted to make a difference, then we had to elect a new president in 2012, and that's our job this election. [applause] this is a very, very serious time. i spoke here last year and i have been speaking around the country. i just came from new hampshire, just flew in from new hampshire. it was my 20th visit to new hampshire. have i been to all of the other early primary states. south carolina. i know we have some south carolinians here today.

thank you. have i been there many, many times. and iowa. my kids have been watching me more unfortunately on television than they have across the table at the dinner table. the other day i was home, and my son patrick, who's 9, karen and i have a very, very blessed to seven children, and so if you don't think i have experience on balancing budgets, you don't know what having seven children means. anyway, our sixth, patrick said to me, dad, you're awfully serious. when i see you, you're always so serious. i said patrick, this is a very serious time for our country. he said you know, you should try to tell a joke. i said, patrick, i'm not good at telling jokes. he said, well i heard a good joke. tell this joke. i said ok, patrick, i'll tell your joke. what is it? he said, what goes ha, ha,

thump? now, he's a 9-year-old remember. what goes ha, ha, thump. i said, i don't know patrick, what goes ha, ha thump. he said, someone laughing their jay leno, there you go. i don't know about you, but i don't watch either. but we do have serious problems. someone around the country i have noticed and recognized and felt from people this enormous amount of anxiety. we saw it percolate up in america from the tea party. and god bless the tea party for what they did in this last election. we would not be where we are today without them. we saw it percolate up.

we saw in energy. we saw this anxiety, and almost fear and resolve as we face the problems of the country. i tried to put my finger on it. what was it, what was it that really was going on here? i felt maybe it's the economy. maybe it's the fact the economy is horrible and, of course, as a result of the policies of this administration, they have gotten worse and worse and worse. they're saying it won't be a double dip but certainly will not be any v-shaped recovery. it's an almost flat-lined economy. no jobs are being created. why is that? try to climb a hill with barack obama and the rest of the democratic caucus on your shoulder. it is incredibly, unbelievable how much this administration has done in a very short period of time to just crush the american entrepreneurial spirit, crush innovation and growth.

i can tell you as someone who's been in congress, i spent two terms in the house and two terms in the united states senate. every time i was there, i voted for lower taxes, pro growth, less regulation, less litigation, because we know in america that's what works. what have we learned from this administration? we have seen bill after bill, the trying to put more controls. throw everybody how to run their lives. it's destroying america. maybe that part of it. maybe it's what we see here in louisiana. as michele just said, you have survived the regulations that this president is putting on you in the oil and gas industry. they're trying to now start -- they're starting talking about it up where we are in pennsylvania. we have something in common. we're drilling a lot of gas and oil wells in pennsylvania these days. we found the second largest reserve of natural gas in the

world underneath pennsylvania. yeah. and we're drilling thousands of wells, thousands of wells, oil, mostly gas wells, marcellus shales but eunuchia which is oil wells. we're doing it in people's backyards. i want to remind everybody what we're drilling in pennsylvania, pennsylvania has the second largest rural population in the country. we have people all throughout pennsylvania -- we're drilling in people's backyards, ladies and gentlemen. we have a president who's allowing, thankfully for now, drilling in people's backyards but we can't drill thousands of miles from everybody in alaska. that's too dangerous but we can drill in backyards. that is just sick ideology. that is just trying to drive an ideological agenda that makes no sense for the health and safety of people.

[applause] we have a huge mountain of debt. 40 cents of every dollar we borrow. president obama, how can you justify, how can you justify 40 cents of every dollar to prop up your sick policies, your sick economic policies and putting those on the back of future generations for the rest of their lives, how do you justify that? [applause] i am something who's done something. i'm the only person who announced for president who said i immediately supported the ryan plan. stood by paul ryan when others were walking away and equivocating. [applause] there's a reason i did, because when i was in the united states senate, i actually fought for entitlement reform. when i was in the united states senate, when i was in the house, i actually wrote the contract

with america welfare reform bill. it was the first time in the history of our country that we ended a broad-based federal entitlement. i fought daniel patrick moynihan and ted kennedy and all of the liberals in the united states senate and was able to end a federal entitlement. they were screaming people are going to be out on the streets. we couldn't trust people to be able to provide for themselves. i said no, welfare, poverty. poverty is not a disability. it's a temporary condition. we need to believe in people again. just like what paul ryan suggested for medicaid. we had income support, aftc it was called at the time. we put time limits, with we put work requirements. we said you shouldn't have a government that supports people in dependency. we shouldn't tell people they can't. we should tell people that you can and we believe in you. that's what we need to do for

medicaid. that's what we need to do for food stamps. that's what we need to do for all of the welfare programs. we can save money and tell people again, we believe you. we believe in the american spirit and can-do attitude of the american public. that's what paul ryan pleans does. that's what i support. i also was someone who fought on social security. tpwhack 1998 i actually traveled -- my only trip on air force one with bill clinton, but i traveled to missouri and did a town hall meeting where i republicans calling for reforms of social security when no one else on our side was willing to do that. i stood tall, had the courage to go out and talk about the problems that we were going to confront here in america in a very short period of time. there's an article in "the wall street journal" and they talked about it 1990 when i first got to congress, there were four workers for every one retiree. 20 years ago. 20 years from now there will be less -- almost just above under two people. almost cut in half. is that something new?

did we not know that? of course we knew that. we knew that was coming but only a few, very few in washington had the courage to stand up and fight for what we knew was coming, which is a fiscal disaster for this country. i did. i stood up and when george bush in 2005 said, let's take on social security, in my election cycle, i stood up with jim demint and we went to the floor and we carried the debate. we lost but i learned from my 2006 election, which i lost, that losing isn't the worse thing that can happen. not standing up for your principles and what's right for america is the worse thing that can happen. and i was out there before anybody else. when i was on the armed services committee talking about something we termed at the time asymmetric threats.

talking about this group of people who hated us not because of what we were -- excuse me, not because of what we did but because of who we were. radical jihaddists. when they attacked us on 9/11, they changed the term from asymmetric threats to terrorism. but i had been working on it, trying to shape our military, to respond to those threats before -- before we were attacked. after we were attacked i confronted, yes, even the republican president, george w. bush, because he didn't have, in my opinion, the courage to go out and tell the american public the truth tooze who we were fighting. we weren't fighting terrorists. terrorism is a tactic. doesn't describe the enemy and who they are. who they are are radical islammists. they are people who follow an ideology that is both a religion and a political doctrine.

and i gave a speech five months before my election at the national press club calling out the president, calling out the people of the republican party to be honest. this is not just a war of tactic. it's war of idea. it's a war of cultures. we need to be clear we can't motivate people to defend america unless they understand what the threat is. and i did and i stood for our closest ally. i know a lot of people have come up here and said, i'm for israel. i did and performed and fought and passed bills that made israel secure when i was in the united states senate. two major pieces of legislation, the syrian accountability

account and iran support act i augesered. the president of the united states, george w. bush, opposed both. thought they were too tough. even though i did it because i wanted to get syria out of lebanon and to quit harassing through hezbollah another israel and i wanted to put a stop to the iranian nuclear program. and to help fund pro democracy movement in iran because i knew that the existential threat to israel was in fact iran. so i fought president obama -- president bush, and eventually he came to my side and signed those bill and we had a safer israel as a result. and i've also led the charge on the culture. the debate was the other night. i happened to notice the that john king asked all of the cultural moral questions to me. but that's ok. because i'm used to that and i'm

proud of it. i'm proud to stand up for life. i'm proud to stand up for the family. i'm proud to stand up for those at the end of life. because someone in this party, someone who wants to lead this party, needs to stand up and say that they are just as important an issue as the economy and national security of this country, if america is not a moral enterprise and blessed by god, we will not be a country that can continue far. and so i heard all of these things as i traveled around and i thought, well, maybe it's all of these things that were going on, all of the fact that the president of the united states was apologizing for america as he traveled around or he funded

embryonic stem cells or refused to defend doma are whether it was the economy or the debt, all of the things the president has done, you heard the litany since we've been here. i realized after being out there a while it was in fact all of these but yet it didn't quite capture what was really going on in america. the fear in america is something deeper. when i announced for president just a little over a week ago, i went to summerset county, pennsylvania. i went there for a reason. it's where my grandfather came to this country in 1927. and a couple years later brought my father, who was at the time 7 years old. he came from mussolini's italy. he came not because he had a good job that he was promised. he actually had a great job where he was. not because he was promised government benefits and to be taken care of. they were doing that in a major way in italy. in fascist italy under mussolini. no, he came, left a good job,

beautiful little town in northern italy. he came to america, to northern somerset county, the cole fields, the deep mines. and from 1927 to 1958 until he was 72 years old until the year i was born, he worked in those coal mines. he worked in those coal mines for one reason he used to tell me all the time, so his son and his grandchildren could be free. that is the reason he came. and i believe that is the reason people in america have this angst, have this sense that something big is happening to this country. let me tell you exactly what it is, we have a president of the united states who doesn't believe in the founding principles of this country. he said it -- he said it in a speech recently where he was giving a rebuttal to paul ryan

and the budget. he talked about social security and medicare and medicaid and unemployment insurance. and he said this, he said america's a better country because of these proposals. i will go one step further, he said, america was not a great country until these commitments were made. the president of the united states said, until government took your freedom and your money and redistributed it and gave it to those that they chose who were worthy, america was not a great country. mr. president, america was born a great country. [applause] i love our tea partyers. they carry their pocket constitutions and hold it up at their meeting at town meetings, god bless them.

the constitution is an incredible document, vital document. it is the owner's manual for america. it is how we are to operate the machinery of government, and we need to abide by that owner's manual and quit trying to amend it by actually doing through the courts and through executive orders and through regulations. there's one way to amend the constitution, and it's actually in the constitution how you do it. the second thing, though, that is printed on these documents, almost every single one of these pocket constitutions is another document. you ever ask yourself, why is this document also here, the declaration of independence? we had many other documents that were important documents, but why do they put these two together? i believe it's because the constitution is the how and the declaration is the why. [applause]

it's who we are. and it's found in that sentence that all of you know, that critical sentence that gives the exceptionalism to american exceptionism. we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. among these, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. that phrase is a phrase that transformed the world. it's the basis upon which our government rests. it is the why, it is the foundation that the constitution was created to protect. you see up until this time, up until this document, no government had ever been instituted that recognized that rights came from god to every man and woman.

never before had happened. they went to the king. they did not go to every person. the people were the subjects of the crown or the emperor. in this country, the government was there to serve the people, not the other way around. we created this constitution, in my opinion, to do one thing, and that is to keep america free. that is the one thing that our government is there to do. that is why we say we need limited government. government is there to protect the life and liberty as a foundation for this country. [applause] i got involved in this race, i

got involved in traveling the country, because i believe there was one moment, one bill, that will take this sentence and erase it from the minds of america, that will do more to erase the constitution from its relevance to political discourse, and it is obamacare. why do i say it is that big of an issue? because it is the first time that we have passed a piece of legislation to try and enact an entitlement for every working man and woman. they are not to help the poor, the disabled, the elderly. this would connect an ivy -- iv to every person in america. everyone in america will be connected and dependent on washington for their health

care, for their children's health care, for their parents' health care. and the government will be able to withhold or pump up more or less in that depending on how compliant you're going to be. margaret thatcher said when she left the prime ministership of england, after having transformed england from the socialist country to one that was privatizing their industries and embracing capitalism again -- she said at the end she was never able to do for england what reagan did for america. remember in the 60's and 70's liberal was not a bad word. we were going to go the way of europe. and then reagan said no and change america. thatcher was never able to do that, never. she said what. she said because of the british

national health care system. as brave as paul ryan is, look at what he has proposed. it does not touch anybody with an entitlement. all of his changes are for people in the future, far into the future. he would not there. no one cares. talk about taking anything from anybody who has something from the government. look at what is going on in greece. this is the future of america if obama care is put into action. this is the future of america. when i was 16 years old, it was the first time i had ever been to a funeral with an open casket. it was my grandfather. i knelt next to his casket and i looked at his hands.

they were enormous hands, click, a beefy hand. they had done work for 30 years. i looked at those hands, and those hands clawed and scraped and grabbed their way for freedom for me. you think about the men and women across america now, in uniform. you think about the sacrifices of those in the past two fought for freedom, who were willing to do whatever it took to make sure that they were going to hand off and america as free as we were given it, and here we are. yes, we are at war. but very few are participating in that war. thank god for their coverage. thank god for their sacrifice.

but most of america is working, playing, doing what they do, and watching america slowly slipped away. one of my favorite quotes is from a man by the name of christopher latch, who says every day we get up and tell ourselves lives -- lies so we can live, and the like americans are telling themselves now, as they are in denial about a $1.40 trillion debt -- 100 trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities, a worse condition than in greece is in from a debt standpoint in the long term. and we deny ourselves. more government, obama care, and

more dependency. it is just part of the process. it is nothing really new. it is more of the same. we will be free. everything will be safe. that is a lie. we need a leader to stand up and tell america about the line and remind them who we are. this is the challenge of the next leader. yes, to win this election, but the -- but to then have the courage to go out and lead and motivate a country, to remind us who we are, that the people who came to this country came like my grandfather, because they cherished freedom. it is in our dna. we are different than the greeks. we are different than the brits. we left greece. we left britain. we left italy. we came here because we knew our

government would believe in us. barack obama does not believe in you. he believes in himself. in the 2008 election, the american public was convinced by this anointed one, as shawn hammett he calls him. -- past --- as sean hannity calls him. there was a belief that if you gave him your trusty would take care of you and america. after two years of running this country in the ditch, of having our allies, like the czechs and the polls and the hondurans and the colombians, and they used to be the egyptians and israelis, now see that america is no good friend, and our enemies like iran, venezuela, cuba, and

syria look at us with the stain as toothless tigers -- this is our moment, ladies and gentleman. this is our moment. it is our watch. it is our obligation to go out and make the sacrifices, and to have a leader who is willing to lift up the people to believe in themselves again. when i was in the united states senate, i fought for life because i knew of the dignity of every human person. i fought for welfare reform because i knew the dignity of every human person, the potential of every human person. i believed in that. i still believe in that. i believe in the greatness and goodness of this country. i believe we need a leader that will raise them up.

i am concerned that if this goes on much further, not only with obama care, but with what our children are being taught -- do you know our children? everybody talks about how poorly they do in math and science. do you know their worst subject? history. how can we have children in this generation of america willing to fight for america if they don't know who we are. our president does not tell us who we are. he tells us to believe in him. in 2012 we do not need a president that we can believe in. we need a president who believes in us. [applause]

i know it is frustrating. i know the anxiety level when you see this country that you love going through what is going through economically, going through what it is going through culturally, going through what it is going through with the embarrassment of the president who does not believe in america and it's the use and standing up for the country. i know it is hard. but it is our watch, and we need to be faithful. we need to go out and fight for those values. i will close with a story of faithfulness. it is a story of the foremast from my time in the united states senate fighting on the issue of life. i want to share this with you because i want to instill in new this. all you need to worry about is what you can do.

all of us are going to be called to do heroic things, i believe, in this next year and a half to win louisiana. we need to elect a president and a sufficient majority of the united states senate to repeal obama care. [applause] this is a bigot, a big task for all of us. we need to keep our head down. we need to keep working. we need to keep faith. if you keep faith, god will keep faith. he will bless what you are doing and he will bless this land. i told you of the story of the debate on partial birth abortion. it was the second time bill clinton vetoed this bill. i was the leader of that bill. i was author of it. i fought for three years to get

it passed. he vetoed it in '96. we tried to override it and we failed. we tried again in 98 and we can short again. we tried again in 2000. the supreme court threw out a similar statute out. eventually, after george bush came back, we stood up and said the supreme court was wrong. we put the first two sections of the bill telling the court how they screwed up the case. we told them congress has a say of what is constitutional and we believe this is constitutional. the court sided with us. we eventually won. during this discourse, i have a moment when i was in the trenches, and not necessarily feeling they love and success of the ultimate victory. it was in september of 1998.

we had just debated for six hours on the override a veto. i debated barbara boxer on the floor for six hours. i am catholic. i think i will have a little time off in purgatory as a result of that, personally. [applause] we finished the debate at 8:00. the vote was the next morning. i felt maybe there was something more i should do. i still have this sense of responsibility that you all feel. that is why you are here. i went and called my wife. we had four children. we had a little one. i said, "i have been debating all day, but i feel maybe there is more, maybe there are two or three senators who are watching c-span late at night and will see what i have to say. maybe i can change their mind.

karen said exactly what she always said. this time when i sat down with her in the family, "if that is what you feel called to do, that is what you have to do." i went back out on the floor of the senate and an hour and a half later i finish. i am almost done. don't worry. packed up the senate, came in the next morning, and we lost by the same number of votes we were going to lose by the night before. i walked out of that chamber having gotten into late at night to see my kids to bed, or even my wife. i got up the next morning at 5:00 a.m. and was out before they were awake. i thought what a horrible that i had been, what a horrible husband i had been, another night were you focused on what

you felt called to do. i thought of the hubris and the pride i had that somehow i could make a difference. i beat myself up for days. five days later, i got an e- mail. it was from a young man from michigan state university, and it said the following. the other night, my girlfriend and i were flipping through the channels and i saw you standing on the floor of the senate with a picture of a little disabled boy. that is what i was talking about, the children who are the targets of partial birth abortion, children with disabilities. we did not find out about the disabilities until later in pregnancy. he said, "we stopped and listened. after a few minutes, i looked down and saw my girlfriend had tears running down her cheeks, and i asked her what was wrong. she looked up at me and said, "i am pregnant. i have an abortion scheduled for next week, but i am not going to have an abortion anymore.""

[applause] god will be faithful. he has blessed this land. but he needs his people to be faithful to. that is why you are here. you're responsible to this country is to select leaders of the republican party who will go out in this election and touch the hearts and souls of the american public. someone who will lift their eyes up. someone who will help break the shackles, the siren song of those in government to said, "just trust us. just give us a little bit more. we will take care of you."

take the view that narcotics. the week after the massachusetts election last year, i was in the green room at fox. it was the day after barack obama decided to push the senate health care bill through the house. i ran into juan williams and said, "this is crazy. you are going to lose the election. people are outraged. even massachusetts does not like this bill." they had some experience in it. [laughter] this is what williams told me. he said, "let me tell you what people in the white house and nancy pelosi's office said. we believe that americans love entitlements, and once we get them hooked on this entitlement, they will never let it go."

why do you think they were willing to push this bill, in spite of this and popularity? why do you think they were willing to lose this election? because they knew that obama care is a game changer. it will change america forever. it will make america the country that your ancestors left. don't let that happen. god bless you. god bless america. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

can continue to shield from the damage i have caused. host: amid a chaotic scene, congressman resigns in the wake of a scandal. who will succeed him? joining me with some perspective

is david wasserman. but we appreciate your time on c-span. thanks caller: for having me -- guest: thanks for having me. host: i know it is early, but what names have been mentioned to replace him? in guest: amazingly enough, this will be the third special luncheon in new york state in recent years. to we have had two sex scandals that have already created a special alexians in republican leaning seats in -- specialty elections in republican-leaning seats in upstate. now it is a democrats turn to defend a seat in queens. interestingly enough, this will be more of a tribal election

than the of state elections we have seen, which is, the partisan policy dictates of the chair of the political party of the democratic party in queens will be selecting nominees. there will be no primary election. and governor cuomo will be setting the date for the special election. everyone is watching joseph crowley. he is share of the queens democratic party. he gets the call on who the democratic nominee will be. they will start out with an advantage. but keep in mind, this is the least democratic district in nyc. this is not a foregone conclusion and democrats cannot take the race for granted. host: and his cousin, elizabeth crowley is a councilman. guest: that is true.

and there are other names in the house as well. one thing we will be watching is whether, crowley -- is whether crowley has the credibility to mount a campaign. it is a very diverse district. here is the ranch in this, n.y. is losing a few seats in redistricting, and this is a district that everyone has been looking at since the scandal broke as one district in the city, will most likely have to go. crowley would like to take on more of queens. currently, his district is in the bronx. he would like to take on more of his home base near el morris to. he would benefit from -- neera

elmhurst. he would benefit from redistricting. many speculate that he would move into wiener's territory. we do not know of the names that have been mentioned -- you know, linda calves, it for more city councilwoman, or his cousin. of the names that have been mentioned, we do not know who would be willing to be a caretaker of the seat, but also led a vigorous campaign in a special election against potential republicans. host: you indicated that the governor has wide latitude when it comes to determining when he will hold the special election. when will he know about the newly drawn lines in new york state?

guest: we will now know about the lines, most likely, until run against the filing deadlines of the summer of next year. governor cuomo, shelley is over, the assembly speaker who is a democrat, and the minority leader -- or rather, majority leader in the state senate will all have to hammer hard a deal on redistricting. -- hammered out a deal on redistricting. it will be a situation where most people would expect to run for a seat for a lame duck session as a member of congress before it may be eliminated. as we found out in new york's 26th district, the last time the scandal broke, drawing

conclusions about the special election at the outside -- outset of the elections can be hazardous. i do not think that the county clerk what ultimately win that race and how the county can be preserved by redistricting. there is a greater chance that will be eliminated, but we will have to see whether republicans can mount a credible campaign that puts the democrats in a tough spot. host: david wasserman, who tracks the house of representatives and the politics of congress for the "cook political report." the headlines outside of washington d.c. putting him the winner on the front page.

>> white house communications director, dan pfeiffer, faced questions with the on-line community at the sixth annual netroots nation convention. he also talks about the in administration's economic policy and the repeal of the don't ask don't tell all. this is one hour 15 minutes. don't tell

law. this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> many of you know her as angry mouth. please welcome the editor of daily kos. [applause] >> for all of its six year history, not roots nation has brought our leaders -- netroots nation has brought our leaders to talk about politics and progressives change. i am thrilled to be your representative on stage for another in a long line of conversations, this with the house communications director. for the past week, i have been getting feedback from the community through facebook,

twitter, and blogs about your questions for the administration. the questions i am asking today concern you and are a reflection of the issues you care about. my colleagues and i will be gathering questions from you today in real time. here is how you can participate. at each of your tables, you will find index cards and pans. you can write your questions. raise your hand, and someone will pick up your card. if you do not have cards at your table, raise your hand and we will bring you one. you can also send your questions by twitter. before i asked mr. pfeiffer to join me on stage, let me say he is here with that limitation on subject matter, so ask away. with that housekeeping out of the way, let me introduce you to the white house communications director. [applause]

thank you for joining us here with the professional left. would you like to make any introductory comments before we get started? >> of course. thanks for having me. i am excited to be here. when it was announced i would speak today, "huffington post" wrote that i was heading to the lion's den. that is probably true, in that i know there are levels of frustration with some decisions that have happened in this white house. there is frustration in the times that the pace of change has exceeded everyone's patience, including our own. i know that beyond that without the people in this room today, barack obama would not be president of the united states,

people in this room who walked on doors in the -- knock on doors in the freezing cold of iowa so that we could win that caucus, people who were in the convention to celebrate barack obama becoming the first african-american nominee in a major party. it was the people in this room who helped put together the largest grass-roots campaign in history so we could win that election, and who helped us to do a lot of things in the white house -- help us pass health part -- health care. it means 30 million americans are going to get health care. it is a very important thing. people in this room want us to bring an end to the war in iraq and to do things like repeal don't ask, don't tell. i do that not to get credit or wax nostalgic, but to be grateful and know that is the foundation for some of the big

fights we have coming up. we have seen in recent weeks with the plan paul ryan put forward and the performance republican presidential candidates had onstage on monday night a very different vision for this country than the people in this room and the president has. it is one that includes massive tax cuts for the wealthy, and in medicare as we know it, privatizing social security, repealing health care, appealing don't ask, don't tell, and doing all of those things. we are going to have a lot of fights together and i hope we can work together. we are going to have the lot of battles in congress as we fight to make sure the republican vision of this country does not become reality in the coming weeks and months. my hope today is that i can have an open and honest conversation. if there is a thing you are frustrated by, i will address --

i will address those and tried to give you the best understanding for why he made the decisions. i look forward to having those conversations. >> thank you again for joining us. did you bring your long form birth certificate with you? >> i promise i was going in this country, even if not everyone will believe it. >> we were soliciting questions all week from the community. one of the main questions that came up over and over again is about jobs. i just wanted to review and comment we got from broke in seattle. what does the president planned to do about people like me, who have been unemployed for more than three years and are not getting unemployment benefits? does he have a jobs plan for people who are over 50 and already have multiple college degrees, other than telling us to go back to community college to train for jobs that are not there?

what jobs can you train for when nobody over 50 can get an interview? we have run through our savings and for a 1 k plans -- 401k plans and do not have relatives. what can you do for us? what do you save for a book in seattle -- for brooke in seattle? >> her story is not unique. the president gets these letters every day. they are tragic. they are what he thinks about every morning and every night. if we could wave a magic wand and fix this, we would do it. we need to do several things. we need to keep growing the economy. that is going to include doing things like investing in infrastructure, investing in education, research and development, high-tech jobs of the future like bioscience, things like that. it means doing things sitting in

congress now that could help people, which includes passing an infrastructure bill, which has bipartisan support and leverage is private capital to get structural things done. it requires making sure that when we are going to have a pending fight on unemployment benefits in this country we work together to make sure the republicans who have been fighting us do not get their way. what we have to do for everyone is to get the economy moving on a large scale. there is no question that with a republican majority in the house this is very challenging. >> earlier this month, you wrote on the white house blog that the president wanted to tell you that we will not rest until every american who is looking for a job can find one. does this mean we can expect a jobs bill from the president? >> the president will support a number of initiatives to create jobs that have not been acted on

yet, including the infrastructure bank, a proposal that would put people in jobs creaking in national wireless plan, significant advancements in clean energy and infrastructure, additional tax incentives for small business so people can start businesses and hire people like brooke, and there will be more ideas on that front. we are going to work with democrats and republicans in congress and see what we can get past. >> the president is not going to be proposing a jobs bill? >> the president will continue to propose initiatives to create jobs. there will be more initiatives. whether that will be in one bill or a series of different proposals -- there will be initiatives. >> with a 91% unemployment rate, why wouldn't we have a jobs bill? [applause] >> i think it is a false thing to say we do not have a jobs

bill. we have a number of bills in we are going to have additional ideas, proposals to create jobs. and proposals for things that we can actually get done. challenging where republicans are. gosh what of the things that keeps coming up from the administration, i understand it is difficult from an obstruction of the party and some democrats that are not as supportive as you like them to be. it is hard to get things done that the president talked about when he was running for the presidency. is it impossible to get these things done unless he has a super majority in the house and the senate? he said it was next to impossible to get these things done. what difference does it make whether we reelect him? >> i will give you several

reasons why it makes a difference. it is challenging. we have the historic amount of things that we got done. was that everything that we got done? i know. but we passed a recovery act, a health care act, don't ask don't tell. >> you are still firing people for being gay. [applause] >> in the historic vote, congress repealed the law. nobody thought that it would pass through congress. >> when will you stop kicking a gay people out of the military? [applause] >> that bill has a certification process in place that is close to being finished. >> when can we expect it? >> as soon as we can possibly do

it. an orderly transition. >> speaking of the military, the white house released a report on libya. the president did not need congressional authority to go and libya because u.s. operations do not involve the same fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces. and they don't involve u.s. ground troops. it is a little more that we don't need the authority to do this. the united states sent a few military advisers to vietnam. the war was over, how do we know that libya will turn into a bigger war? -- and that libya won't turn into a bigger war? >> holly did it in a very limited way, it was done in a multilateral prohibition with an

american president. it is the opposite of what we have done in iraq. we only would have done if out of those circumstances because we could not have forces marching where they threaten to go door to door. we had a choice. we could either let that massacre happened, or we could do something about it. now we are heading in the right direction. i am not a lawyer or an expert in the war powers act. the way that this is set up with the very limited role, we're primarily providing answers for nato forces. this is consistent with what we did. there is a 60 day provision in the war powers act and we are not in violation of that. it is not helpful to our efforts

and when members of congress, particularly the republican leadership play politics with this. and this and example of politics. in 1999, the speaker thought that the war powers, he thought that it was unconstitutional and ho invoking in this way was not hellhole. >> of the republican attacks on the president from the left are a little disingenuous at this point. i think it raises an important question, should the president, and the president be able to wage war without the authority of congress? >> you should be involved in limited supporting roles in the military conflicts like this one. u.s. troops are not engaged in

acts of hostility. we're playing a supporting limited role. >> you are saying the you're guaranteeing us that this is not going to become a bigger war? >> he made a guarantee, absolutely. >> i would like to ask you about a different kind of war, a war that i am particularly concerned about. the war on women. [applause] we are seeing an unprecedented number of attacks on women at the state and federal level, anything from contraception to health care to food stamps. drug-testing, women receiving welfare in florida. women in congress are talking openly about a war on women. i want to know if the president agrees with nancy pelosi and the new chairwoman. is there a war on women?

>> there is a sustained effort from republicans at the federal and state level to undo a lot of the progress we have done. the most prominent example was the effort to defund planned parenthood a few months ago. the president at that point told the house republicans that if they wanted to do it, they would have to shut down the government over it. they signed into law an effort that would illegally defund planned parenthood. the president is very concerned about all of these efforts and the ones from the federal level. the president will do that. >> we saw that when it comes down to it, for the larger issue, for example, the president said that accepting

the amendment that punishes poor women in this country was unacceptable status quo and we had put that aside for the bigger picture. is there a war on women? >> let's talk about health care for a second. [laughter] amendment was the lot of the land. >> is renewed every year. >> if we tried to repeal it, there it be no health reform. that was the choice. it was a very simple choice. you have two options. there was no health reform, that is the to as you have to make. if you have a question about --

war on women is not a phrase that the president has used. nancy pelosi has. there is no question that the very same things that concern nancy pelosi concern the president in the same way. >> he talked a lot about the efforts on planned parenthood. i am sure he will speak about it as well. >> president obama carry a 11 by a 56-43 margin. in 2010, democratic women stayed home or voted republican. democratic women that were the majority of the country and the majority of the party, we feel like we are under assault. does the president think he can

win reelection without those women that did not show up for him in 2010? >> of course not. >> and does he intend to do any pro-active steps to get the women in this room, meat, the women in this country to turn out in 2012? >> the paycheck fairness act, the president is a big supporter of and a big push in congress. >> ok. we have a question from clutter. what are the lines you will not cross while negotiating with the gop regarding medicare and social security? >> on both of those, the president will do nothing that will cut benefits, privatize the

program, or change the nature of the program. there is no question that both of those programs need to be strengthened. it is certainly not a driver of our deficit, same with medicare. there things we can do that was done on the affordable care act. like what the president proposed in the speech he gave a few months ago that will deal with the provider side, not the benefit side of medicare. he is opposed to anything in 100 miles of what the republicans and paul ryan have put forward. >> not raising the age limit? >> we will make sure that however we strengthen it is done in a way that does not change the fundamental nature of the program. i will not have a negotiation with republicans here with you,

but what i can promise you is, the president will strengthen medicare and he will fight every effort to change the nature of the program or end it or privatize its. >> i want to follow up on this issue of compromising with republicans, because it is the scene that came up quite a bit. i looked at what senator barack obama wrote in 2005 talking about how you deal with an obstructionist party. this is what he said. whenever they are wrong or dishonest, he should face those clearly and repeatedly. we should respond quickly and forcefully. truth as we best know it will be the hallmark of our response. here is my question. republicans have been very effective at promoting their own

agenda. with no respect for tone or true. it seems to have been fairly effective, actually. at what point will the president responded quickly and forcefully with truth as the hallmark of his response rather than concern for the proper tone? >>, the president has and will continue to respond to republicans. if the argument is that the town doesn't matter, it does matter because there are a lot of people in this room and in washington that are very partisan and have a lot of anger towards the other party. i am like that a lot of the time. there are also a lot of people in this country that are less engaged in politics and are

turned off by the partisan back and forth that is dominating so much in washington. the president was elected because he wanted to transcend it. if you don't fight for what you believe in. he did that in the midterm alexians. >> they did not work out very well for him. >> that is not why. >> a lot of lies, ugly tone, and they did pretty well on that in 2010. that does not like they will be changing that strategy in 2012. will it not work for them? >> i don't think it was the best strategy for democrats to stoop to the things that they do. that is not how we won in thailand that -- 2008 or how we will win in 2012. >> the president also says we should be able to agree on

certain principles. he is open to any good idea regardless of where it comes from. can you name a good deal of the republicans have proposed? >> i will give you one. the individual mandate in the health care bill. a republican idea. the tax credits for small businesses that were passed as part of the recovery act or since then. some of those were republican ideas. there are ideas from the middle part of the republican part, those would be a mistake to just discard every idea simply because it came from a republican. >> ok. does the president still think that bipartisanship is possible? >> the question isn't whether it is possible, the question is whether it is necessary.

there will not be a law that gets to the president's desk that does not have some measure of republican support. that is the nature of washington right now. if you want to do something that will actually help them, the republican support. do we wish we could do this on our own? that is frankly not an option given or the country or the economy is. >> of the concern about compromising, it means betraying the fundamental value of the democratic party, like extending the bush tax cuts that the president said was a bad idea and is bad for the economy. we don't support it. he made that compromise. >> this is a perfect example.

there were two choices in this. a bill extending only the middle class tax cuts that the president would have signed could not pass the united states senate. the choices were to either extend the bush tax cuts for the wealthy along with the middle class tax cut for the tax cuts that were passed in the recovery act, which led to the poorest americans, or you could let them all expired. the president believes that it would not have been the right thing to do or the progressive thing to do to give a massive tax increase to the middle class and working americans simply to make a point about the bush tax cuts. those are the only two options. >> of the tax cuts have been horrible for our economy. >> what do you say if she ends

up with a tax increase? >> i don't work in the white house, i don't have the -- have to answer the question. >> but the president does. >> a question from charles in minneapolis. why hasn't the administration used the black press to get the message out, the successes that are large or small? >> we have tried to do that. the president spends a fair amount of time with members of the african-american media. he is on shows like steve harvey at of regular basis. we will continue to try to do that. >> a question from texas of afghanistan. in the latest poll, 74 percent of americans want all or some troops removed from afghanistan. " will it take to get through to

the white house that we want the war ended? >> when the president announced his afghanistan strategy, he said that we will begin transitioning the end of the war in july of 2011. you will hear an announcement from the president about the size and scope of that transition, how we will begin withdrawing troops. >> ok. >> be you have a follow-up? >> how we will change gears a little. >> he wrote i favor legalizing same-sex marriages. after the proposition 8 decision came in california, the president does oppose same-sex marriage. his position has evolved to being more supportive of civil rights to less supportive of civil rights.

is the president going to of all the again and get back to supporting civil rights of gay marriage? [applause] >> a couple things on that. the best way to do this would be too -- i will paraphrase and answer what the president gave. >> i have his answer right here. i favor legalizing same-sex marriages and i will prohibit efforts. >> it was asked by someone else, not the president. >> it was a fake questionnaire? >> the president's position has been consistent. >> you are saying that this is a fake questionnaire? >> this was litigated in the campaign. >> i would like to clarify it out. there are people concerned about this issue. the president has never favored

it? >> his position is that he is against it. the country is evolving on this, and he is evolving. some of the folks in this room or at the white house meeting with the president. the president said that it is clear the country is moving on this. it is because he has friends, staffers who are in committed accommodate partnerships that are great people, great partners, great friends, great parents, and he is evolving. when thatll you today evolution will continue, but that is where he is. people have pushed him on this, and he believes he should continue to push him on that. >> if he doesn't manage to of over most of the country is heading before 2012, why should

gays and lesbians vote for him? >> i think because this president has been the most progressive president on issues we have had. >> that is a pretty low bar. we have made progress on benefits for same-sex couples. this is a huge, important issue for everyone. it is a big deal to them. i would not begrudge a single person who feels strongly about this for being upset with the president on that. if someone else as president, all of the of the things i talked about are all going to go away. >> we have another question from the audience. why didn't president obama go to

wisconsin to support the workers alike he promised he would do in the 2008 campaign? [applause] >> he has spoken publicly about this about supporting their efforts and white the governor, what he wanted to do was disingenuous and using a budget deficit as a way to play politics against his political adversaries. >> will he be going to wisconsin to show his support? >> when he is in wisconsin, i am sure he will support them. he will be with those workers every step of the way. >> i want to ask you a question on emigration. the majority leader said congress has spent more time on emigration than any other issue

and was committed to getting the act passed. it didn't. we have seen this anti-immigrant legislation passed in alabama, georgia, arizona. what can the president do without legislation to address emigration? gosh states like arizona where there are laws that violate civil rights, the justice department can take action to stop a lot of the most offensive provisions. it is still working its way through the arizona court. it is working its way to make sure the focus of enforcement is on criminals. that is where the focus of the energy is. you have a very limited capacity without changing the law to deal with the very real and very tragic situation of millions of

americans living in the shadows. >> there is no executive order you can possibly issue? >> it will be helpful around some of the processes and procedures. but the president of the united states cannot stop enforcing the law. that is not an option available to him. >> if the white house fails to get a payroll tax going, what will happen? >> there will be a payroll tax cut or some other measure like that, either as a part of the process if it heads in that direction, or he has got to put a lot of pressure on republicans. will they try to block this? and put a tax increase in place for millions of americans. the infrastructure bank, there will be a lot of pressure on

republicans. you will hear more from manhattan in the summer and fall about this. >> will he be able to revisit the bush tax cuts? they would try to get the bush tax cuts expired. how will he focus on that at all any negotiation having to do with the debt ceiling or any of these issues? >> when he signed the extension of the bush tax cut, and will include an income tax credit. he said that he would never extend them again. they will come to him in december 31, 2012. he will make sure that they are never extended again. there will be some things that will have to be a bipartisan bill and my suspicion is that it

will be non-starters. i suspect for the republicans, the bush tax cuts will be there. >> when the tax cuts have been and were extended to much to the disappointment of probably everybody in this room, the president explained that we have been taken hostage. and we really didn't have a choice. have we been taken hostage of anything else we should know about right now? >> being president, you don't get good choices. the good choices get help elsewhere. the ones that get to the president are hard choices. there were two choices. everyone in america gets a tax increase or extend the bush tax cuts. i would challenge anyone to explain why it would either be good for the economy or good for the people in this room a, the

president can care most deeply about it. >> i understand, what upset people is that the president said he had to do something that fundamentally violates what democrats believe and was very bad for the economy to do. he explained it was because we had unknowingly been taken hostage. i want to know if we have been taken hostage in any other situation where the president might be going back on a fundamental democratic principle and will explain to us that we have been taken hostage again. >> if that comes up, i will be sure to tell you first. what is also a progressive democratic value that we care about is tax cuts for the middle and working class. not tax increases. that is the principle he would have violated if he led the tax cuts expire.

forget what macro economists said, it would be devastating for people struggling to get a massive tax increase. that is the situation that was before the president. >> i would like to talk for a moment about the 2012 election and the republican nominees. i am sure the president looks forward to having a very serious debate. i want to know, between us, palin-bachmann 2012 is a no- brainer? >> it would be perfectly consistent with a vast majority of the republican party today. >> are you rooting for anybody in particular? >> having watched the debate the other night, parts of the debate, there was a hockey game

on that night, you essentially have a series of messages offering a very broad plan for america. tax cuts for the wealthy, and in medicare, repealing don't ask, don't tell. and so, there'll be a big debate about which direction the country is going and there will be very stark differences between what the president is talking about and what paul riot and the republicans are talking about. everyone understands that it is worse when we have a republican in the white house. it is worse when they are in charge. but a consistent theme that came up in discussions of what people wanted to know is that they feel really disappointed about where the president has been on

issues and representing true, fundamental democratic party issues. we are all democrats and we understand the importance of making sure democrats are empowered. they may not turn out the same way. show up on election day, but i will not donate money. >> do you need us? >> absolutely. >> what is in it for us? >> there is much that was accomplished in the first 2.5 years. there's much more that needs to be done. we can either work together to continue that work and finish what we started in 2008 or can be relegated back to the sidelines and see what a republican president with potentially republican majority

in at least one house does to this country. we had that starting in 2000 and get it up with massive deficits and the war in iraq, and violations of our civil liberties, and corporate interests like wall street running rampant through washington. that is the choice. this president's is as committed to the ideals he ran on today as when he was in springfield in 2007. he has fought as hard as he could. washington is a hard and frustrating place. we do this under tremendously challenging circumstances. we will keep fighting for them. on some of the things that you care about and he cares about, i promise you he is as frustrated as if you are. we have not been able to get it done. >> he seems to be frustrated with us, or at least members of his administration have been. i thank you for being here and

acknowledging us. but i'll ask again, what is in it for us in a second term? what big ideas are we going to see? will he return to some fundamental progressive values instead of focusing mostly on what he can get done with republicans? >> i will do that, i -- but i want to address what you said about being frustrated with our critics. >> we are also his supporters. >> yes, and at times, we have become frustrated with our critics, but it is not all of our critics. when glenn beck and john boehner and mitt romney attacked

us, we expect that. when our friends attack as, we get frustrated. we want you to push us. we absolutely do. the president comes from a tradition of grassroots organizing, community organizing. a lot of the pushing that you do on a national level he did on a local level in chicago. but when you retire did you think you're doing the right thing under circumstances, and the people you care about most are attacking you, that is frustrating. it does not mean it is not the right thing to do. >> we understand how that feels. >> absolutely. everyone gets frustrated. it does not mean -- it comes from a good place. we care about the same things that you do and we want you to believe that we are sincere and getting does done. >> i would say to the president, right back at you. another question from the

audience. obama madepresident more recess appointments, particularly to the federal reserve, and elizabeth warren? [applause] >> i believe that you cannot recess of. to the federal reserve. but we have made a number of them. if we have to do more, we absolutely will. it is something for the president. as it relates to the appointment of elizabeth warren, she has done amazing work of fighting of vigorous republican opposition trying to undermine her every step of the way. the president is considering to move that forward. she is one under consideration, and we will have an announcement on what we will do their sen.

>> we will look forward to that announcement. on climate change, why does the president not taking on more of a leadership role on climate change? will the president do everything possible to support the epa against efforts from republican governors who are trying to fight federal air quality enforcement? >> the president is obviously being pushed hard in the last congress to try to get a cap and trade legislation, and it could not get through the senate. which was unfortunate. it shows how tough a piece of legislation this is. even with 59 democratic senators, there was significant opposition. it was not particularly close to happening. he will continue to push for it. over time, he thinks that we can do that. as it relates to -- >> does that mean before the

election or is that a second term goal? >> if pekin get it passed in congress tomorrow, he would absolutely do that. but that is not going to happen. it could not pass when we had a democratic house and it is even more challenging now. that is the reality. as it relates to the epa, the president has repeatedly threatened to veto attempts to undermine legislation that would take away the ability to regulate greenhouse gases. administrator jackson is doing great work protecting our air and water. he continues to work with her on that and supports her on that. >> another question from the audience cheered when will president obama keep his promise to close guantanamo? [applause] >> this is something where everyone in this room can help us. >> what can we do for you?

>> call members of congress, democrats and republicans, who have supports efforts blocking that right now. including a democratic senate, and many democrats and house have voted for legislation that prevents us from transferring people that we want to bring to trial in the united states to try out. we're completely limited by bipartisan congressional limitations on this. we have dramatically reduced the number of prisoners there due to transfers to other countries and bringing some here to trial. but right now there are legal prohibitions to prevent us from doing it. >> you have mentioned a couple of times that it is very difficult for the president to get things done when he does that have people in his own party willing to support him. when bush was president, he had

a minority in congress for a lot of that time. the power of the executive order he used quite a bit. he was able to get a lot done. why is it so much harder for president obama to get things done? [applause] >> a lot of the things that bush wanted to do he did not get done. privatizing social security, 41. some of them were bipartisan, but the tax cuts, they would not have passed without a significant proportion from democrats. a lot of the democrats who may oppose us on some things, they have supported president bush on those things. >> so president bush is better than by partisanship than president obama? >> i'm not saying that. there were democrats that

support -- that come from very red states. and that is important. but that means that sometimes there are people -- democrats that will support republican issues. either we beat them in 2006 or 2008 or the tea party beat them in 2010 by primary in them. that is the challenge there. >> maybe i am not that clear on it, but is there anything the president can do without congress on any golf on any of the areas that we've talked about? anything without getting all of the democrats to behave. republicans will not. they have made that clear. they will vote no. what can he do to accomplish some of these goals? >> there are a lot of things we have done that way.

we have removed the bush ban on stem cells that way. we have to change federal benefits for same-sex couples that way. through executive action, and there will be of the things that he can do. bottle of the things that you're talking about here, climate change, immigration reform, those are things that require legislation. >> another question on twitter. what is worse, loss of tax cuts or medicare benefits? >> the answer is both. we have made sure that we will get a tax increase and we are abiding republican efforts to reduce their medicaid and cut their food stamps. as painful and messy as the five over funding the government this

year was, those are things the president fought to protect her does the things republicans wanted to cut. that is the debate in congress, and the president focused on making sure that while we have to cut spending and we have to reduce our deficits, those are things we have to do, but we have to do it in a balanced approach and not on the backs of the most vulnerable americans. >> that seems to be happening a lot at the state level. we see it happen with some of the things that we had to compromise on. and this is the question that people are asking a lot. a tax increase of a couple hundred bucks a year, isn't that better than slashing all the other resources that they depend on for their health care? >> it does not have to be an either/or choice there. i cannot speak to every state capital around the country, but there are families that are

barely getting by. $200 a year will matter a lot. we do not have to do that. states may make different decisions about how they balance their state budgets, and that is up to them to do. on the federal level, we do not need to do either one of these things to balance our budget. >> i read talking. memos, daily cos, greg sargent on "washington post," and i read a lot of people here. and i would say, as challenging as it sometimes makes my job,

the democratization of the media that on any given day, any person with an internet connection to make a real impact on the country, it is something that has been very powerful and important for our country. >> we only have a couple of minutes left. here is a question i want to get your reaction, you're going back to washington. you're going to be talking to people in the white house. and it will ask our things on the progress of left. what are you going to tell the white house about how the leftist feeling right now? >> it will not surprise a lot of them. there are a lot of people in this room who care about the president, support the president, a lot of the things that the president does, are very concerned about the direction republicans want to take us in this country, but are frustrated at the pace of

change. [applause] and i promise you, the president shares that frustration. if the cut, if it was in his power to do, if we could wake up tomorrow and have immigration reform, climate change done, that we could have the employee free choice act and things that he talked on on the campaign, he would absolutely do that in a second. but we have huge challenges, and it is not just that we have obstructionist republicans and recalcitrant members and our own party, we are also dealing with an economy that has been in crisis for a very long time. it did not just art in 2008. it is a tremendously worse. he came in when the country was on the brink of a great depression. he is governing in very challenging times.

is someone that have taught to every day for the last four years and i promise you that he is the same person who you remember from the campaign trail, the same person from springfield and des moines, caring passionately about all the progressive ideals that we talked about today, and he has fought for them the best that he could from the bottom of this art, and he will continue to do that. >> would you suggest that he made do more for us? >> i will say that we need to continue to have a conversation with this group of people and the people watching around the country, probably on the computers, some on c-span, and that you are very important part of the coalition that got him here and an important part of a coalition that stop republicans from doing things like ending medicare as we do it, and that ensures that this president is reelected. he knows that, i know that, and

we want to make sure that you guys know that. >> he came before when he was a senator. can we expect to see him next year? >> when are you having? >> it will be in the summer, though we do not know what city. >> i will talk to him about it. his schedule is challenging and i suspect it will be more challenging next year. but we should absolutely talk about it and maybe we can make it work. >> that would be great. after all this is a professional left. thank you so much for joining us. t think you got the message right? [applause] not too bad. >> thank you, everyone. >> thank you ver

>> on washington journal, the right on line is being held in minneapolis. we will speak to the executive director. will also speak to raven brooks. then, the attorney for the association of credit and collection professionals. then, a look back at the watergate scandal. washington journal begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c- span. today, our live coverage of the 2011 republican leadership congress -- republican leadership conference. that is live at 12:50 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> blackberry users, that you

can access our programming any kind which the c-span radio application with audio strains of our programming. all commercial free. you can also listen to our signature interview programs each week. it is available around the clock where you are. dell lowered its free from blackberry app world. >> next, a couple of republican candidate speeches. first you will hear from herman cain. after that, representative ron paul. this is about one hour. wow. thank you, thank you, thank you.

my, my, my. my, my, my. it sounds like y'all ready to have a party in here. shucky-ducky, now. one of my heroes, the late dr. and benjamin mays, used to remind the young men of morales when i was a student there, let it be borne in mind that the tragedy of life does not lie in reaching your goals. but tragedy lies in having no goals to reach for. [applause] dr. mays went on to say that it is not a calamity to die with dreams unfulfilled, but it is a calamity to have no dreams. i have a dream. [applause] [applause]