things up. what is happening in europe is very important, and is trying to prop up a system that is unworkable. it cannot work, and it will end. >> we will open discussion to your questions. weundecided voters, this is a great opportunity for you to ask your questions of dr. paul. >> hi, dr. paul. >> it works better that way. >> sure. hi, dr. paul. my name is hannah. i, along with 25% of the country, do not identify with any particular religion. would you support any legislation that is religiously motivated but cannot be

staunchly defended on secular reasons as well? >> probably depends on what you are talking to, because somebody might accuse you of saying that you should not murder somebody that is religious, you know? but any issue of violence, i think the government should be involved, but when it comes to regulations, the government should not be involved. it is clear. congress shall write no laws pertaining to religion. i used as a whole lot as an example as how we should look at civil liberties, because, basically, in religion, we do a pretty good job. i bet there are many different values in this room and some who do not want them. we do not have to make the decisions. the government should not make the decision. and we are pretty tolerant on what our intellectual lives should be. we can read books, and even when

communism was a real threat, we still had books on communism, and we did not prevent people from doing it. we rarely apply that same principle to personal lifestyles. you know, personal habits. because, they are afraid, some people's personal habits may not be good. they may smoke too much and drank too much. they do not give the people the same type of protection. but the federal government definitely should not be involved in regulating anything with religious values, and they should not be involved in intellectual matters, but i do not think they should do it in personal habits either, and a lot of people say, "oh, yeah, they may go out and gamble, and that could be bad." this does not mean we endorse it. i want everyone to make their own choices as long as it does

not hurt other people. what you do with your personal liberties, but your own habits, i do not endorse what you do, this is what brings people together. all of a sudden, people who have different religious values, different -- what we want to protect is the principle of liberty, and that is what we want. today, we do not have a concise understanding of what freedom is about. some people are a little bit better with personal liberties and other liberties, and at the same time, another group would be better on economic liberties, but it should be one in the same. if you have a right to our liberties, you should defend personal liberties to economic liberties, and that is one of my goals, probably, is trying to bring people together, but the

federal government should not be writing any laws or regulations on religious values. >> hi, dr. paul. i know you have said before that you would not use the executive order unless you absolutely had to, one of those things, but i am wondering, with oliver unconstitutional laws and bills that have been passed lately -- with all of the unconstitutional laws and bills that have been passed lady, would you do it to -- that have been passed lately, would you use it to get rid of them? >> believe me, there is a lot of authority the president can have to unwind these.

the executive orders should be for the president to do his duties. you write an executive order and say, "it is time to bring the troops home." any executive order that was written by a previous president, which is nothing more than legislation, i can write an executive order and cancel out that executive order. but also, how about the regulations the executive-branch rights -- writes? these are unconstitutional to. only congress should write the law. if i do not like what they do, you veto it. that is a pretty good start, and i would not endorse the principle of a signing statement. you know, presence, along and say, "-- you know, presidents,

along and say, "i do not like this part" -- president come along and say. other times, you would have to work with the congress. right there, that is a handful, a fistful. you would have a lot of things you could do using that executive power in a proper manner. >> hi, thanks so much for taking my question. i have a question about health care. 33% of children in the united states are on medicaid, and another 10% are uninsured. you have offered charity by doctors as a solution to this. do you really think that 43% of america's children will be cared

for three charity? >> -- throw -- through charity? >> there are so many people depending on medical care, and i deal with that in the budget. i want to cut all of the spending but one to keep certain programs, the elderly, medical care -- but want to keep certain programs, the elderly, medical care. that does not mean that that is a great idea because we are in a mess. it will take a lot of work cutting and working our way out of this. when i got out of medical school in 1961, i practiced for a couple of years before there was medicate. i worked in a catholic hospital. nobody was turned away. back in those days, people were not letting industry with no

medical care. now, -- people were not playing in the street with no medical care. now, from the doctors to the labs to the hospitals, the fact is, you have a lot of illegal aliens that are coming in, and they have a baby, and they are put on the welfare rolls, and the costs are going up. it is just a real mess. as far as i am concerned, it has been created by the government, so i would want to transition, so some of you, if you see, this is not the way, i do not want to be totally dependent on the government, i want to really promote these medical savings accounts so people can put their money aside and by their own insurance and pay cash to the doctor. -- and buy their own insurance. there is a real problem of

dependency, but as the economy gets worse, that gets worse. if you take this food stamp issue, it was not long ago that i was using the number that there are 40 million people on food stamps. 44. last week, i said it was 46 million. what we have created is a catch- 22. medical care or food stamps, our country gets -- our jobs are gone. we cannot raise taxes. it is back to printing the money and borrowing the money, but it is not going to last. i am convinced we can do it. i am not overly confident in the way we are going, but i think the calamity is if we care about anybody, we have to avoid this major crisis where 2008 is going to look rather minor, and i think that is what we are moving toward. why in the world can we not

agree at least on changing our attitude on spending all of this money overseas and try to take care of some of this at home? what? you mean -- when? right now? this minute? i describe having a transition. my budget takes care of them. you talk about when we have a free society once again proved how it will be taking care of? we will look at how the country survived before 1965. [applause] when i worked in the county hospital in 1962, $3 an hour. when i got in my medical practice, $5 an hour, but now, you pay more than that, do you not, to go see your doctor?

the cost goes up because the government is involved. when you destroy the value of money, prices go up more in the areas the government gets involved in. they are very much involved in housing. they are very much involved in education. what has happened to the cost of education? as the quality gone up? the price has skyrocketed. the young people cannot pay it, so we give them loans, so they graduate with $1 trillion in debt. and there are no jobs. the price goes up, and it is very difficult for it to happen, for people to make this. i know it is a problem. we have these legal problems, where doctors over order because of litigation. that is part of the problem, but it is really inflation and doing away with competition. we need more competition in madison.

-- in medicine. whether it is a republican program for prescription health, edessa does the lobbying? the drug companies -- kessinger does the lobbying prove the drug companies -- guess who does the lobbying? the drug companies and the insurance companies. i have come to the conclusion after studying economics, being in madison and being in politics, if you want to care about people, you had better free up this system, understanding of freedom works and how limited government will provide a lot more for people than doing it through the government. when a country destroys its currency, one of the characteristics is that you wipe out the middle class. the money goes from the middle

class to the wealthy. what is happening today? the middle class is getting smaller. , wall street is still getting their bailout. they have all of the advantages of the monetary system, because they get the money for is. they spend it and circulate it, and then prices go up, and you cannot afford medical care. i believe one of the shortcomings of libertarianism and conservatism is that we have not really expressed ourselves on this point, because it sounds like you are cold hearted, do not really care about people, but who is the government? if somebody wants the government to take care of them, you are the government. if someone has to go and shuffled the cards, this is one of the wonderful things about america -- if someone has to go and shuffle the cards. it is going down the tubes, and we will have to do something

about it real soon. [applause] >> hello, everyone. hello, dr. paul. with the death of the north korean president, would you still remove the troops from the region? with the death of the north korean president, kim jong il, will you remove the trips? >> -- remove the troops? >> this looks like this may be a wonderful opportunity. the world is changing. the south koreans have, what? 10, 20 times the gdp of north korea? what are they doing over there?

why do we not have them spending money back here in this country? i would bring them home from south korea. i would bring them home from japan and germany and the middle east, and we would be stronger for it, because great nations do not get defeated usually militarily. they get defeated by bad policies. liberties are more destroyed by people's and governments more so than someone in dating. -- than someone invading. i would bring them home, the sooner the better. [applause] >> hi, dr. paul. my question is regarding the act

that is to protect cargo coming in and going out of the united states and to protect jobs for american sailors. it has created essentially a middle-class jobs, and we see where i.t. jobs are getting -- it has created essentially middle-class jobs, and we see where jobs in i.t. are getting shipped overseas. would you create something to essentially shore up more jobs stateside? >> without reading the act and knowing every detail, i have dealt with it to a greek -- to a degree, because i of dealt with in my district, and the ships come in and out. -- because i have dealt with it in my district, with the ships coming in and out.

unless there is something very special and necessary, i basically have had the position that i would repeal most of it if not all of it, because i believe we would be better off for it. it was supposed to protect american jobs, but what it does is chase a lot of vessels away. i would be repealing most of it but -- i would be for repealing most of it is not all of it. >> hi, dr. paul. a couple of years ago, we had a really bad ice storm up here, and just around halloween, we

had another snowstorm, and i was without power for a while, and i really wondered why the power companies did absolutely nothing to do preventive maintenance to stop this ahead of time, and it was not until i talk to with somebody who worked in the power industry -- it was not until i talked to somebody who worked in the power industry -- transformers expert, power lines go down, and then fema comes in and pays -- transformers power lines go down. we get a service that is worse off. how to begin around -- how do we stop this insanity -- how do we get around and stop this insanity? your opponents are going to

stand up and called you heartless and uninformed voters are going to -- are going to stand up and call you heartless. how do we stop this? >> i thought i had heard all of the stories about fema, but that is a new one. that is another great example. i know a lot about fema as a practical stand mulling -- as a practical matter. i was first elected to congress in 1976, and i've always argued against fema. if we have a hurricane, why do you have to pay need to rebuild my beach house? -- why do you have to pay me to rebuild my beach house? why fix it if i am going to get the government to do it?

as if it is magic, another neighbor in another state. what it gets you to do, if you do not go along with fema insurance and flood insurance, they say you do not care about the people and what is going to happen. well, what would you do if you did not have the government's subsidizing the insurance? it is dangerous. why should we dumping on the taxpayer? -- why should we dump it on the taxpayer? i will build my house a little bit better or pay more for my insurance, but instead, there are some people in houston i think trying to stop it. they have had their houses led to three or four times, and they come in and -- they have had their house is flooded -- houses flooded three or four

times, and they come in and rebuild. the program is there, and we have had to pay into it. most of the complaints are about fema, so i go to bat for them. fema becomes the dictator. they come in, and there was one flood where fema was keeping out the red cross. they take over, with the department of homeland security and fema, they take over all police activities. katrina was a disaster. they went in and started confiscating guns. there is no constitutional authority for the government to be doing this, no matter how well intended. it has not been around that long, and it teaches people to take a risk they should not take. interesting.

[applause] >> hi, dr. paul. i like a lot of what you said, but i like a lot of what all lot of politicians say -- i like a lot of what many politicians say. if you belong to a party, how are you going to get congress to do what you say we need them to do? >> it is the key question. and i am going to start off by saying something, because i am going to challenge you, but my challenge is that we got into this mess because we had too much by partisanship, you know? because the right and left get together, and they want to spend money. somebody once a war over here, and somebody wants a welfare --

somebody wants a war over here. they have a federal reserve, and we will print money, and they got away with it. i demonstrated this in medicine. they let the lobby's control. -- the lobbies control. i think it should be not by getting them to come over by giving half of your promises away. why do we not bring people together as coalitions? and this is where i have worked for so long, because i am pretty independent. that is why i like new hampshire, because i understand there are many independents in new hampshire. you can appeal to them and liberals on civil liberties, and there are a lot of conservatives, but there are a lot of liberals who think we do too much overseas.

being elected president is also going to bring in like-minded people. the other thing that should encourage you, if we get to the point where we have the right kind of president to bring people together, you can say this is a secret, do not let it out. a lot of people in washington do not have a whole lot of principles. [laughter] [applause] but that is the way the world works, so, therefore, they respond to you. if they think their job is in jeopardy by, you know, if they do not do what you want -- this is where with this occupy movement or the tea party movement, that is a message they are starting to receive and sort out. ultimately, government is a reflection of the people, and the people are a reflection of

the prevailing attitude, a philosophical attitude. seven years now, almost all of us have been talked about keynesian economics. spending money is the most important thing -- almost all of us have been talked about keynesian economics. -- have been taught about keynesian economics. in the meantime, you want to bring coalitions together. all you have to do is get to be buddies with one-third of the congress. obviously, it is a stalemate there, because like i started off with, they do not admit that spending is a problem. they are giving you lips service, but if they thought it was half or one-tenth as serious as i thought it was, believe me, they would be cutting as opposed to this deception they are putting on the people. >> this will have to be our last question.

can we get one from the back? question? i only see one hand up back there. >> we need a mic. >> hello, dr. paul. my name is alex. one thing i have been falling in the news that has been alarmingly is one act. i would like to know your thoughts on it, hoping they would be in line with my fear on this. [applause] >> i am always pleased to get questions like this, because my complaint is that this stuff goes through and nobody knows about it, so when someone knows about it, i think that is fantastic. out of self-defense, you had better know about it, -- i saw

in the paper what the most important event was last year, the biggest news story. the biggest news story was an bin laden being killed, but i think what you're talking about is a much bigger story -- the biggest news story was bin laden being killed. in the house, they were tinkering with the words we signed into law after 9/11 to go after al qaeda. i supported that. but that morphed into going after all terrorists around the world and invading countries. it was gross distortion of that of 40, so instead, some of us wanted to eliminate that -- it was a gross distortion of that of 40 -- of that authority.

they added the taliban, and they are not making plans to come here. they are mainly motivated to keep people out of their country. as a matter of fact, the current congress is starting to talk to the taliban. so what was changed in the house was to say that anybody who was a taliban, plus associated forces -- associated forces mean if you happen to visit a web site that is controversial, or maybe attended a mosque or something like that, and somebody in that moscow was a bad guy, and you were associated, -- somebody in that mosque was a bad guy, in your associated, and you would be arrested, -- and you were associated, you would be

arrested. some on the senate floor bragged that if we get one of those guys, and they ask for a lawyer, no lawyer for you. this was on top of the president's announcement that it is a national policy that the president is allowed to assassinate american citizens, and it has happened three times already. you can say that he was a bad guy. what about his son that was 16 years old? "we did not know he was so young." this is really, really bad. just this past week, the senate made it worse. it came back to the house, and there is no chance of stopping it, and the president was anxious to have it. that is major. it is very, very dangerous.

the patriot act, which i think should have never been passed. repealed the fourth amendment, this basically repeals the fifth amendment. the ideas of freedom develop slowly over many centuries. they were trying to establish these principles with the magna carta. so i am glad you are interested. i am glad you know about it. i wish something more could have been done about it. see of representatives vote. that may not heard anything. -- see how representatives vote. that may not hurt anything. >> -- >> that is not true. american citizens.

they are not exempt. o. -- no. it includes american citizens. [laughter] you know, it is too bad. getting rid of -- i wish it were that easy in washington. it has to be the election. if they really get out of hand, congress can for a person out, but who are they going to throw out when they are all guilty? not all, not all. [applause] >> ok, folks, we are going to wrap this up, and we tried to keep this as orderly as we possibly can, recognizing that there are a lot of supporters here.

what we would like to do, he will be available for pictures. we wanted to just do pictures, no autographs. folks who are interested in that are going to go straight through that exit door where we will have a line. folks who want to bypass that can go all the way down a hallway and go down to that door to exit. give us a chance to get to the back, please. >> are we going this way? ok. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> hear what the candidates are saying at the news c-span's web site design for 2012. -- at the new c-span website designed for 2012. >> who is the approve the constitutional conservative in this race? and that would be made -- who is be approved constitutional conservative in this race? that would be me. >> republican candidates john huntsman -- jon huntsman's daughters and his wife were at

the university of massachusetts- lowell, who hosted the event. >> welcome to this special forum of presidential candidate jon huntsman. i am the director at the center for public opinion, the host of this forum. with our media partner, "the boston globe worldcom" this is one of a series. -- "the boston globe," this is one of a series. we will continue to follow this important campaign, one that has caused considerable national attention. we also want to thank the university for their support of this forum, and thanks to our good friends, and today's event

is being webcast live and also at the "boston herald" webb said. we are pleased to draft two of the -- we are pleased to have two of their reporters with us. >> thank you, frank. we will be taking questions for our distinguished panel. we will also be taking questions from their twitter, which sort of kicks off and introduces the first point, how we are all here. >> in the audience, please, ask questions. that is what we are here. we want to get some -- that is

why we are here. we want to get some input. the first thing we wanted to do was hoping you could introduce yourselves. not all families want to be involved in the campaign and want to be visible. did you want to start, liddy? >> i am liddy huntsman, the third daughter. i have never really been in politics. i have grown up in it, but when i graduated in may, for the fourth time, i kind of realize the mess that our country is in. -- but for the first time, i kind of realized the mess that our country is in.

i wanted to be involved in politics, so i am excited to be on the campaign trail. i am excited about my dad and believe he is the best one for the job. i went for my graduation to come straight on to the campaign trail, i was so excited about it. and on twitter, kind of reaching out to the younger generation. i think social media is the big new thing for this campaign election cycle. i am really excited to be doing it with my sister. >> i am mom. i am not the beautiful daughter who is at home with the flu. the incredible growth have had so much fun on the campaign trail. it can get some serious, of times, -- it can get so serious

a lot of times. you have to sit back and be a little bit light-hearted, which i and the girls at to the campaign and add to our lives, and they have been a lot of fun -- which i think the girls add to the campaign and to our lives. i think for the first time i have seen young people really get out there and get involved and really be concerned about what is in store for their future. when i was back in high school, we were not even concerned about our future because things seemed to be in good hands, and all seemed to be going well. it does not seem that way today. everybody needs to get up and

take a stand and get passionately involved to make this a great country that it can be and is. it is good to be on the campaign trail, and i am looking forward to getting to know these girls and what they have done. i think social media is obviously the way of the future. as we are finding, one little tweet that somebody sent out can go by very quickly, and you can see a video that they did and a song that they did that went a viral. my husband does a speech and gets five hits on youtube, and they do this and get thousands of hits, this is the wave of the future, and you all are a part of that, and i think my husband represent a lot of what is important to each of you. the direction this country is going, looking for somebody who

has not only an executive background in government service, like running a state, but somebody that understands business, and i think a very important aspect that we need to look at especially with what we are experiencing right now in our world is to have somebody that has an extensive background in foreign policy, and that is something i think is truly, unique need to jon, that he offers this campaign -- uniquely to jon. when he ran for governor of utah, he was able to get so many things done there that brought the state together and brought them to number one in job creation, the best managed state in the country, and he went on to win his election with 78% of the vote, and to me, that is leadership and bringing people together. as you look at the types of

things you are looking for, i do think that someone who is able to bring this country together is an important part of it, thank you for having us here. >> i am mary anne, the oldest of the bunch. i have been in china last couple of years performing as a pianist, and when i heard that my dad was going to get involved in this election, i thought i could not not be a part of this experience. i was actually part of the last presidential election cycle. being over in china and seeing how much our country is in need of somebody with a real leadership, i thought my dad is the best person to take that role, and so it has just been a great opportunity for my family and also being with my sister is. we decided to do this twitter account. i had not been exposed to

twitter, living in china, said this was my first real introduction to it -- so this was my first real introduction to it. twitter has taken off during the presidential election especially, so it has really been a wonderful thing for us to do, and also it has been great because the three of us have different roles in the campaign. aside from the twitter account, my sister who is not here is helping out on the media side. i am helping out with finance, and liddy is helping. we are here to answer any questions you have. >> for those who did not know, what would your involvement in the last presidential cycle? >> -- what was your involvement in the last presidential cycle? >> i worked in finance for the mccain campaign. >> ok, we are going to jump to

the social media aspect of this and take a look at the first video, which was a parody. this was the infamous commercial. the former presidential candidate herman cain had an unusual campaign ad with his manager, looking serious, and then taking a puff of a cigarette, so these girls have a hilarious parody, and we will take a look at it now, so let's take a look. >> we have the privilege of watching our father, jon huntsman, represent america three separate times overseas and back here at home as the two-term governor of utah. >> tomorrow is friday, one day

closer to the weekend. >> a proven track record to revive the american economy and create jobs. even if we did not have to believe -- even if we did not believe that, we would still have to be here. >> no one has ever seen a trio like this. >> we need you to get involved to make sure that our next president is not based on sound bites. >> follow us on twitter. ♪ ca, united we stand ♪ >> how many takes? did you shoot it out of the park the first time? >> i think it took one try for all of us. >> i think all seen probably

took one hour. -- i think the whole scene probably took one hour. >> we did not know -- we knew they were doing something. we were a little bit nervous, because we had no idea. "just wait, just wait," and they sent it to us right as they send it out. >> we had no idea it would go this viral. when we were making this video, it was also for fun. we actually got up early that morning, and liddy had the idea, and we ran out in our pajamas to go find mustaches. the disney store, the little

pipes that blow bubbles, but we could not find them. we were sitting there, and i had received emails. "have you seen the hermann -- herman cain commercial?" of course. i am more creative. it would be something fun for us to do, so my sister who is the mom of the group -- it is 7:00 a.m., and i have this idea, and you have to do it. she was like, "ok."

it must be ok. so we got to work on it, and i did not think it was going to turn out the way that it did. i was very, very surprised. "oh, my gosh," people are going to love this tweet. others go viral. i do not know. i was just on a roll. i just rode it. >> for those of you who did not see it, this great tweet, when she'll is treating about his lack of experience and knowledge about china -- when she was

tweeting about his lack of experience and knowledge about china. you have this nice reaction that i think people understand and is not scripted, and that is the most refreshing part. >> i think that is what people really like about our twitter account. it tells it in a way where it is very true, but it gets a laugh, i do not know, some entertainment towards it. >> so i wanted to say, first of all, those were great faces. i wanted to ask about your father and what he thought of it when he first saw it. >> we were in the car, and he looked down, and he broke up laughing, and i knew it was ok. >> as liddy said, we sent it to him, right when we sent it out.

>> it is a dinner on a friday night. a lot of laughter. >> we love to sit around and watch "dumb and dumber." >> in terms of the social media aspect of this, you talked about it a little bit. what do you think is so important terms of the presidential campaign and in praising the social media? -- presidential campaign and embracing the social media? >> i think it is a great tool to reach out. in previous elections, it was the blog, and today, people are

very impatient, so with twitter, people can get news. if things go viral in 30 seconds. -- and things go viral in 30 seconds. it is making this a different cycle more than ever. i think social media has a big part in that. it is the modern world kind of coming into play. this is changing elections a lot. >> on the spot. right when you are on twitter, you just read all of the news feeds. everything going on, like liddy said. it might take a couple of days to blog about it, but with twitter, it is right in the moment, and i think twitter will stay around awhile. >> i have had twitter for

awhile, and the last few months has really made it grow. the new aspect of facebook. >> using it. >> your twitter dump has over 18,000 followers. i do not know if anyone is bothering the girls. have you had any kind of pushback from the campaign? to stay on message -- here you are, sort of off the cuff, two leading -- off the cuff, tweeting. >> they have told us we are the campaign's secret weapon. >> at the end of the day, we are promoting our dad, so we are going to try to make it as positive as possible and try to

get him out there. that is most important. >> that is our goal. it is to help our dad. that is why we started this twitter account. >> i have our first question from someone who tweeted, and she asks, is it true that young voters are apathetic? >> i mean, i think, what i have seen -- we were all involved. i was in college for the last election cycle four years ago, and i think the media was really involved. it was really attractive to the younger generation. with this election cycle, i think a lot of people have lost that hope, and they have not seen a lot of change, said they are not wanting to be involved. -- so they are not wanting to be involved.

more than ever, because it is our future. crucial in the next election cycle. i do not think people realize. people wake up. some of these are not things that will affect us in the future. getting the youth involved, because it is such a crucial time in politics. >> it affects our generation more than anybody else, and i think that is what a lot of young people do not realize, is that whoever our next leader is, it really has a huge impact on this generation. >> encouraging people to get involved. >> now, one of the things i want to remind you of, if there is anybody to ask questions, just line up. oh, great.

we have someone. just introduce yourself. >> hello, my name is seth. a lot of candidates in the spotlight have been front- runners at some point, and i wonder why you think that has not happened yet to your dad, that the media has not put a spotlight on him and that he has not become a front runner yet in this campaign. >> the media were more interested in sound bites than substance. the person you won the debate was the one with the best lines, and now when we are getting to the crucial part of the election, now they want substance, and they will see that in the coming weeks, where it will change, and people will be interested in what my dad has to say. we all want to be the last front

runner than the first front runner. >> i think this is really an interesting time in our country and election cycle, where i feel like both parties have never been so divided, and so, you look at all of the different front-runners come and go, i do not think people have a clear idea of who they want to get, and one thing my dad brings to the table is that he is a real people person, and he brings different parties together. he has all of the republicans, independents, and the democrats, and when you are looking at someone to go against the incumbent, president obama, you need someone who can bring all of those people together, and that person is my dad. >> i think in the beginning, when jon jumped into the race, immediately, the republican party said he crossed party lines and worked as a democrat

-- for a democrat as ambassador to china. people have come back to look at his record. he has a conservative record and has a consistent conservative record. always pro-life. what he did in the state of utah was phenomenal in bringing it to no. 1 in job creation, and his economic plan that he has put forth has been endorsed by "the wall street journal." i feel that the republican party is going back now, and they are admitting, "we automatically dismiss you because you took that job." -- "we automatically dismissed you." i am proud of him for serving his country when asked. when asked to serve your country

during a time of critical need, and trying to find someone who fits the position, such as the ambassador to china, it is very hard in this country to find somebody who has a business background, the executive service background, and a background in china, which he studied for 30 years and speaks fluent mandarin. it would be hard to pass someone over like that, regardless of which party you are from, and we have two serving in the u.s. navy, who we think about every day we are in this race, and the decisions my husband made is something that i think he would have disappointed his boys -- he has taught them about service and stepping up and always serving your country, so i think america will come around. people understand that reason, and doing a phenomenal job as ambassador to china, speaking

out on human rights, which is such an important issue that i think a lot of people feel strongly about. you can now look at the whole picture, which i think is happening now. there is a slow and steady rise, but i think you will find his rise is not one of these that will go up and down. he does not want 15 minutes of fame. he wants that slow, steady rise. in new hampshire, he started out at 0, and now he is at 13% right now. we are very encouraged and excited about where he is. the town hall meetings are getting bigger and bigger, so keep your eye on new hampshire, and i think you'll see a steady rise. >> he just got two newspaper endorsements yesterday. >> thank you. >> i also want to follow up,

mary, because you worked on the last campaign, do you feel this has been more of a roller- coaster ride, in terms of having a front runner candidate, one after the other? and any thoughts as to why it is like this as opposed to 2008? >> it is funny. although this has been a very odd election cycle, i look back at 2008, and there are actually a lot of similarities in the front-runners, because if you look back, mccain was not even up at this point. you had rudy giuliani and fred thompson who were the front runners for a long time, and i feel as though rudy giuliani was named by the media as the nominee in like june or july of that year, so, in a way, there are some similarities to how the cycle has gone, but i think this

has also been a very odd year. i think you will see a lot of changes happen in the next few weeks. like i said before, said, we hr been so divided. i think you have extremes on both sides. people are unhappy with the current situation and are impatient. i was watching the news and they were saying, who do like for 2016? i said we should be talking about 2012. how lot of people who want to know who is going to be the nominee. especially with twitter. you get more information with twitter and other social media

outlets. >> you sit there and you turn on the news and you would think there are only two people running. you will see whoever it happens to be in the lead and that time, you only think there are two people running. in a way it is a disservice because you think we only have two people to choose from instead of here is the field. that is something i have noticed. maybe because we see it every day. it seems that they really focus on the debate or the news cycle. i think we need to look at the field. >> looking back to 2008, it was similar where you would turn on the tv and there would be to candidates and then mccain ended up getting the nomination in the end.

nobody would have thought until this point. >> this question is from a new hampshire independent. he asks, what do you think of mitt romney or newt gingrich? your thoughts on the two that happened to me -- be talked about right now. >> we like them that they are no jon huntsman. [laughter] anybody willing to put themselves out there, you have to say, you have to complement them. obviously our data is the best candidate for the job. -- dad is the best candidate for the job. >> there is a lot of respect among spouses speak.

yes, you are going to see advertisements and different things but you get in the arena and everybody shake hands. it is the part of the game where there is competitiveness. but there is a good rapport between candidates and spouses. that is something that -- >> there is a respect behind the stage. we all understand. >> on that trail, and looking at ads, looking earlier in the campaign, and time mormon rhetoric, how much of that -- anti-mormon rhetoric, how much

of that fills personal? >> i do not think we take things personally. you cannot or else you would not get adam bed in the morning. we -- out of bed in the morning. we are out there for the right reasons. people can say what they want. we hear negative comments all the time. we have our family and we are behind the right guy. >> we went through this when my dad ran for governor. it took time to get used to. the hardest thing is to read things about your dad. that took a while for me to get over. it only makes you stronger. you know what is going on within the family and with your dad. you try not to read the news. >> he cannot be in a batman.

what we read affects our emotions. you have to try to keep yourself focused. my husband does not open up and read articles all day. he is busy thinking about the next thing. he figures they will let him know. you can get caught up in the minutia and it can bring you down. you have to stay focused every day. the best thing is having each other built one another up. we might get down that was set and someone else will pick us back up again. we are human. we feel it. talking to some of the spouses, i know that we feel these emotions. we feel it for our husbands. it is all part of this game.

we knew it would not be easy. there is a bigger picture out there. >> we were in south carolina. every channel i foot on, like conan talking about to the debate. every tv show. >> what has it been like a sense youtube and twitter -- like youtube and twitter? >> the more we do things, the less i read. you know what is going on. i think it is worth it. it is worth it to put out your life for such a good cause. we have seen that. we are risking a lot of things

but this is for a greater cause. it is for our country. we feel confident on what we're doing. >> on that, this is from a new hampshire voter, they asked in terms of social media and your exposure, will it translate into votes? how many? >> 3, 4. [laughter] >> your shooting high. >> we hope so. we hope to make an impact on people. i have seen several tweets that i am voting for your dad. >> that was the whole point of getting ourselves out there to promote our in-. if people are going to watch youtube, we are making fun of ourselves. it is worth it in the end.

hopefully this will translate into votes. >> questions from the audience? >> hello, i am a student trustee. i would like to make a comment and about your father. he seems more moderate. you see the rise of the tea party. how does your father reconcile his moderate streak compared with the domination of fringes? >> if you look at his background, he has a more conservative record than any of the other candidates which not a lot of people realize. >> in reality, he is a moderate on civil unions. if you look at his record, he is

the most conservative out of everybody. i think he was mislabeled as being aimed -- moderate when he is conservative. go back and look at his record, like in utah, he is more conservative than any of the other candidates. >> we encourage everybody to go to jon2012.com. >> he may have a moderate attitude because he has the ability to unite people together. sometimes that comes across as liberal. it is a great gift he has. that is something our country needs. somebody who can bridge people together. as governor he brought our state together. and was able to unite a state where you might not agree with him but you know he is genuine and authentic. he does not pander.

you are not going to see him say something to one group to get a vote. he would rather lose than the not inauthentic. >> he is like a modern-day politicians. our country want somebody who is modern. we have the social media, our country is changing. we need someone with a more moderate approach. >> yet he has not changed his conservative principles. you're not going to see him flip on issues. he is exactly the same on those values he has had since the day and married him. that is something quite believe the republican party may have mislabeled him at the beginning which was unfortunate because if you look back now, it has taken a while to see who he is.

people are real -- realizing we forgot to look at his record. his record speaks for itself. >> another question? >> ayman freshman at school. i just got a lot of the army. you said you had brothers in the navy. as far as spending stationed, how does that impact the family on the campaign trail? >> thank you for your service. they're just beginning the process. one is in the second year of the naval academy in the second child is enrolled island playing football and he will be at the naval academy next year. i know they have a world ahead of them that this historic. you wonder what it is going to be.

when we were in annapolis and about one year ago picking up our son, we spent an hour with him. to see him in his uniform, you dropped him off six weeks before. you get to see them for an hour. he said, i want to take you up to the cemetery because that is where i run every day. we have so many heroes that have served our country. it meant a lot to our son. he said i feel their goodness when i am up here. that was a moment i will never forget when i think about the next generation, our men and women going into battle. my husband shook his head and said, i am really worried for our country. i thought, what is in store for

your generation? i realized how concerned he was. we were still in china at the time. we were not thinking -- he continued as ambassador. i knew that did not leave his mind and he was concerned about our men and women for the next generation. that had an impact on him. coming back, as we thought about where our country was, he thought i can sit on the sidelines or jump into the arena and put forward some ideas carried that is something we think about every day. yesterday some said, what about the iraq war? he said i'm thinking about four thousand goldstar mother's right now. i found i got choked up, that one comment.

goldstar mothers. i realize to the sacrifice our men and women are doing. about youru feel brother serving? >> is an amazing thing. we are proud of our brothers. people ask me all the time the, where they forced to do this? they have been thinking about this since they were little. it has been a dream of them to serve in the navy and to serve their country. i am proud of them. we look up to them more than anything. >> i am honored and proud of both of my brothers. i feel like i get emotional talking about them because i looked at the position we are in. that is why i have become passionate about my dad because i feel like he is the only one,

i want to someone i can trust in office. that is why we are saying this is our brothers boss at the end of the day. we need is somebody we will be able to trust. we want to be able to trust them. i am also out here fighting for my brother's and trying to get the best leader in office. >> we are going to do a bit of a lightning round. the first question is, because you guys are in massachusetts, we are wondering what your thoughts are on senate -- senator scott brown? [laughter] >> i do not know him. i think very highly --

>> yeah. >> we will move on. will you run for office some day? >> i have been involved in campaigns and other presidential campaigns. it takes all lot of guts to run for something. i think it is great for anybody who decides to do that. i do not think it is in my future. >> i will not run for office. definitely not. i love politics and think is great but my hobbies and passions are nowhere near the political route. it would be fun to work on another political campaign. we all have seen the inside process. i think it comes easily to west.

but i will never run for anything. >> when are you shooting your next video? do have plans? >> we have found that spur of the moment ideas are what get to the best viewership. maybe tomorrow we will have another idea. >> i am curious, did you watch sons? romney's >> i did. >> he had arnold schwarzenegger at his desk. did that influence you or did you see it and saw children taking part? >> mary anne worked on that.

even look at anybody, i think we read her blog. we started twittered just to keep our friends updated. it's moved into a bigger process. so we ran with that. >> i think it is great to see behind the scenes, a family and what the kids are up to because you want to see what the family is like. that is one thing i liked about the last election cycle is you saw a lot of the kids out there. the three of us are very close. we wanted to do something a sister. twitter happens to be the new thing so and that is why we decided to do this. >> what is it about the mitt

romney boys that are fun to poke fun of it? >> their response to us on twittered. iq is trying to play hard to get. >> we do not know them. it is all fun and games. they have not been that involve to this go around. >> of at least one of my questions, who was the best in terms of campaigns going back and forth, the best sport, playing with you. doing what you guys give out. >> of other campaigns? >> yeah. >> this election cycle? >> griff, probably. we are close to the perry's.

no one else will respond to us. >> really there is no worse sport because -- >> i do not think anybody wants us to make a parody of them. >> i do not blame them. >> you said you have been in new hampshire for two weeks. >> we have both been here. >> any takeaway moments? any long days? >> there are always long days. every day is a new adventure. we have met so many great people. every day is a new date. we have not come across many candidates. >> one day we went and got into every diner we could think of.

>> we have gone to a few. i would say one of the most memorable experiences for me was when we first got to new hampshire with the three of us. they had been in florida and i had been in other places. we came together in new hampshire. this was my dad's first debate. we got to new hampshire and saw there was a 5k at 6:00 at night. of course we have not been working out. we all thought, this would be a great thing for us to do together. we decided to jump in the 5k. they do it year round.

>> was a labor day? >> i cannot remember. we've jumped and and i remember thinking the only thing that got me through was thinking we are doing this for our data. we all got through it. our first debate party. my dad did a great job. it was a way of getting us through it. there are things like that that happen on the campaign that are memorable for us. >> it was motivating. >> do we want to take another question? >> i am sophomore here. i am a question regarding the daughters. i'm wondering how been out of college has influenced your campaign or actions as an adult? >> i would say it is more

passionate. during graduation, 76% of students on graduation day were unemployed. when i read that statistic, my heart dropped. the majority of people on graduation day or all unemployed. it is to the point where you have to worry about health care and taxes and you have to wake up and say i need to get involved and make a difference. we are in such a hard place. if i were in college right now, i would not understand the real world. but now it has made me more confident about getting involved. >> i am in a musician but having

lived in china until last two years, i had several friends who had graduated from great to schools who could not get a job here. they have been in china for the last few years and they are planning on staying there for as long as they can. it is hard for them to come back and get a job. that is something that has surprised me. it really made me want to come back and be a part of this campaign. >> we have another question. what you hear back from voters using twitter? >> comments to us? >> yes. >> i would say the biggest comment is we love your dad, he is the only candidate. we hear that over and over.

he is the only sane candid it. -- candidates. every day we get that comment. >> three to five a day. >> what is your sense? what do they mean? >> i think everybody can see the field during now, how it is looking. when people see my dad onstage, they realize he is the only one that can get out there and win and beat obama. he has a proven record. when they say he is the only sane candidates, that is what they're going at. >> another question from the audience? >> i am a sophomore. since social media has been a topic, and if you guys have any ideas, trying to get your dance

images out more -- dad's image out more. any ideas of giving his image out like he is in utah? >> that is why we are excited to do things like this and going on different programs. to get his name out as much as possible. if we have to do another video, we will have to. >> you can come up with anything. >> like with new hampshire, trying to get people more involved and hopefully coming down here and doing a lot. trying to get his name out. >> i remember when they thought about doing the video it was more out of, we are tired of people not knowing who our dad is. that gave you an incentive to say we are going to do something

about it. >> that was the conversation i had with my mom. video we're going to do a and come up with something. >> your world has changed. you have become more and more visible. when did it change? when your father announced his candidacy, were you ready to jump in? >> i think we have always been ready. when he was governor we were always there and played the same row. we all had to be ready for this. >> it took a little while to sink in when your dad announces he is running for president of the united states. it is exciting but i think we

got involved when we started this twitter account. we were going to do all we could to help our dad. i think it has definitely been a great experience so far. a matter what happens, we will never forget this time of our lives. >> i saw you had treated -- tweeted that it was not a debate, it was the ticket. who would be the best candidate to pair up with your dad? >> they need to do this with all of the candidates. it would be interesting for the country to watch all of them paired up, talking about these serious issues.

they only got through five issues because it takes more than 30 seconds to answer some of those questions. you cannot talk about china. i think the country needs to see, who can handle all of these issues for our country? i hope all of the candidates to get an opportunity to do this. >> after the debates, the media did not -- on an twitter it was like oh, there was no side show. i am not going to write about it. it was a good debate because there was substance and people were learning something. >> jon may not be in the center of the drama. so sometimes you do not get all the media attention.

that is why people are realizing the substance, you have to go back and say it is not about to the side show. it is serious business. that is why we're seeing those voters taking a look at someone like him and his background. it has been an interesting road to save the least. >> is there a candidate that would be the best to be on the ticket with your dad? >> we will find out. >> no opinions on that? >> not as of now. we have not talked about that. >> we have another question. >> hello, i am an english major and a news editor for the

student paper. do you disagree with your father on any major issues? >> i went through a phase where i wanted to debate him on every issue. every time i brought it up i would come back to his side because i realized he was correct. i have gone through every issue with him. >> i agree with him on every issue so far. >> will this be a contentious process? will this go all the way to the convention? >> boy, i do not know. it very well could. this has been an interesting

year. we are not doing much in iowa. watching that, it is anybody's guess at this point what happens there. >> i think it is going to be an historic cycle. the governor said, mark my words, the next person who is the straw poll will be the nominee. herman cain one. -- won. nobody knows what next week is going to predict. it really is going to be such an historic election cycle. >> anything can happen at this point. you could have a different winner for each primary. it could go on for a while. >> sometimes it is our by hour.

we could go outside and see something else has happened. or on an airplane and we will get off and something is different than when we left. that is the way it has been. an interesting process. >> the use see that as meaning this could drag on and on? >> there is a chance it could. you may have three winners. you do not now. i do not think anybody knows. it is exciting to watch. >> i do not think it will be over soon. we are just starting. >> people asked us because your father put a sum much stock in new hampshire. if he doesn't win, does he need to drop out? >> even if he comes in second, i think he still has --

>> at the end of the day with new hampshire, people are focusing in on new hampshire. the story at the end of the day and will stay -- say my dad was at 0%. for some reason, new hampshire love tim and he is first or second there. we will see that. >> they get to know the heart and soul of the candid it which is important. many times you have to shake people's hands before you earn their vote. i think that america looks to see what happens in new hampshire. the world is watching. >> the rest of the nation is watching. whoever has the best party

before the election, new hampshire is important. i think my dad is gaining traction because people are liking backed up there. >> we are able to take one more question. in trees yourself. >> i am the president of the student government here. in massachusetts, higher education has not been getting as much funding as we like. i am wondering where your data puts a higher education in his list of -- dad puts higher education in his list of priorities? >[overlapping] >> put it this way, he takes it very seriously. >> i can answer a little bit. he had a trial run with all

seven of his kids. he has seen it all. he has had some of us in private and even home schooling. he has seen the importance of everyone's individual needs for education. that is something he takes seriously. if you go on the web site you can see what he did and what was on his record. >> thank you for your questions. we want to thank the huntsman family for being with us. we want to thank all of you for watching and coming. thank you gan. we appreciate all of your work. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> we have something from the university for your time today.

>> thank you very much. >> very kind. >> there is a shirt and there you might want to show the audience. >> that is a great one. >> i love that. >> we need the long sleeves in new hampshire. >> come to new hampshire and help us. >> we would love to have anybody, and volunteer. it will be a great opportunity. >> thank you. [applause]

>> on tomorrow's washington journal, the latest on the tax cut extension. our guest is james lankford and allyson schwartz. later, cnn appears morgan will testify on contacting. he is a former news of the world editor. we will have coverage of that at 9:00 a.m. eastern. >> have you tried it the three c's band radio app -- free c- span radio app?

>> anytime, anywhere, and get streaming audio as well as all three c-span television networks including coverage of congress. you can also listen to our interview programs including q&a and afterwards. c-span, it is available wherever you are. with the iowa caucuses next month, c-span's series the contenders looks back at the man who ran for president and lost. here is our lineup for this week. tuesday, -- thursday, eugene debs. friday, charles evans hughes. on saturday, a three-time governor of new york al smith followed by wendell willkie. every night on a 10 eastern.

>> next, a discussion on relations between turkey and iran. from the woodrow wilson center this is about 90 minutes. >> can i ask you to take your seats because we're going to start? good afternoon.

i joined the middle east program at the woodrow wilson international center for scholars. oncome to today's meeting enemies or allies in the new middle east, turkey, iran, and saudi arabia. this meeting is part of an ongoing series of meetings we have had for the whole year since the beginning of the revolutions in tunisia, egypt, libya, and yemen and also the ongoing events in syria. and bahrain. our speakers today are david

ottaway, he is a senior scholar at the woodrow wilson center and the former cairo euro chief -- chief for the washington post. i will be brief. david, the last paper, as part of our occasional series, was saudi arabia in the shadow of the arab revolt. we have a few copies left outside. we urge you to take one on your way out. our second speaker is a former fellow at the wilson center. he is a professor of international relations at the

university. i just received a copy of his latest book, "iraq: its neighbors." witchy added. -- which he edited. our next speaker is the president of the national iranian-american consul. the former public policy scholar at the wilson center in on his upcoming book, a single roll of the dice. it will come out in the new year. we have planned a book talk for mr. parsi in february. i think i will stop here and ask each of our speakers to speak for 15 minutes so we have enough

time for a discussion. there is overflow in the fourth floor. we will take questions in writing. david, you have the floor. >> thank you. i am going to focus on the rapprochement between saudi arabia and turkey and look at their from the turkish viewpoint. i think the first thing that strikes me about this a new relationship between saudi arabia and turkey is that if you look at their history, you would not say they might ever become friends. this was brought home to me this month. i was attending a conference on

the saudi foreign ministry and they took us to the history of -- the museum of natural history which is the whole history of the arabian peninsula back to the big bang when the world began. there is a section there on the three states. there is quite a bit about the relationship between saudi arabia and the ottoman empire. there was a reminder to me of how these to have historical interacted and been enemies. just to mention a few things, the ottoman empire and its struggle with the portuguese established an outpost in an eastern province in 1551 and

stayed there until they were driven out in 1680. mecca came under ottoman rule starting in 1517 and fought in the army of the first saudi state. it is an alliance between a religious leader and the saudi family. that is how the whole thing outgoing and continues until the state. the first saudi state began in 1744. immediately it went to war against the armies of the ottoman empire input to egypt in charge of regaining control of mecca, the holiest site in the moseley -- muslim world.

1818, abrahim reached the capital of the first saudi state. he captured it and destroyed the first saudi state. worse than that, he sent its amir back to constantinople to be executed. that is an interesting relationship. the ottomans were in control of the western part of saudi arabia. until 1916 when the sheriff went into revolt with the help of florence -- lawrence. he tried to set up a kingdom there. the point is this relationship

between saudi arabia and turkey carries a lot of historical baggage and helped keep them apart for many decades. all of this began changing after 9/11. this was because of three developments happening during the past decade. first was the fallout from 9/11 which i will discuss. the second was the ak party coming to power and the third was iran accelerating its nuclear program. about whether we saw each other flow because 15 of the hijackers were from saudi arabia. osama bin laden was behind it. there was a lot of tension in the relationship and the saudis

decided they had to look for allies other than united states. when he became king in 2005, when of his first trips was to beijing indicate where they were thinking there were going to get major help. in august 2006, he went to istanbul and this began a series of exchanges between the senior leaders of the countries. he has been prime minister but spent eight years working for the islamic development bank. he knew in saudi arabia and they knew him. there was a flurry of diplomatic contact and relationship between them. i think initially the motives or

different. the turks were looking for new business in turkish policy. they were looking for new markets. the saudis from the beginning were looking for a sunni counterweight to iran. unfortunately turkey's zero policy kept turkey from coming out on this side of the kingdom. furthermore, turkey was buying gas from iran. they had a lot of economic relations. the turks did not -- they seemed anxious not to alienate iran. strangely enough, things did not

begin to change until the arab spring at the beginning of this year. one by one, the turks and the saudis found themselves more or less on the same side in libya. it took turkey while to come to the side of the rebels there. the saudis were with them from the beginning. syria, where they are both on the same side working with the opposition to overthrow the regime. not for the same reasons. in the case of turkey, it was more a personal the trail -- the betrayal. the saudi position is to eliminate irani and influence in syria and to get even for what

happened in iraq where the american invasion created a shiite dominated government which is a major loss in the saudi constellation and thinking about the arab world. so, here they are on the same side, fighting to overthrow assad government. in september, turkey decides it is going to host that nato anti- missile system aimed mostly against iran. this puts a turkey on the saudi-side of the saudi-iranian conflict. i think that is a major turning

point in the relationship because that is where turkey commit itself to being on the side of the saudis. you might ask, how solid is this proper of small -- rapprochment? it mostly has political rather than security meaning for the kingdom, for the saudi kingdom. it is true the turkish decision to host the early-morning system is important to the saudis but turkey, in my mind, cannot replace the united states as the ultimate guarantor of the kingdom's security. i think turks are unlikely to ever sent troops into the

kingdom because of their past history if it comes to a military showdown between iran and saudi arabia. there are much more likely to look for pakistani said and americans -- pakistanis and americans. officially, you have the saudis welcoming their new engagement in the arab world and saying they see no competition for leadership. unofficially, the saudis remain wary of the turkish bid for influence in the arab world. because of the historical baggage between them and because the turkish model of multi-party democracy, even if it is islamic-oriented, is an antenna -- anathema.

you get to these imbibes when you see -- these vibes when you see, they spoke for 20 minutes about the wonders of the new turkish government and what they're doing overseas. at the end of the speech, he got hardly packs the -- reaction at all. then there are other strange things going on. the saudis ambassador, the last one left early this year. they have not replaced the ambassador there. they have named them but they have not gone back for reasons that remain obscure to me except

it may have to do with a changing of the guard in the saudi leadership at the highest levels. there is some tension between the two. i expect you will see a lot of publicity about this new relationship on both sides because it suits their interests. no doubt that the turkish turn against him is big news for the saudis because the king has all kinds of reasons he wants to get rid of assad. i think what you will see is they will line up depending on the issue. iran will help keep them together. to me, it is not impossible they will work in iraq to help the sunni faction of the iraqi

equation to have some say in the government there. seeing isy what we're all about politics and not an affinity for democracy behind the alliance. it is important, particularly to the saudis. one of the major new developments in saudi arabia's search for allies around the world. >> thank you, david ottaway. >> thank you for inviting me. as i was preparing for this presentation, it made me think, we talked -- keep talking about friends and enemies. maybe we need a new word to

explain things. the only word was acquaintances they came to my mind. that was not very satisfying either. this captures the essence of the relationship. we are not talking about of friends and enemies but states that are making do with what they have in front of them. when you look back people talking about this turkish access, now we're talking about this major rift. the fact of the matter is that events happened. some of them are momentous. but things will change and countries will adapt. what exists is an enduring

competition for resources and influence just to able to say, i am the number one in the region. there's no question that with the arab spring and the iraq war, three countries have been taken out of the current equation. iraq, syria, egypt. they do not have any influence at the moment. that leaves some arabia and turkey -- saudi arabia and turkey. in many ways the saudis see themselves in a do and i confrontation with the iranians. partially it is sectarian. they see the emergence of the new iraqi state as a major loss for their own strategic position. they resent the fact that here is an arab country run by shia.

by contrast, as we heard from david, it may -- they may take relief that iran's main ally is in deep trouble.

. .

i wish it were that easy in washington. if they really get out of hand, congress can throw a person out but who are they going to throw out when they are all guilty? [applause] not all, not all. >> we are going to wrap this up. we tried to keep it as orderly as we possibly can, recognizing there are a lot of supporters here. what we would like to do, the congressmen is going to be available for pictures. we just want to do pictures tonight. no autographs.

it is going to be 9:00 before we get out of here. go through that exit where will have a line. if you want to bypass that, go to my right at that exit all the way down the hallway and go down to that door. give us a chance to get to the back. [applause]

>> here what the candidates are saying that the newly designed c-span website for campaign 2012. >> if you cannot live with a nuclear-free on, you have to say what to do. all options are on the table. >> if we took the oath of office seriously, we would get rid of 80% of government. >> who is the proven conservative in this race, that would be me. >> read the latest comments from canada and reporters and links to our media partners -- can it its and reporters and links to our media partners. >> the house rules committee approved a rule that sets up a vote today on a motion to go to

conference on the payroll tax bill. we will have a hearing later. next we will hear from house republican leaders and then democrats on their differences over the payroll tax extension. >> i always knew there was a risk. i decided to take it because whether it is an illusion or not, i do not think it is. it helped my concentration. it stopped me from being bored and other people being boring. it would keep me awake. i could prolong a conversation. what i do it again? the answer is probably yes. hoping to get away with the whole thing. easy for me to say. not nice for my children to hear. it sounds respond to --

irresponsible. but it would be hypocritical to say i would never touch the stuff if i had known. i did know. everyone knows. all of life is a wager. i am going to wager on this. i cannot make it come out any other way. it is strange, i do not almost regret it. i should. it is impossible for me to picture life without wine and other things fueling the company. keeping me in reading and some traveling and energizing. >> journalist, author, and columnist christopher hitchens passed away from complications with esophageal cancer. what is nearly 100 c-span appearances on line at the video library.

>> the house announced last night it would not have an up or down vote on the senate passed a compromise on extending the tax cuts. instead it will have four votes including one for a committee to resolve differences between the senate and house which passed bills last week. here is john boehner and the house republicans. >> we talked about our way forward. our members believe we passed a reasonable bill that will extend the payroll tax credit for a year. it would take care of those doctors to take care of medicare patients and solve that problem for the next two years. and extend unemployment benefits. exactly what president asked us to do. our members do not want to punt and to a two-month short term fix or we have to do this again. we are here willing to work.

we will appoint people. we are willing to get the work done. it has become clear that what the senate did pass is going to cost and job creators all kinds of problems. we saw a report that came out today that there is confusion about the way the senate bill is put together. it is time to do the right thing for the american people. let's solve this problem now. we'll have time for other issues next year. until congress passes an extension of the payroll tax holiday. we outright reject the attempt by the senate to kick that -- the countdown the road. -- the can down the road.

its book caused an increase in expense and will actually hurt small businesses and workers. we are going to ask our rule committee to go to a meeting tonight, i expect them to report a rule for tomorrow and tomorrow we will come in and move to pass the rule will also take up a motion to reject the amendment and to go to congress so we can work this difference out and resolve this situation and the people get what they deserve as far as tax policy and health care policy. >> when the republicans laid out the pledge to america, we wanted to end uncertainty. two months is not where america

is that. we have listens to them. -- listens to them. we said we were going to follow the order in which this country was created. the senate and house can pass a bill. you find common ground then you move forward. we also said we did not like the idea of doing things in the dead of night. that is why you will find the rules committee will go tonight and these votes will take place tomorrow. this is a new house and a new direction and a place we want to move america forward. we listen to what the democrats said. when he noted he had pushed for a one-year extension on the payroll tax from harry reid saying that on december 7 congress cannot leave until these issues are dealt with. we cannot go home until we finish this. we will stay here as long as this takes.

we will stay here until christmas and new year's. nancy pelosi as early as december, house democrats will take up this legislation without delay and extend these provisions for a full year. that is what we are fighting for. >> in the three years since the president was elected, unemployment has been at, and near, or above 9% and millions remain unemployed. almost every member of congress has decided we need to extend the payroll tax relief for hard- working american families. almost every member of cameras has decided we need to have a the longer extension of unemployment insurance reform so that it is fiscally solvent.

the bid -- the debate comes down to two points. do you want to do something for 60 days that kicks that can down the road, that no business or job creator or family can count on, or do you want to do what the president asked us to do. do you want to do what the president asked us to do and do a full year. the second point, are you willing to work over the holiday so that the american people might have a better christmas? house republicans are ready. we stand ready to do what is necessary before the year's end to get insurance reforms and extensions necessary. >> we have a couple of

questions. can you explain on the votes tomorrow? >> obviously we will have a motion on the rule. after that we will have a motion to reject the senate amendment and vote to conference. we expect a minority to have a motion to instruct conferees and then we'll have a majority resolution that will lay out our position that is consistent with the bill we passed last week and what we have all been saying which is we believe, as has the president said, democrats in the senate that a much better path forward is uncertainty. that is a year's extension of the payroll tax holiday. so that families are not going

to have to guess from month to month what their tax status is. >> can you help us understand what happened between your conversations leading up to this? did he miscalculate or did you know or miscommunicate? >> the house passed a bill to do what the president asked for. we would extend the holiday for a year. i made it clear that the house was not going to enter into a negotiation until the senate did its job. it is time for the senate to produce something. as a result, we are asking you to resolve the differences between the houses. >> did he negotiate a bad deal? >> the senate did their job.

and house disagrees with it. >> you guys were talking like this might be something to go along with and find common ground. are you enthusiastic about this? >> we believe this is the right thing to do for the country. that is why we are willing to stay here to get the job done and to make sure the tax credit is done so that the american people and small businesses have some certain -- certainty. thank you.

>> we will get reaction from nancy pelosi. they spoke to reporters last night at the capitol. >> good evening, everyone. we came back to washington on saturday when we heard the senate had passed the bipartisan bill overwhelmingly, 89 votes. voting for a negotiated agreement negotiated by harry reid. we were hopeful that by now the president could have signed this bill. it was acknowledged by john boehner who had insisted the negotiations take place between

the majority leader in the minority leader. that was then, this is now. what is important are the facts as they are relative to the lives of the american people. what we see is stalling action on the part of those who were never for a payroll tax cut in the first place. president obama went around the country with the american jobs act. this was a very appealing to the american people. they support it overwhelmingly. they want the jobs it will engender by injecting demand into the economy and they want us to work together. n'ty have been clear, ca you work together? it is not everything we would have written into the bill but it is about cooperation in

coming to an agreement to meet the needs of the american people. here we are a few days before christmas and the republicans have another excuse as to why we cannot do it now. it is not a reason why it is not necessary. it is an excuse. here is what is at stake, 160 million americans continuing to have a tax cut. over 2 million people will lose their unemployment benefits dipped we do not act upon this resolution. 48 million americans will lose the opportunity for choosing their own doctors under medicare. 160 million americans who are working will get a tax cut. 2 million will have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

48 million seniors will have something to lose in this. economists tell us that passing this will have an impact of 600,000 jobs on the american economy for us to move forward. that more money will be brought into the economy than almost everything you can name. and of course the health of our seniors is very important to us. we have been trying to get a compromise. it was a step forward. it is a bill that takes us through the end of next year. but it says we want to remove all doubt that when you gather around your kitchen table and when you sit down to a holiday dinner, you know that come

january you will be able to pay the bills. these people, benefits years, it will have no way to live. this is critically important to their personal lives and to the growth of our economy. the momentum we have for growing the economy and for the republicans to say we're here to work. welcome back to the capital. we should never be in this position and we are in this position because the senate republicans and the senate democrats the house democrats are not loving the proposal but our grain to the agreement. it is the radical tea party republicans who are holding up this tax cut and a jeopardizing

our economic growth. >> the president and we and the american people have indicated they feel it is important that we ensure the continuation of a middle-class tax cut. that is good for them and good for the economy. it is good for growing jobs. we have made it clear that the continuation of unemployment insurance is critical. for those who are going to lose their insurance that the leader referenced but it is also critical to our economy pureed critical to jobs. critical to the growth of jobs.

at 48 million senior citizens who will be adversely affected if doctors cannot get reimbursed, enabling them to serve medicare patients. this is critical we act. we passed a bill. harry reid try to put the bill on the floor to see if it had majority support in the senate. the republicans refused to put the bill on the floor. so john boehner and others met to talk about how we would make sure that we had an extension of the middle-class tax cuts. a quote thatread

leads me to that conclusion. just a few days ago, before the agreement was made, senator mcconnell were exiting john boehner's office. mcconnell said he was in constant touch and communication with speaker john boehner before the deal was made. in my opinion, what we're seeing is a leadership of the house and senate who believe to this compromise, while not perfect, was something should be done. i am not sure that john boehner is for extending the middle class tax cut. let me give you a quote of his. six masako -- months ago he

called proposals to extend the tax cuts, "another short-term gimmick." does that language sound familiar to you? he thought a year's extension was a short-term gimmick. he thinks 60 days is a gimmick. he is not for this in my opinion based on this rhetoric. so we seeing that not withstanding the fact that tomorrow before noon time the president could be sent a bill which would give the certainty of which john boehner and others talk about. the certainty there would be a continuation of that cut on january 1. a certainty that doctors would reimburse at a level they could serve patients. a certainty that those who

cannot find a job would have substance for themselves and their families and continue to participate in growing the economy. let me read another pair read earlier today summoned you. this is not a partisan issue. 39 republican senators voted for this. 83% of the republican members of the senate voted for this. the american people are saying a 80% of the republicans and almost 100% of the democrats are for something, why in heaven's name don't you come to agreement? addis the question we should give to john boehner. an don't you take yes for answer. give people the assurance they need to have at this holiday time. dick lugar said this.

i am hopeful the house of representatives will pass the bill and do so tonight. that was saturday night. john boehner is under pressure. that is from the tea party. he has a lot of feedback from many republicans who say we do not like it. the payroll tax. not the fact that it is short term. they just do not like it. they like type -- tax cuts for the wealthy but not for the middle class americans. as a matter of fact, dick lugar said, many -- many republicans would say we do not want the extension of unemployment compensation anyway. he went on to conclude, i am hopeful that our majority republicans and democrats will proceed because it seems this is best for the country as well as all individuals who are affected.

senator scott brown said the same thing as did the senator from nevada and maine. ladies and gentlemen, the american public understands that what is happening is a partisan convulsion driven by the tea party in the republican conference. they are concerned that american is faced with the uncertainty in a debt limit extension, appropriation bills that republicans cannot come to yes. on behalf of the american people. i hope john boehner tonight decides that while this is not perfect, it will give certainty to people that on january 1 it will have the assistance they need for themselves and their family.

that is the least we could do at this holiday time. remembering our neighbors who are in distress. putting our country on a path of continued recovery. now i am pleased to yield to my friend could have been interesting conversation today. representative jim cliburn from south carolina. >> thank you. i think that all of us have heard a question asked time and time again. why can't you work together on behalf of the american people? we just saw an 89-10 vote in the senate. i think that demonstrates that

the senate can work together. 99% of the democrats in the house have indicated there for this bill. if it does not happen, it is not the senate or the house democrats. it is leadership in the house republicans once again capitulating to a small group within his conference that refuses to do and what for the medical -- middle-income people, what a rush to d for the upper income. all of us have seen recent studies. significant studies.

the study that looked back on the last 30 years and set the policies we are pursued in this country has held the lower 20% of the income earners who have experienced an 18% growth while the upper 20% experienced a 5% growth in income. the 1% in 275% growth in household income. , if we're doing here today the republican leadership continued to pursue this policy, it means those people who have had suffered over the last 30 years can look forward to a post-holiday season without

the unemployment insurance for 2.2 million of them. without this tax-cut continuing, for 160 million, and for 46 million seniors, they will see themselves cut off from their doctors because doctors will walk off the field and will not treat medicare patients if they experience this reduction in their benefits. i want to say to the american people that it didn't -- democrats in the house are willing to join with their bipartisan delegation of 89 senators on the other side of

this building and say to the american people, merry christmas, happy kwanzaa, happy hanukkah, and hopefully a happy new year. >> thank you. the reason the republicans are not taking yes for an answer is because no is their answer. that is driven by the tea party republicans who are responsible for this tax increase if it happens. earlier this evening, i saw the republican leader say that tomorrow we would have the opportunity to vote on the senate bill. have heard from our ranking member that is not the case, they have instructed them that

we will not put in an opportunity to vote on the bill. i do not know what happened when you spoke to them and they instructed their people at a rules committee whatever was, it was harmful. my guess is they are afraid their members are not going to stick with them because i do not believe that republicans are against a tax cut. the american people are for it. the senate is for it. in the house, we support that agreement. it does the job to get the tax cut in place so we can get on with the business of doing a one-year proposal want to do. why is it that what a couple hundred people in the republican

caucus can hold up a tax cut for middle income people, proper access to medicare and unemployment insurance? it is because they do not support the payroll tax cut. they were against it. president obama went around the country with the american jobs act and made the issue too hot for the republicans to handle. so they cannot put it on the floor, afraid to their members will abandon them. this is a pivotal moment for working families. decisions made here will affect them very directly in an immediate way. it is a moment we must make clear what the facts are on this and not continue to be misled by some procedural arguments.

a week on and we costs and the do nothing congress. in any event, we're going to make sure the public understands that when we take the debate to the floor tomorrow. disappointed members will not have the opportunity to vote on an agreement in the senate, insisted upon by john boehner and now once again walked away from as he walked away from the agreement with president obama on the default of the four trillion dollar bargain as eric cantor walked away from the joe biden talks. the list is 1 mile long. right now they are walking away from the middle-income tax cut for 160 million americans.

>> i have a question. you said earlier today that he thought john boehner knew what the right thing to do was. earlier you said you're not sure he was for a cut. >> he was for this before he was against it. he was against it before he was for it. what explains that? the american people. mr. mcconnell was not as enthusiastic. he said we're going to put it on the floor because the american people have been pulling in support for this proposal to give stability to middle-class families so they will have an opportunity to support themselves and help grow the economy which economists says this will do. i think while he knows the right

thing to do, that is why he came out and said it this deal, this agreement to give a middle- class tax cut some certainty for the next 60 days was a victory. he told his caucus came back, the members, the tea party faction, and said we do not like this deal. so he reversed himself. i think he knows that the american people believe that what the senate did was what it wanted to see. they hoped the proposal is approved. >> they said there are going to vote for conferees. >> i do not think we should go to conference. i think we don't have an opportunity to vote on a bill.

the american people asked for three things jobs, tax cuts, and for us to work together. this proposal meets the standards worthy of a vote on the floor of the house. >> the payroll tax cut does not expire tomorrow. everyone is for the extension. what is wrong with bringing the senate back here and negotiating? >> let me ask you this. one of the tactics they do is to push it to the limit. having covered the senate? q. how long it takes to get something done over there? it is not a question of that. it is a of an agreement that was made that does the job and we come back and start tomorrow, negotiating on the additional 10

months. there's nothing that forecloses that option. this paves the way for that. we have an ideal situation where we can remove all uncertainty that their wishes will be respected for us to work together to inject demand into the economy and to continue our economic growth. that is what this does. it enables us to look to the table tomorrow to start working on what we need to do in order to make it a 10 month arrangement. i know how sophisticated you are. but i know you must know that the success of the senate had -- was told that mcconnell was giving high fives to one of his members. so proud of this accomplishment.

let's take yes for an answer. one other reason not to go further right now, republicans do not want a payroll tax cut for the middle-class. they said they do not believe in extending tax cuts. they said for the wealthy should be permanent. we know where they are. >> i want to say something on your question. it perpetuates the uncertainty that john boehner says he does not want. none of us have watched this process and thinks things are certain. we do know that the senate has passed an overwhelmingly extension of these three items.

we know for certain if we pass that tomorrow and send it to be president, he will sign it. we know that people will not lose their middle-class tax cut. they will not lose reimbursement. and unemployment insurance will continue for those who need it. so when you ask, it perpetuates the very uncertainty of which john boehner and the congress could blame. we could get certainty tomorrow bypassing the middle class tax cut, and unemployment insurance continuation and the doctor reimbursement for medicare. [unintelligible]

>> i know how closely you attended the particulars of the legislation and you will know there were poison pills built into the bill so what would not be acceptable in the senate. under that guise of so much stuff that it had the seeds of its own destruction built into it. another farce, another situation. it is like a man courting a woman and she says, i would love to marry you. i will marry you want to be wary 30. that is never coming. neither is the day when the republicans are going to be honest what they're putting on the floor about having a clean pair wrote tax cut without all

of the instructions that make it impossible for us to vote and except in tucson. it is important to know, you want us to work together, we have. you want this to keep the momentum going, and job creation, it does it. let's get down to it and put the bill on the floor. see if they are willing to vote for it. that is probably why the story changed that they're going to take up the bill. in a matter of minutes that was gone. there are many in the republican caucus who would like to vote for this. that is what compromise is about. we have had to make and cooperate on it.

if you are for it, put it up there in a way that brings people together but does not have seeds of its own destruction selling in it. -- sown in it. >> senator mcconnell, in the debate on the bill that got 89 votes, this is designed to pass. after coming out of the conversation. let me finish this thought. you ask why we opposed it. it was designed to fail. it was designed to pretend they wanted the bill they built into that things they knew the senate was not agreed to. i know because the republicans would not allow it to come to a vote. they objected to its consideration.

that is why. >> i wanted to mention, the speaker said yesterday there were 300 votes in the house against the senate bill. why not bring it to the floor? he said there were 300 votes against it. >> last night, the rose committee approved a rule that sets up a mission -- motion to go to conference on the payroll tax bill. democrats attacked -- asked for an up or down vote which was rejected. david dreier is the ranking member.

regarding any final measure to extend the tax holiday and unemployment insurance benefits or prevent decreases in reimbursement for physicians to provide care to medicare beneficiaries. let me apologize to all the members of the committee. as is often the case when you're dealing with challenging circumstances like this, we had a protracted republican conference that started at 6:00 and went until 8:00. i apologize to mass slaughter.

i do not apologize to mr. sessions. i apologize for the fact you had to wait here and that our meeting went on. we thought it would be over an hour. that is why we said 7:05. why don't we began and entertain the motion. >> i moved the committee granted rulemaking offered by the chair of the committee or is his designee that the house disagrees to the amendments. the middle class job creation act of 2011 and requests a conference without question of consideration. to rule provides that the senate amendments and the motion shall be considered as read.

section 2 provides for consideration of the house of representatives according to any final measure to extend the payroll tax holiday, unemployment insurance benefits, or prevent decreases in reimbursement for physicians to provide care to medicare beneficiaries. to rule waives all points of order for resolution. in the resolution, one hour of debate by the chair and ranking minority member on ways and means. section 3 provides pending their appointment to the conference, at the previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening except one hour of debate. such a motion shall be

considered as read and shall not be questioned to a question of consideration. consideration of the motion provided in section 1, the chair may postpone further consideration of the motion to such time as may be designated by the speaker as through the clause and postponed the adoption of the motion under clause 8 of rule 20. the requirement of clause 6a on the same day is waived with respect to any resolution of january 17, 2012. section 6, it shall be in order of january 152012 for the speaker to entertain motions that the house suspended rules as under clause 1c of 15.

>> let me explain the rule and say that i have discussed the fact that we have this republican conference meeting downstairs. one of the things that came to light was an argument that has been made regularly and was a concern when we're last in the majority, having votes take place in the dark of night. we followed the slaughter directive and have decided rather than going through this evening and having to vote at 2:00 in the morning, we will meet at 9:00 in the morning which will allow us to have a full and open debate on this issue. we know president made it clear in his statement on saturday, as

did the house minority leader and the minority whip, but the notion of doing anything other than extending this package for less than one year was inexcusable. let me say that this rule allows for us to consider all of the alternatives to vote to conference for one hour that will be equally divided. the minority will handle half of the time. that vote will have two elements to it. going to conference which, as we all know, a bill becomes a law and the idea of each house passing their version is the way it is supposed to work. that is what we intend. i was asked if we're going to

have a vote concurring with the amendment. the vote is exactly that. if one is in support of the position, if one supports the idea of a two-month extension that would expire in february for the payroll tax and the medicare beneficiaries through the reimbursement to doctors, they should vote no on are going to conference. if someone supports the senate measure, their chance to voice their support will be to vote no on our going to conference. the minority will also have a motion to instruct conferees as preserved. there will be an hour of debate divided on the motion. it also makes a resolution, i

have this here because this will be made available for an hour and then the rule will also include some day consideration authority to bring up measures between now and when we return in mid january. this is an opportunity to do this in the light of day. there is a strong sense, beginning with president and the state and made by my california colleague when she said house democrats will return to washington, take up this legislation, and we will keep up the fight to extend these provisions for a full year. she said this on saturday. we feel strongly about imperative to move to get this done as expeditiously as possible to guarantee our fellow americans will not see an expert

-- expiration of their unemployment insurance. are there any amendments to rule? >> i have some comments are would like to make. -- i would like to make. i hope everyone has read "alice in wonderland." she said she was able to believe six impossible things before breakfast. i appreciate you were concerned about when i would want to vote. i do not believe a word of it. when we came up with the time schedule, the agenda was to concur with the middle-class tax relief and to go to conference and then a resolution. we know why that changed. we should be honest.

we have been hearing all day, from people on both sides of the aisle, that they were going to vote. i believe you knew you were going to lose. >> i look forward to your yielding at some point. >> as i think you decided to change that. 80% of the republicans in the senate have voted for this resolution. we cannot get 80% for anything. even getting a vote will take two or three days in the house. if they were willing to do one and they're not. what is impressive to me, you have probably seen them. what your senators are saying about what is going on over here.

i thought his statement was revealing. he had hoped the house would be sensible and co-head and passed this bill. you are inviting trouble. people thought we should not have an employment insurance, suddenly they feel that too much is not enough and you want a full year. that is another alice-in- wonderland attribute. the idea and you will get all of this done in two weeks. it is not going to happen. i do not know how mr. mcconnell feels about it. i know that steve first reviews the came out was john boehner had said to harry reid, and you

guys work it out and i will accept what you give me. will understand there are a lot of people in your caucus. we think that is what the problem is. >> if it is going to be a two month extension. >> yes, i know that. let me tell you, that gives us two months for the rest of the year. i would rather have the extension of that have expired. in addition to the work. we know what you're doing. we are not going to play. >> you are not supportive of what we outlined? >> we are not. hoping for a conference is like waiting for the dow -- godot. we have been trying to, worrying

about this people. this is the year -- a time of year of tiny tim and scrooge. there is no concern that people are losing their houses or unable to feed their children. get at they're going to tax increase. i cannot believe six impossible things before breakfast. everything in my mind rebelled. you know what is happening here. we know that tonight -- i would like to make a motion and cut to the chase and just to do a motion to concur with the bill. >> you have heard the motion of the gentlewoman. let me say that vote is made in

order under this rule when it comes to going to conference. by virtue of a voting, one is -- if they vote in opposition, -- >> hopefully. >> excuse me. can i complete my scott? >> you certainly may. >> 1 voting in opposition to going to conference -- excuse me? >> i am listening. >> that wasn't listening. >> we do that in the south. >> soft buffalo or soft rochester? -- south buffalo or south rochester? by virtue of the voting to go to conference you are disagreeing with the amendments. that vote is already made in

order. >> will you yield to me? that is different from having an up or down vote. >> if i could reclaim my time. i will say it -- may i reclaim my time? reclaiming my time, i will say that anyone who wants to support that senate position will vote in opposition to go into conference. that is what going to conference is about. i have to say -- >> no, it isn't. what we are asking in this motion -- >> would you like to be recognized? >> yes, i would. we have a motion to concur with the senate with a one hour of debate and to strike the rule. we do not believe for a second

of that voting to go to conference is the equal of voting to concur with what the senate did 89-10. >> i'm going to read the rule. an order offered by the chair of the committee on waves of means -- ways and means that the house disagreed to the senate amendments. by virtue of voting in favor of going to conference, one is voting to disagree with the senate amendments. >> to be clear, if the no side prevails, and i think we need to pass the amendment, not to go to conference, it does that send the bill to be president? the bill to be president? >>