i talked about earlier. we have a president that the not understand that it is small businesses, and japan ignores, here in iowa is farmers, mainstream merchants -- merchants, that create jobs. what washington does is they can create an environment -- people to take risk with their capital, buying equipment, hiring americans again. americans again. that is what republicans represent, if we get a republican in the white house that stand strong with republican principles. and as i said earlier, it is not just talking about the failure of the obama administration and his policies, but we have to talk about the solutions are. that is what we have seen in the nomination process. we have six candidates crisscrossing the state talking about their plans moving forward.

each of them have different economic and tax plans, ranging from bringing capital back from overseas, as we can invest it in manufacturing and start making things in america again. getting rid of some of the special tax loopholes that major corporations are able to use to save money that can otherwise be put to work on infrastructure, on investing in capital and personnel. so, i hope we will continue to see it from our republican candidate, but we need to talk about solutions. i agree with you. host: matthew strawn, is this your full-time job or did you have another profession? guest: this is a volunteer job. my family has a farm on the eastern part of the state just west of cedar rapids, and i am also involved in the arena football league -- iowa barnstormers, i am a co-owner. for any of your viewers who are football fans, it is where kurt warner got his start. it keeps me busy. host: did you have a winning record this year? guest: we did not. we had a rough season. 5-13. we had to make a coaching change. but hopefully things will turn

around when the season start and we had to training camp next february. host: mark from ephrata, pennsylvania. caller: i want to give a shout out for the christians to get behind newt gingrich to remind him, remember the jesus picked as disciples, the backgrounds. he picked them because he knew they could get the job done. and i want them to get behind newt gingrich. he is the man. host: go ahead. i wanted to pick up on this point because you talk about some of the individual candidates a little bit, but what about the importance of the christian vote in the iowa caucuses?

guest: there is no question when you look at the electorate in the iowa caucuses but the republicans, they are solid economic and social conservatives. mike huckabee, of course, was propelled by a social conservative evangelical christian vote in 2008. right now that is an electorate that seems to be split by a few different candidates -- congresswoman michele bachmann, senator rick santorum, governor of rick perry, newt gingrich. they seem to be battling over that segment of the electorate that has sort of split that vote like we did not see in 2008. so, i think over the long last -- next five days, you will see each of the candidates tried to coalesce that and to get into the first, second, and third spot. traditionally there are three out of iowa. host: indiana, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i am a c-span junkie. retired, 50 -- 67 year old. the lady who represented michele bachmann was on before you, mr. strawn, made a statement that a congressman left her camp to work for ron paul, and he was offered a large sum of money. is it a common practice for congressman to accept money from campaigns to work and campaign for candidates? if so, it seems very disgusting to me. thank you for taking my call. guest: thank you for the call. just one clarification, i believe the individual you are talking about is an iowa state senator as opposed to united states congressman. i do not know all the underlying facts. there seems to be some dispute as to what actually transpired yesterday regarding that

particular endorsement. i do know here in iowa, state legislators, at least in the iowa senate, are prohibited from doing exactly that thing. it is not a common practice for legislators. it is a common practice to endorse and support a candidate, but not a common practice for that to usually involve compensation. host: for worth, texas. susan, democratic line. caller: i have a couple of brief statements i would like responded to. history shows that after every republican administration, there has been a big financial disaster that has to be cleaned up. and another statement is, my understanding is our founding fathers worked for religious freedom, that the pilgrims that came over, came over to get away from religious persecution. and i equate what is going on

now as extreme -- compared to extreme islam and other extreme religions. and the debt that was created was created by cheney-bush buy things they did not put on the books. and president obama did put them on the books. it makes it look bad for him, which is the things that cheney-bush did not put on the books. host: matthew strawn? guest: i think the one thing i will point out when it comes to increasing the debt on not just our current generation but future generations in washington, i think a lot of that, when you look at the debt that has accrued over the last two and a half years will bring three years of your the obama administration is frightening, starting with the stimulus that unfortunately did not stimulate anything. i do hope we can get serious about that.

and it should not be about pointing fingers, but it does lay at the feet of the obama administration. but we need to get serious about cutting spending in washington. that is what our republican candidates are talking about and making sure we do it in a way that makes sense, make government more lean and efficient and identify where the waste is an start returning some of the power back to the states and individuals so we have a government in washington that and live within its means. host: you started this segment by talking about the unseasonably warm weather. what does it mean to you? guest: it means 40 degrees and no snow on the ground. host: is there a prediction of snow before the caucuses on tuesday? guest: there is not. putting on my meteorologist hat, there is a prediction for continually mild temperatures with no precipitation. hopefully that will add to a robust turnaround. host: matthew strawn is in our temporary studio in downtown des moines. this call is from davenport, iowa. caller: how is it going today?

a quick observation. i am a m longtime republican, and when i look at this field and won in 2008, and also in 2004 or 2002 -- they all seem to be light waves. i hate to say it, but if the choice today was barack obama, any one of the republican candidates, and bill clinton, again, as a lifeline -- lifelong republican i would have to vote for bill clinton because he was the real deal. host: matthew strawn? guest: i am confident at the end of this process you will have a republican nominee who is battle tested, somebody who will not only earn but deserve your vote. host: matthew strawn, finally, this tweet -- who are you going to call this for? guest: i will check in but i

will not cast a ballot. i need to remain neutral and impartial and make sure every candidate has the confidence of the state party is free of any partiality so i will not cast a ballot on caucus night. i thank you for that tweet, and feel free to follow me on twitter, @mattstrawn. host: what is your schedule over the next 3 or 4 days. guest: doing a lot of things like this. explaining what the caucus process is for those outside of our state. and i will try to around the state and catch some of the candidate event because that is how to get a feel of how they are trending. host: matthew strawn is the chair of the iowa republican party. guest: thank you, peter. >> lots more from iowa tomorrow

morning on "washington journal." also tomorrow, a round table with the minneapolis mayor, who is also vice chairman of the democratic national committee. also part of that roundtable, a political columnist with the dow morning register. we will talk about the demographics of iowa voters. washington journal starts tomorrow and every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. next up, we're going to take you out to the blue strawberry coffee company in iowa. rick perry is scheduled to appear as part of his bus tour ahead of the two state caucuses. this is his second stop of the day. we understand he will be coming into the coffee shop in just a moment.

the campaign has several other events planned for today as well. this is the second live event we have planned for you today. later on, we will be at a campaign event with mitt romney. we are waiting for rick perry, live on c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[applause]

♪

[inaudible] [applause]

>> hello, it is a great pleasure to introduce a strong conservative who comes to us from a small farming community. he grew up on a cotton farm, participated in four-h, and earned the title of eagle scout. he has served the state of texas as governor for more than a decade. his home state has created more than 1 million jobs during his tenure as governor, even as america has lost jobs. please welcome america's jobs governor and a candidate for the republican nomination, rick perry. [applause] >> thank you. we were doing business over there, selling coffee.

listen, to the blue strawberry folks, thank you for opening this up. we are all about doing some economic development, so we are going to sell some coffee while we are in here too, and maybe a pastry or two. cathy, by the way, thank you for your work, your service and everything. in the brigadier-general is your summer. where are you? i want to say hello to him, a great air force veteran, a real aircraft commander. as a matter of fact, i am going to talk about our military men and women and our active duty folks in just a second. how many veterans are here? let me say, thank you for your service. god bless you. we get to do this, we get to go

out and speak up about our government -- from time to time, we can speak against our government. i do it on a pretty regular basis, as a matter of fact, and i think that is not a bad idea. men and women like you understood that when your country needed you, you put your hand out and said, here i am. send me. just like i say a, the old profit. that is what we are about here today. if you remember nothing else i say today, i want you to remember this question. why should you settle for anyone less than an authentic conservative to represent your values and your views without apology in washington, d.c.? why? you should not. [applause] no apologies. let me tell you, what we believe

then, our values -- i was just visiting with some folks earlier. i tell people, the washington i like is washington, iowa. we were in washington, iowa. somebody's values are going to get represented in government, and the question is going to be, whose values? is it going to be our values or somebody else's values? that is the question. why should you settle for anyone last -- anyone less than an authentic conservative? i have all the respect in the world for the men and women i am on the stage with, men and women who -- i truly have respect for them. but if we replace a democrat insider with a republican insider, do you think washington is going to change? i am a limited government fiscal

conservative, and i am in this campaign to give washington a complete overhaul. i am about going to washington, d.c. and taking a sledgehammer to it if that is what is required. you know, other campaigns are conservative. i do not get confused, but sometimes there records do not always match their rhetoric. i have great respect for senator santorum. i mean, we stand on the stage -- i play -- i pray for his daughter on a daily basis, and he is a good man. but when he talks about fiscal conservatism, i am left scratching my head. senator santorum is a prolific year marker. you know, i love iowa pork, but i do not like washington pork. the washington port is what we

have to watch out for. it will -- pork is what we have to watch out for. it will give you a stomach ache that will last for a long, long time. senator santorum loaded up his bills with all these earmarks. he even voted for the alaska bridge to nowhere. that one i have a really hard time with people explaining to me why. he said in 2009, he said, i have a lot of earmarks. in fact, he said, i am very proud of all the earmarks i put into the legislation. he said i will defend my remarks. well senator, i'm calling you out. defender earmarks -- defend your earmarks. i happen to think earmarks are the gateway drug to the spending problem we have in washington, d.c.. i happen to think that is what is wrong with washington, having

this concept of earmarks, where you do not even debate them. you just take them on. as the president of the united states, i do not care if you are a democrat or republican, you send me a bill with earmarks, it is going to get vetoed. they are dead on arrival. washington, d.c. insiders are not going to be the ones to fix this country. they're the ones that broke this country. and they're not going to be the ones that fix it. it is going to take an outsider. washington -- you know, think about what happened. washington went into complete meltdown when they had this debt ceiling conversation -- which is all it was. as best i can tell there were no negotiations. the president left unsaid here, put your super committee and to place. i think there were very few who thought the super committee would do anything except failed. then the result was that over

half a trillion dollars worth of cuts to our united states military. and then we got the president back asking for 1.2 trillion dollars to raise the debt ceiling another 1.2 trillion dollars. it is so broken that we have to send an outsider to washington, d.c., an outsider that is not tainted with any of the historic things that have gone on there, not an insider from wall street. you see this corruption between washington, d.c. and wall street. you know, leadership is not about raising the debt ceiling and putting it on the back of our children. leadership is about standing up, looking the american people in the eye, and saying here is where we're going to reduce spending. telling the american people look, social security is broken. for those of you approaching social security age, it is going

to be there for you, but we need a president who says we are going to fix these things. we're not going to keep printing money we do not have been devaluing the dollars you have in your pocket. the insiders that have been there are not going to fix it. a look at the members of congress or former members of congress better on the stage with me. 63 years of collective searches -- that are on the stage with me. 63 years of collective service. there is a governor on the stage to have signed six balanced budgets, who has cut spending, who has made the kind of hard decisions on the spending side that they are going to have to have in washington, d.c. working with private sector business leaders to create a business friendly climate. i will put texas up against any state in the country when it comes to job creation. there are some 1300 people a day

on the average that come into the state of texas. i tell people, i said, they're not coming there in august because of the great weather. [laughter] knowre coming because they that there is a land of opportunity still in this country. we were talking about states competing with each other. terry understands that lowering or eliminating personal income tax in iowa is one way to make iowa are more competitive state. illinois, right across the river, they raised their personal income tax rate by 66%. that is a target-rich environment over there. terry and his legislature -- governors across the country competing with each other is the way our founding fathers saw the formation of america. the need to get back to that.

our conservative values -- and i suggest to you that as our constitution was written, they were pretty conservative in the ways they were looking at washington, d.c. they wanted to limit the powers of federal government. think of what they had been through. they had this faraway government telling them how to live their lives. they were being taxed without representation. all of the pressure of this faraway government. sounds familiar, doesn't it? and they put their names, their treasure, their lives, literally on the line when they signed that declaration of independence. and then they developed the constitution ever number of years, and they debated it greatly. and i would suggest it is a conservative document, because they wanted to limit the federal government to a few enumerated

powers like the military, defending in securing the borders of the country. that would be a good thing for the federal government to do right now? something your actually constitutionally supposed to do. they got down to the bill of rights and they talked about the 10th amendment, the powers delegated to the united states by the constitution are prohibited to it by the state's or reserve for the state's, respectfully, to the people. that is so simplistic but so elegant. it talks about having the states be the laboratories of innovation. if you want to educate your children in a particular way or deliver health care in a particular way or the build trans per station infrastructure

in a particular way -- or build transportation infrastructure and a particular way, you choose what is best for your state, and states will compete against each other. people will move to where they're most comfortable. that is what our founding fathers offer this country, and i will suggest to you we are almost 180 degrees away from that, with washington trying to blackmail you with your own money on how to educate your own children, with obama care saying here is how health care will be delivered in america. that, i would suggest to you, is unconstitutional, and i'm pretty sure it is american. -- un-american. [applause] i am asking for your vote, and i want you to vote your conservative values. that is what this caucus process for the republican nomination, i

think, is about. the values i learned were on a small farm, just like all these little small towns we have been through. they remind me so much of the little town i grew up in, hard- working men and women, mostly agriculture oriented either directly or indirectly. they're just good people that believe in the american dream. they believe in the sacrifices of those that came before them have done. my father was a be-17 tail gunner in 1944. he flew 35 missions over nazi germany, and by the grace of god did not get a scratch on him. he wanted to serve his country, come home and live in peace, farm that little piece of land out on the edge of haskell

county. that is what he did. and he taught his son about the values that he had learned and the importance of serving your country. it frustrates me greatly, having been a pilot in the air force and the commander in chief of the texas guard, who have been deployed multiple times to our theaters of operation. it frustrates me greatly that as we come home from one of those theaters, that our government, this is ministration, refuses to give them the simple acknowledgement of the job well done with a parade down main street of washington, d.c. or new york city.

they gave their all, some everything. some gave their today is for our tomorrows. when i am the president of united states and our men and women come home from a combat theater, not only will we have a parade, but the president of united states will be there to welcome them home and to say thank you for a job well done. i will share with you one other thing. we will keep america strong, economically, so that we can be strong and preserve the peace, not just in this country, but in the world. america is a begin, and i -- a pecan -- beacon, and i think that we have lost our brightness. we have lost our cluster in the

eyes of other countries. partly because of a foreign policy that has been so model by this president over the last three years, a president that has gone around the world and apologize for america, said the we are not an exceptional nation. i beg to differ with you, mr. obama. america is an exceptional nation and it will continue to be an exceptional nation. we must devote ourselves to getting this economy back going. you keep taxes low, the regulatory climate fair and predictable, you get government regulations out of people's hair, freedom from the costs of these -- i mean, trillions of dollars of costs. this coffee shop right here, i guarantee you, has epa, department of labor regulations that do not make the coffee a bit better or safer, or those

employees ever -- any safer, but they have to comply with them. we regulations strangling our banks. we have regulations coming out of the epa that are killing jobs and we have a president that will not build a pipeline from canada to the united states. build a pipeline. create the jobs. prius up from those sources of energy. -- free us up from those sources of energy. give us the freedom from having to buy our oil from people like hugo chávez. this is what it is about, mr. president. it is about farina's from dependence on sources of energy from -- freeing us from dependence on sources of energy from countries that do not like us. america's future is what we're talking about, and our country is calling us.

this election is not about me. this election is about our children, our grandchildren, and they are waiting. they're waiting for us to answer if we're going to participate, if we're going to call. i think about the prophet isaiah and when god was asking, whom shall i send? who will go for us? isaiah said, here and my. send me. this is your country, and your country is calling. your children are waiting for the answer. how many of you are willing to put your hand up and say, here am i? send me. here is my packed with you. you go tuesday and you caucus for me, and you have my back now matter what the weather is or

how far you have to go, you have my back on the third of january and i will have your back in washington, d.c. for the next four years. but bless you. thank you so much for coming out and being with us. i'm going to answer a few questions if that is all right, in the crowd, iowa tradition. it is awesome to be here, by the way. yes, sir. >> please explain your criticism of the supreme court decision in lawrence the texas. >> his question is how do i defend my criticism of lyndon

convicted -- defend my criticism of limited government and then criticize lawrence versus texas. i do not dislike government. i just want government to work. we have a federal government that is out of control. i wish i could tell you i knew every supreme court case. i do not. i am not a lawyer. but here is what i do know. i know they are spending too much money in washington, d.c.. $15 trillion worth of debt is on the back of that young man right there. if we do not go in and cut the size of government, court cases are not going to make one tinkered tag. that is the issue.

we can sit here and play i got you questions about one supreme court case or another, but the issue is spending in washington, d.c. the issue is, are we going to have a president of the united states that put strict constructionists on the court and say, i cannot find anything in the constitution about prayer in school, about educating our children, about how to deliver health care? that is what we need is the simplicity of a president who will go and know what he believes and and will stand up for the people that are out here busting their jobs every day to live the american dream and we cannot because we have a president and congress that are out of touch with the american people.

i believe we need to have a president that balances the budget of the united states constitution and also makes an amendment to have a part-time congress. send them back home. let them pay their own -- have a job and work a job like everybody else does. >> have you propose to pay down the national debt? >> it is $15 trillion in growing. you grow your way out of it, for one thing. that may mean that you're going to cut the tax burden. i'm going to recommend you go to my web site and look at our 20% flat tax plan. simplify it. you get to keep more of your money, but more importantly, the of the confidence that you can risk your capital, hire the people, create the jobs which in turn create more money to go

into the federal budgetary process and take those resources to pay the debt down. another way we can pay the debt down which makes much sense to me is to open up our federal land and waters for exploration. we are only producing about 8% s. our proven federal reserve' there are trillions of cubic metric feet of gas in some of these fields, billions of barrels of oil. that money ought to go straight toward paying down the debt. but the easiest and best way to do it is to get the burden off of the job creators in this country from the standpoint of taxation and regulation. that is what is killing us, the job creators and the entrepreneurial spirit and environment. that is what we did in texas.

we have a tax burden that is as light as it can be on the job creators and still allows the state services to be delivered. we ever regulatory climate that is fair and predictable, and we pass the most sweeping tort reform in the nation. it is a simple model, but it works. i think simplicity is what has been missing in washington for so long. >> what we do about the degradation of our religious freedoms? >> she asked what i would do to stop the degradation of our religious freedoms. i think this president has a war against religion going on. i show a couple of examples. one of them is that this department of justice is going after churches from the standpoint of -- it is called a ministerial exception.

historically, because someone's values at the church could not be used against them in terms of hiring or firing someone. this justice department is going after churches and basically taking that ministerial alliance away. if that is not a war on religion, i do not know what is. catholic charities, which are using dollars to give comfort and to aid and to assist individuals who have been sexually trafficked, and this administration is not allowing dollars to flow towards them because they refuse to do abortions. that is, in my opinion, an attack directly against the catholic churches values. the president of the united states -- i will tell you one thing. i will tell you one thing my department of justice will not be doing. it will not be going into

state's ensuing states for what they have the right to do. -- and suing states for what they have the sovereign right to do. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> she asked a question of what i would do to get congress to work together and the president to work together. for 11 years i have been the governor of the seven most populous state. there is a substantial -- second most populous state. there is a substantial number of democrats in our legislative body. i have experience getting men and women who do not always see eye to eye -- and you have got to be engaged. i mean, you have to be involved in the process on a regular basis.

of the six balanced budget i have signed, i know for a fact that there was not the time that myself, physically, or staff was not in meetings as we were going through the appropriations process. [laughter] there are two things you will not see me doing. you will not see me playing golf on sunday morning and you will not see me on a 19 day holiday in hawaii. [applause] >> i am confused. when obama became president, it seems to me he acquired quite a bit of debt to deal with.

can you tell me how much that was and where it came from? >> yes, ma'am. he inherited a bad situation. he just happened to make it a lot worse. [applause] the debt was from things like car, $800 billion to bail out wall street -- like tarp, $800 billion to bail out wall street banks. i know where you're going with this, and i appreciated. republicans for spending money like democrats. that is one of the problems. that is my point. that is the reason i make the statement, if you want to change washington,., be hard pressed te of these insiders who has been there for however many years they have been there. you need an outsider who will walk into washington, d.c., who has the courage to say we are

not going to keep going like this. palau your expensive veto pen -- pull out your expensive a veto pen. and at that point, you can say, that guy says -- does what he says he is going to do. >> what percentage of the debt is domestic? >> i cannot answer that, but i can tell you desk, are you better off today than you were $four trillion ago? >> this republican congress has been very frustrating. >> nobody has been more frustrated than i have. >> i do not understand that. i would like to see everybody worked together, and i do not see that. >> if working together is continuing to do what they have

done for the last 10 years, i am not for that. listen, i am for going in and overhauling washington, d.c. i'm for traveling all over this country and using whatever political capital unite -- you and i can put together to pass an amendment to the constitution. is this your daughter? her future not going to be as good as your future. are we going to go back with insiders or are we going to let somebody who actually has a record of balancing budgets, of creating an economic climate that is second to none anywhere in this country be the president of the united states and support that individual when they come to iowa to pass a balanced budget amendment and to pass a constitutional amendment that makes congress a part-time body.

i'm telling you, you cut their pay, cut their staff, cut their time in washington, d.c., allow them to have a job back here in the district where they are spending time with you and live under the laws that they pass, that will have as big an impact on washington, d.c. as anything we can do. i mean that, the sooner rather than later. last question, -- i need that coffee sooner rather than later. last question. >> the leading candidate right now is another legacy candidate, a politician's son. >> i do not know where you're going with this.

i do not know about that. go ahead, i did not mean to interrupt you. >> we had the bush dynasty, the clinton dynasty, and now the romney dynasty. can you bring something different than that? >> i have always been pro-life, pro-traditional marriage. i have always been a fiscal conservative. i have never been for global warming. but let me say, in defense of, i think public service is an honorable thing. i think men and women, whether you are serving on the police force, city council, mayor, a state representative, governor of the state, i think iowans were very, very wise to bring back an excellent governor in the form of terry branstad to

let him serve again and get this state back on track economically. i'm glad he gave me the opportunity to reflect my differences with mitt romney, but i do not have a problem with someone whose father was in the political arena as well. i think there is great honor. i think we need to always hold them accountable. that is where we as citizens really have -- that is you. that is you. that is all of us. we have to do this. if we want our country back. if we want our children's future to be one that we are proud for them to have, this election is what it is about. four more years of this president and his socialist view of this country, his nationalized or socialized

medicine, will destroy our country. i truly believe that with all my heart. if i did not, i would be sitting back in austin, texas, governing the state i love. but i care about this country. and doing our duty when we are called is what american is all about. you have been called. it is our time to take this country back. god bless you. thank you for coming out and being with us. have my back on tuesday and i'll have your back for the next four years in washington, d.c. [applause]

[inaudible]

[inaudible]

[inaudible]

[inaudible] deat

[inaudible]

>> thank you so much.

>> the repair campaign meeting cedar rapids troy, headed west to marshalltown iowa. we will also let you know about our coverage this evening. mitt romney will be in ames, iowa having a campaign rally

there. we will have that for you on c- span and c-span.org. the iowa caucuses on tuesday night. live coverage beginning at 7:00 eastern with a preview of how the caucus process works. two caucuses that night, one from central iowa, here on c- span, and another from western iowa, on c-span2. everything getting under way tuesday night at 7:00 eastern, here on c-span and c-span2. earlier today, in des moines, police arrested five individuals of the occupy movements outside the offices of ron paul after the republican party decided to tally the votes from the caucuses from the precincts at an undisclosed location, instead of that party headquarters. we were there earlier today

simulcasting the jan mickelson radio show. one of their guests, candidate michele bachmann. we have ron paul coming in later. we get the chance to talk to you this morning. she is proud that her family own a station wagon as a kid. >> it was huge. my dad loved it. it was a two-toned lime green 1959 station wagon. i do not think there is another one man like across the country.

we would drive up to my uncle's farm in minnesota. we would say, faster, faster. we were so excited. >> there is no statute of limitations with speeding tickets. >> i spoke to freely. >> you have been all over the place? >> yes, we are on our 99-county tour. last night, we were on our 93rd in boone county. we did a 11 counties yesterday. >> nobody could keep this schedule straight. you are all amazing. >> we will finish our final four counties today. it is one of the best decision we have made. it is taxing to do 10 counties a day, but we started the day after the sioux city debate. the next morning, we started our tour.

>> i have not heard of that one. >> it is not a chain, but it was packed to the gills. >> i have to get to the internal political stuff. your campaign is experiencing some turmoil. you lost one of your supporters, abandon ship to the ron paul campaign. what is going on with that? >> the ron paul campaign had contacted one of the people on our campaigned, alford -- offered them money to go to their campaign. he went, pure and simple.

>> kind of unusual, this late into the game? >> i would think so. it was a financial decision. >> three days left? goodness. >> he said it was a great deal of money, had to provide for his family. that was the decision that was made. >> you are referring to senator sorensen. the downside, he left it with brad zaun. >> [laughter] you remember the sioux city debate. that is where i went after ron paul on the issue of iran having a nuclear weapon. no question, there is a desperate difference between every candidate and ron paul. he is unwilling to stand up for the united states when it comes

to dealing with a nuclear iran. >> you guys were arguing over questions of fact, whether or not there was -- >> there was an iaea report issued in november that said iran was perilously close to having the technology for a nuclear weapon. i sit on the intelligence committee, we deal with the nation's classified secrets. i cannot talk about a lot of that. >> we have ways to make you talk. >> no, you don't. there is a clear report that iran is perilously close to having a nuclear weapon. ron paul was essentially denying that the report exists. then he said the report was not worth anything later. the whole point is, ron paul would be a dangerous precedent -- president for the united

states. he has frightening views on foreign policy. after that debate, it was like an electric lights which went on across iowa. we began our tour in that area. the next day, that was all people wanted to talk about. we had more people come out to our meetings than ever before. huge momentum. people were saying, i am switching to you to support for president, not ron paul. we have seen this for the last week and a half. people have been coming my way. the momentum shifted dramatically away from ron paul to my campaign. i think that is what led to this disruption in my campaign, where the calls were made and they hired somebody away. >> this is not just an academic question. even as we speak, iran is threatening to close the strait of hormuz.

>> they are doing military training exercises. >> they have threatened to shut it down and blockade. >> this is why this is so serious, for all of the listeners at who. when iran gains a nuclear weapon, if it happens, they will have the capacity to decide who the customers for oil will be, and what the price will be, and they will hold the world hostage. this is something that cannot happen. >> what do you think needs to be done? what are the action steps that michelle -- michele bachmann would take? >> we need to equip israel, sell them the refueling tankers they require, the jet fighter they require. >> feeling tankers for what? >> for the aircraft that is needed, to be able to go to war, if they need to, with iran.

israel is very vulnerable right now. iran has stated, unequivocally, once they obtain a nuclear weapon, they will use it to wipe israel off the face of the earth. just pause for a moment and think about what that would mean for the world, if we will cut and found out that a nation was the lager here, that it had been taken down by a nuclear weapon, our ally israel. imagine if they have that capacity and using that against the united states of america. this is not an academic question. the president in iran has stated, as recently as august of this year, and september, when he came to the un general assembly, that they would use a nuclear weapon against israel, that they needed to be eradicated from the face of the earth. if i was commander in chief, i

would not be willing to wait for an american city to be obliterated by a nuclear weapon, killing millions of americans, to respond to iran. that is what ron paul would do. he would wait until after we are attacked before responding. i would not. as commander in chief, i would do everything in my power to make sure that never happens. >> michele bachmann is here in the studio. we will continue the conversation during the break for our local callers. we have people joining us from all over the country. 800-469-4295 is our toll-free line. you are welcome to join us in a moment. >> my screens went down.

>> we are still able to communicate here. you cannot be the way you normally are, because of these people here with cameras and microphones. you have to guard your language. >> my screen went down. got it. >> i do not like to waste time. the c-span audience is participating as well. ross, can we take calls from listeners from c-span? we will do that. let's go to dallas. jonathan, good morning. what is on your mind? >> thank you for having me on, first of all. i want to congratulate michele bachmann for being the strongest female in the republican race, by far.

i think she is fantastic. ron paul is unelectable, with comments like we cannot build a fence on the border, because that would not keep people -- keep people from coming in, it would keep us from leaving. michele bachmann is up against not only the other candidates, but up against president obama, who has facebook, twitter, google, and youtube in its back pocket. i believe that helped him win the last election. no president should have the monopoly of those companies in their back pocket. not republican or democrat. i wanted to know what you think about that. >> i absolutely agree, jonathan. we have seen, whether it is the head of facebook or google, it is clear there is an alliance with the obama administration, as well as with nbc.

i think that is very concerning. we do want to have a separation between the media and an administration, whether republican or democrat. we know there is no such thing as a complete lack of bias in the media, but we would like to think there is some level of objectivity. this is a crucial race. in my opinion, this is america's last chance to regain our constitutional underpinnings and get us back on the right road. the reason i say that, this is the only chance we will have to get rid of obamacare. it is the law of the land today. socialized medicine is the law of the land. only a 34% approval rating. >> let me ask you about that. this is what propelled your first few months in the candidacy. this is why the tea party

initially latched on to you. you came out and said, obamacare was the number-one issue. 80% of the american public, when this was debated, said that we do not want this. ok. hang on. our listeners are joining us again in a moment. ♪ i was just asking michele bachmann about the fact that the initial part of her candidacy was propelled very much by the issue of obamacare, the potential for repeal. but the party adopted year earlier. the political class had thrust it on the american people, despite an 80% disapproval rating back then. other candidates came into the

race after that, and to some degree, your support has softened. we have been playing musical chairs in iowa with presidential candidates. to what degree does that issue -- when you go talk to people, you are still hiding in this morning. >> always. in our 99-county tour, finishing our last four today, in every single town hall meeting, people resonate with the issue of getting rid of obamacare. it is wildly unpopular. it is not just republicans. they do not want the united states to be the land of socialism. the crown jewel of socialism in any country is socialized medicine. government controls you when they control health care. we have got to get rid of this. we are dead broke. obamacare will cost us trillions of dollars that we do not have we already know what

will happen. 15-political appointee board that will be making all our decisions for us. president obama appoints 15 people to a board, and they will make the major health-care decisions. health care will never be the same again in the united states. i am not willing to see the united states, which has always been the premier nation in the world for health care, lose that. >> you are familiar with the lean 6 sigma stuff. candidates have invited people to sign onto those pledges. a texas consultant. newt gingrich has been highlighting this. did you sign the pledge as well? >> yes, it is called a strong america now. >> i think the only person that has not is mitt romney. yesterday, on this station, we

were talking with mitt romney. he said he did not know what it was. is that even remotely possible, as far as you are concerned? >> i do not know. i cannot go into his thoughts. >> he has been asked over and over to sign this. >> i know that our campaign was asked and we were happy to do it. i signed it in cedar rapids. i am a private businesswoman. i know, in my own company, if we did not continually change, continually improve, we would be out of business. that is the essence of this pledge. >> can that be applied to the federal government? >> as president of the united states, i intend to. without exception, we all recognize the federal government is bloated beyond any possible recognition. it has got to come down in size.

when you have a government that spends $3.70 trillion a year but only has $2.20 trillion in revenue, with a deficit of $1.50 trillion, that means you are broke. no business could act like that, no family could act like that. we have to pay this off. this is not monopoly money. the sad reality is, our kids in their 20's, and younger, are going to have to hold two, three jobs in the future just to keep this ship going. this will mean a reduced standard of living for the next generation. i am unwilling to do that. >> i know you are a tax attorney, expertise in tax policy. you have talked about this. you also have expertise on the immigration issue. one of your strong campaign points. i do not like to do this

normally, but i have been playing this sound bite to candidates to get their instant analysis. i will probably play this for ron paul has well. alan greenspan, a former fed chair, has written a book called "age of turbulence." he was talking about a policy on immigration. we usually talk about immigration, out of control stop on the southern border, illegals, low-skilled workers. in this case, he is talking about skilled workers, encouraging skilled labor to come into the country. i want you to hear why he wants this to occur. >> one of the most controversial things in the book is to augment immigration of skilled labor. we pay the highest skilled labor wages in the world.

we would open up our borders to skilled livermore then we do, we would attract a large quantity of skilled labor, which would suppress the level of the skilled. we are essentially subsidized by government, meaning our competition is being kept outside the country. but if we bring in workers to suppress the level of wages relative to a lesser scale, we will reduce the degree of inequality. >> they rejected government

intervention, as i do. what you heard with mr. greenspan is the same idea of having more government intervention. the geniuses in the elite circle who think they know best what wage levels should be -- think about that. we want to bring in more so we can bring the wages down. to benefit who? >> he said it would reduce the wage inequality. we are overpaying the educated class. >> we want to bring more people down. my thinking is the opposite. i want to bring wages up for everyone, at every level. in order to do that, my plan is the one that works. i would abolish the tax codes. i would reduce the rate for businesses and individuals so we are among the lowest in the in the astral world. i will have a field day getting rid of government regulation and what i'm going to do, probably

further than any other candidate, i want to dismantle the modern welfare state and end it. if we do that, we can get our budget to balance. we cannot balance our budgets with the modern welfare state we have today. >> let me give you a softball before the break. >> i have the best record on immigration than any other of the candidates. i will address the problem, truly, and make english the official language of the federal government, and i will go further and other candidates. i will also and anchor babies, giving automatic citizenship to babies that are here born illegally. >> you do not need to change the constitution to do that? >> the aborted lies with the congress and president. we are the only industrialized nation in the world that allows this. >> the 14th amendment is being used to grant automatic citizenship.

>> the courts are inventing that, saying that is what it means, but congress makes the laws. that is the separation of powers doctrine. people have the representation through the congress and president. the courts are not the people's representatives. they need to pass law, and it is enforced. >> jacob howard, during the senate debates, said, of course, this does not apply to the children of foreigners. >> very good, thank you. >> would you fire ben bernanke? >> yes, i would fire him. >> you are an austrian economist. up until this point, you and ron paul are on the same page. >> on economics, we are. ron paul would legalize heroin and cocaine. i would not a legalize drugs. i also believe strongly between -- in marriage between a man and

woman. he would not have protection for that. i also believe in the sanctity of human life from conception until natural death. ron paul would not overturn roe v wade. foreign policy, in my estimation, sitting on the intelligence committee, while the economy is the number-one issue, i am probably more worried about our vulnerability to foreign aggressors and any time in the last 40 years. we cannot have as our commander in chief someone on willing to take on foreign aggressors. >> we will be speaking with ron paul in the next hour. the litany of what you just spoke on, the argument would be made. i do not think he would agree with your assessment on roe versus wade. he says that it is not only the law of the land, but you do not need to go through a constitutional amendment to

overturn that did i have not read that chapter, but i agree, we should have legislation on personhood, protection of the individual. this is an area where the congress and president needs to take this area and reflect the people's values and a pull the sanctity of human life. >> we are going to break away on a local basis. we will continue the conversation, go to our phone lines. i am done with the some of my questions with michele bachmann. the rest of the time will be confined to phone calls. it will take us a second to get all of the switching necessary. all right. we are back live with our c-span audience. michele bachmann is in the studio with us.

let's talk with james. good morning, and james. >> thank you for taking my call. i appreciate it. first of all, i would like to address some of the things that she said. i was a friend with cindy mccain. i suggest michele bachmann to a greuel search for cindy mccain and u.s. liberty. israel is not an ally of america. it murdered marines in 1967. you are willing to overlook that. telling lies about ron paul. he is not going to put our country and risk. michele bachmann is a neocon is real supporter, willing to get us into world war iii with iran. you could go to my blog -- >> he is on a ron paul ran to their. address this any way you wish.

>> i believe israel is our ally, and we need to stand for them. that is part of the problem with president obama. he is the first president, since israel declared her sovereignty, to not stand with them. that led to the high in the aggression of the hostile neighbors surrounding israel. hence, the rise of radical islam in egypt, tunisia, libya. now we are seeing the imposition of sharia law in egypt, libya, tunisia. this is changing the course of history. we need a president understands international dynamics and will stand up for the united states. these addresses are not content to stay in their own backyard. they also see the united states as a false. some of the commentators have said it may be that the u.s. will find that one day what it is to be in israel's shoes in the middle east.

>> part of that was part of the conversation of the attacks on theuss liberty. gathering intelligence gues- ship. whether an act of war or not, it is a question mark. they later pay reparations for that and said, we screwed up. >> i stand by my claim. i believe ron paul would be a dangerous precedent for the united states. clearly, the number one threat today to international security is iran gaining a nuclear weapon. it is simply untrue. all you have to do is do a google search, and there is ample evidence of the president of iran stating, unequivocally, he seeks to eradicate israel, and will use a nuclear weapon against the united states of america. if there is anything that history has taught us, when a

mad man speaks, listen, pay attention, be smart. i will. >> texas, this is sean. >> good morning. how are you today? my question for michele bachmann is, about a year and a half ago, there was a question about rebuilding the electrical infrastructure of america. there was some stuff admitted a year and a half ago as well that would replace all of the existing electrical infrastructure in america, updated stuff underground, the natural gas grid at the same time, and the internet. put in place the infrastructure necessary for natural gas at the same time. and we would pay for it as we go. $5 per individual over the age of 18. the government would then match.

it puts everybody to work. what i wonder is, is this something you are aware of, something that is still on the table? >> we are going to rejoin the listening audience here before we answer that question. welcome back, radio listeners. we are in the studio with michele bachmann. we are also simulcasting with c- span. ron paul will be joining us. maybe another guest, we are not really sure. the fellow was just asking you about the possibility of developing many more infrastructure issues, including natural-gas and electricity, and internet grid. >> i am and all of the above energy person. i want less dependence on foreign sources of energy.

opec has a stranglehold on us now. i want us to have our own development. that is the gift that god has given us. we are the no. 1 energy-rich nation in the world. the problem is, the government has put our access under lock and key. we have more shale oil in three western states than all of saudi arabia. i am glad the caller brought up natural gas. one of the largest fines ever is in pennsylvania. now, the epa is trying to crack down on us being able to access natural gas. >> i have to go up thef-bomb here. >> frakking? >> yes, what do you think about that? >> we have trillions of cubic square feet. why not access it? i believe in all energy, as fuel -- as well as biofuel, wind.

let's use it all. it can be paid for through the private sector. the subsidy levels that are required by the federal government for some of these grids has to be looked at. after all, we are broke. we are terribly broke. >> wouldn't it be nice, upon hearing that iran plans to close the strait of hormuz -- >> yes, too bad, we are independent. why president obama wouldn't have an all-out effort of the brand mobilization of energy in the united states in the face of that is beyond me. we should be laughing at them. >> this is john. calling us from the people's republic of the windsor heights. >> thank you for taking my call. >> what do you want us to know? >> i would like to ask about

this can sorensen affair. i am reading a statement on the internet about her political director saying, i will not say much about the situation or conflicting statements beyond this. i can say unequivocally that ken was not's decision financially motivated. then he goes on to say, i cannot come in good conscience, watch a man like him be attacked as a sellout. can you reconcile those statements between you saying that ken sorensen took money and your political directors saying that he did not? >> i can tell you about the conversation i had directly with him -- [inaudible]

slipping away from ron paul. they were coming and decide to vote for michele bachmann. that was when the ron paul campaign offered a money, and that is when he said he was given a great deal of money, and that is why he left. >> thank you for your call. what you said previously about the fed, you would get rid of the current fellow? how about the fed itself? ron paul says he wants to abolish it. he has written a book called "abolished the fed." you share a similar economic point of view. is it time to get rid of the federal reserve as a system? >> that is a concept that should be evaluated and potentially put

into place. i am on the legislation for auditing the fed. i do not think it goes far enough. if you look at the enabling act that created the federal reserve, the scope of power that congress gave to the federal reserve is breathtaking. it was never before utilized until 2008. and then we started to see the fed utilize that our, that was always sitting there, it was just dormant. when they used it, it was at a scope we had never seen before. because of those extraordinary circumstances, i think a case could clearly be made to end the fed. >> the president wants another $1.20 trillion. are you going to give it to him? >> i was the one voice in congress last summer that said, do not let congress borrow any money. we are up to our ears in debt to china. that makes us a servant, where we are the debtor.

president obama is effectively putting us and our children into indentured servitude to china economically. i am unwilling to do that. we have to sober up and stop spending money that we do not have. i would absolutely refuse to do that. i would call all members of congress together to say we are not spending one more dime than what we take in. growing up in waterloo, iowa, my parents would not have considered spending more than what my dad brought home in his paycheck. what we need to do is get our house in order and say, we cannot afford these programs. we have to stop this. i will and the the department of education, the epa, interior department, a number of departments that i would close down. those functions simply need to go back to the states. >> jeff is joining us.

good morning. >> i understand the philosophy that some people have, wanting to be the world's policemen, preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon. it is a dangerous game because russia already warned us, if we attack iran, there would be serious consequences. i have a question for michele bachmann. i'm having trouble reconciling our policy with north korea compared to what you want to do with iran. you have an unstable government, with a nuclear weapon, they just launched test missions towards japan and hawaii, have attacked south korea twice and killed a bunch of people, and yet, people in the government are unwilling to do anything about that. can you help me decide -- would you attack or a career for what they have done, if you are willing to attack iran? >> this is not about attacking iran. it is about preventing them from

getting a nuclear weapon, because of the clear statements they are making about what they will do with that nuclear weapon. what would you have us do? we have to seriously consider this a real possibility. if iran has a nuclear weapon, they will use it to kill millions of people. >> i do not think the rest of the government is on board with ahmadinejad. >> let's understand who runs iran. it is the mullah's. they hold the power. ahmadinejad is the figure, but he is in sync with them. >> you are not talking about military action to stop iran, so what are you suggesting? >> i am talking about potential military action, putting everything on the table to make sure that does not happen. >> so what about north korea? >> north korea has not said that

they would use a nuclear weapon to wipe israel off the map. nor have they said that they would use it against an american city and killed millions of people. north korea is not a good actor. they are effectively the wal- mart of missile delivery systems, and they are for sale. that is what they're manufacturing business is. there is a new axis of evil that has emerged between north korea, pakistan, china, and iran. and with russia. russia has supplied the nuclear scientists to help iran game that nuclear weapon. the united states has only evidenced weakness under president obama. what is amazing, ron paul is to the left of president obama on this issue. that is why i say ron paul would be a very dangerous precedent to the united states, when it comes to -- president to the united

states, when it comes to that issue. >> that is a sweeping statement, to declare those countries as the new access of evil. that is what ronald reagan said about the cold war communist states. would that be reflective of a michele bachmann for a policy? the new axis of evil is those countries, including russia? >> yes, we need to understand where these aggressors are coming from. we need to take off our politically correct glasses and look at the world the way it is today, in reality. we need to look at that and recognize where our world vulnerabilities are, here in the united states. only a fool wishes for war. i would not put our troops in harm's way without a clear, identifiable, vital american

national interest. that was the problem with president obama in libya. there was no identifiable interest in libya. >> you left off a country, china. >> i thought i said china? china is definitely a part of that. >> a brief time out. michele bachmann is in the studio with us. we are simulcasting this morning with c-span. we will go to our phone lines during the break. ron paul will be joining us later in the break. you are free to join us as well. also, make the transition at the top of hour as quick as possible, too. to some oft's talk the listeners to run the country on our c-span 9. this is dan from grand rapids.

>> i have a question for michele bachmann. she mentioned obamacare, only 34% of the people agree with it. i think she needs to do some research on that. seniors are getting a heck of a break this year, and it is all coming in this year. she talks about socialized medicine. in essence, that is where we are, when you turn 65. medicare is socially run. the reason it costs so much, there are so many americans that do not have insurance at age 55, 56, and younger. by the time they get to 65 the have so many problems, it costs us taxpayers so much money. i believe we have to do something similar to obamacare, but they do not seem to have anything to replace it. the status quo, we would end up with 88 million americans

without insurance, and you and i would pay for that with insurance. >> today, it looks like the medicare system could collapse under president obama because it is running out of money and is broke. it will be broke effectively by 2017, according to the cbo, the hospital part b program. president obama's intention is that all americans, from cradle to grave, including senior citizens, would fold into obamacare. that is the federal government decided what our health care will be. i want to see americans have a choice in their health care. i want to have the very best health care they can. the real problem in health care is cost. president obama only made health care more expensive under obamacare. he said we would save $2,500 per household, and we have not. ♪ >> can thank you for your call. one last segment.

what defines you? what would you like listeners to know about you? how would you be defined, if you had your own dictionary? >> i am the most pro-growth candidate running for office. i am a real person, i have no interest in being a politician. i went to washington as a proven conservative, living in the real world. i went there as a fighter. i fought against obamacare, dodd-frank, the out of control spending. that is when nancy pelosi and president obama were in charge. i thought when i had a chance. i am not part of the establishment. i get what growth is because i have run a real business as a private businesswoman, and i understand the tax code. i know what needs to be done to grow the economy and create millions of jobs. of all the candidates in the race, i am the one with the result and backbone to do it.

plus, i am the most delectable. i have won four elections in the last five years in a state where no republican woman has ever run before. just like in 1980, we needed the most conservative candidate we could get in run right into defeat jimmy carter, and just like margaret thatcher won in a difficult race in britain, to become one britain needed at that time, to be the iron lady. i will stand on the stage with him, hold him accountable, and i will defeat him, just like i held ron paul accountable in the debate in sioux city. i will be the candidate who wins in 2012. >> did you just said you were the most electable? >> i did. i won four races in the last five years in the most difficult state you can be elected in. and i won the iowa straw poll. >> good morning, drew.

what is on your mind? >> i have three questions. we put saddam hussein into power in the first place. >> you are asking for a history lesson? >> i figure history is the most important thing to look at, our past is a big. who put saddam hussein in power? >> get to your question. so therefore -- >> we put him in power because of the iranian revolution. >> let me borrow your question. frankly, we sock at international relationships and foreign policy, -- >> that is why i should be the next president. no one has more per national security spirit and i have.

our next president will be tested almost immediately on foreign policy. our next president has to understand this issue. clearly, barack obama does not. >> would you agree that we are not very good at this? >> we can be a lot better. i believe i am the best of all the candidates to be able to conduct foreign policy. >> last few seconds. what would you like us to know more than anything else? >> i am the candidate that can be barack obama in this selection. when i go to the white house, i will do exactly what i say i will do. we need somebody who will not cave. that is why i need people to come out and vote january 3. iowa will be the cannon shot that would change the course of history for the better. >> we just heard from the nra spokesperson. >> i am great on that issue, too.

>> i did not know that you used cannons, too. >> lock and load. we will be going hunting in sioux city later. >> rick santorum admitted that he had to steal an orange sweatshirt from the department of transportation. did you bring your own? >> i will be bringing my own. i am a pretty good shot. i am a concealed permit and carry holder. i learned to hunt in i with what my dad. i went through gun safety when i was 12. i favored gun is the ar 15 because you can be so accurate. i scored better than even the men in my class. >> that is a combat weapon. it can be made automatic, but it is a semi-automatic 222.

>> i like being accurate. it is of great gun. >> and apparently lots of fire power and many shops. how big is your magazine? >> you really want to know? >> is it legal? >> of course it is. >> we are just about out of time. thank you for joining us. >> a thrill to be on who. >> how well do you have to do in iowa to win? >> we think we are going to do well, because of this 99-county tour. candidates are spending millions attacking each other on tv. we decided to go to iowa. we are clarifying who we are in the race. i winds are independent people. i know them. -- iowans are independent people.

>> i cannot explain it. it makes no sense. thank you for coming. >> thank you, jim. it was wonderful. >> for the c-span viewers, we are going to have to play musical chairs. that was really cool. we were not told up until this morning that c-span was going to be here. i did not know for sure. michele, welcome back, good to see you. >> we are always happy to be here. thank you. >> that is the morning guy. he is the boss. you are welcome anytime you want. >> lots of road to the white house coverage on c-span the head of the iowa caucuses tuesday. mitt romney this evening in his

campaign, unveiling 10 additional stops for the weekend, saturday through monday. we will have mitt romney for you at a rally today in ames, iowa. earlier today, at an event we covered with rick perry in cedar rapids, he talked about rick santorum, calling him a prolific the marker -- earmarker. here is what he had to say. >> i do not get confused, but sometimes there records do not always match their rhetoric. i got great respect for senator santorum. we stand on the stage, i pray for his daughter on a daily basis, his little girl. the fact is -- he is a good man -- but money talks about physical -- fiscal conservatism, i scratch my head. he is a prolific earmarker.

i love iowa pork, but i do not love washington pork. that is the problem. that is the one we have to watch out for. it will give you a stomach ache that will last for a long, long time. i was telling the crowd before, senator santorum, he loaded up he even voted for the alaska bridge to nowhere. that one i have a really hard time with people explaining to me why. he said in 2009, he said, i have a lot of earmarks. in fact, he said, i am very proud of all the earmarks i put into the legislation. he said i will defend my remarks. well senator, i'm calling you out. defender earmarks -- defend

your earmarks. i happen to think earmarks are the gateway drug to the spending problem we have in washington, d.c.. i happen to think that is what is wrong with washington, having this concept of earmarks, where you do not even debate them. you just take them on. as the president of the united states, i do not care if you are a democrat or republican, you send me a bill with earmarks, it is going to get vetoed. they are dead on arrival. washington, d.c. insiders are not going to be the ones to fix this country. they're the ones that broke this country. and they're not going to be the ones that fix it. it is going to take an outsider. >> rick perry today from earlier in iowa. making the same points in more

than $12.5 million in advertising that has been spent in advance of the iowa caucuses. in response to that, santorum's iowa boosters are accusing rick perry of desperation and hypocrisy. rick perry, rick santorum and michele bachmann are competing for the same pool of voters, a self-identified evangelical christians. mitt romney and ron paul are at 23% and 22%, respectively. in third place is rick santorum at 16%, with newt gingrich at 13%. rick perry also at 13%. in part of our "washington journal" coverage, we take a look at the caucuses.

>> we have the iowa arts council and the state historical society of iowa. we hold the state's interest in terms of the development of art history and culture across the state of iowa. it is important for us to ensure that we are not only raising awareness about what we do, but that we are educating the people of iowa. we have the arts council, but then we have the state historical society. we also have our museum here, our state preservation office, our archives and our records. it is a great opportunity for us to not only collect from the people of iowa, but also to say, will we take this opportunity to

educate the people of iowa. >> talk about the diversity that you used to teach the people of iowa. >> back in 1987, in december, the governor and others came together and said it was important that we have a museum to focus on i was history and that we needed to make sure we were collecting and preserving our history starting 25 years ago. as you can see from this over behind you, we have patten's neighborhood, the delicate balance, the bio history. we have an exhibit that just opened this past summer that looks at the history of electric railways in iowa. other uss iowa sterling silver -- it is being renovated as we speak and be moving to the port of l.a.

obviously, now it is timely and relevant, the caucus exhibit, which is getting most of the attention. >> this is part of a caucus series you are hosting. >> correct. this was built four years ago. we want to update, to make sure it is relevant and did not just cut off in 2008. we wanted to show what happened in the past four years. also we have held a speaker series to ensure we were able to raise awareness, to make sure people were engaged and able to have an opportunity to come here. folks like mark halprin -- talking about the history of iowa and our role in the process and how important it is as we continue to take our role seriously and not take it for granted, and you can see sometimes we are in the cross hairs of why iowa should not remain first.

--it is they're consistent is there consistency of years? >> the media, a lot of time they will call their respective state parties and even call us to say you have background or videos of jimmy carter or 1982? what is great is i always encourage the media to come in here because really it is a one-stop shop to get a real overview of the caucuses. but we can also provide the elements of research, articles, in addition to obviously other newspapers. we help collect them from all over the state. >> if you look on the outside it is deceiving -- because inside, it is quite large. >> this building -- we are in the east village, downtown des moines, which was pretty one down 25 years ago and it had been restored and revitalized. the east village is actually

rising. you will drive down locust and grant and seeing media doing the stand up because the capitol is to the east of the building. we are part of the capitol flights and are looking to have a visitors center where people would come to the state historical museum first, get a view, and then walk up, not to the capitol, but this building is important not just for downtown but for iowa in general, how to educate iowans, not only the past and present, but their future. >> what have you learned? >> still so much. >> back in baltimore in tomorrow with more washington journal coverage for you -- back in des moines tomorrow with more "washington journal" coverage

for you. we will talk about the demographics of iowa caucus goers. it all gets underway tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern. coming up this evening, more live coverage from iowa, mitt romney campaign. we will have that live on c- span and also streaming live at c-span.org and on c-span radio. ron paul held a salute to veterans campaign rally last night. this is an hour and a half. >> good evening. i want to cross is all for being here this evening. i want to thank the ron paul campaign for inviting me to speak before you because this is indeed an honor. most importantly, i want to salute every military veteran here this evening who is presently wearing the uniform of the united states of america or

who has warned that uniform in the past in defense of our constitution. you deserve to be honored. veterans, we salute you. give them a hand. [applause] we thank you. although this gathering is made up of veterans and non veterans alike, i would like to speak to the veterans first. as a veteran, we have all sworn

an oath before god and man to protect this country's constitution. notice in the oath of enlistment, i do solemnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic, that i i will obey the orders of the will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that president of the united states and the orders of the officers over me according to regulations and the uniform code of military justice, so help me god. i first swore that goes back in 1976 to support and defend the constitution of the united states. like you, i have kept my toes. last year, i was sworn in as an iowa rep, and the oath i took

was as follows. i do solemnly swear that i will support the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of iowa, and i will faithfully discharge the duties of representatives according to the best of my ability. notice again in the both, i will support the constitution of the united states. i'm keeping that both. but there is another man whom we all know who has faith police warned the military oath and -- faith police warned the military oath and -- faithfully

sworn the military oath and kept it and the oath of a congressman of the united states and he has kept it all so as well. he has sworn the following oath many times. i do solemnly swear that i will the support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that i take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office i am about to enter, so help me god." ron paul has proven that he can be trusted to keep his both in office. -- keep his both -- oath in office. [cheers and applause] he has sworn numerous times to support and defend the constitution of the united states. here is my point, veterans. why would you or i'd be willing to put our very lives and limbs all -- our very lives and limbs on the lineto protect and defend

the constitution of the united states and then, at the same time, be willing to support a candidate for president who has not demonstrated that same level of faithfulness, commitment, or fidelity to the same? the answer is you would not. that, ladies and gentlemen, is why we support ron paul. because he supports the constitution. [cheers and applause] he supports the constitution. that is why, come another january 20, 2013, i want to be present when he takes another oath -- "i declare that i will support the constitution of the united states, so help me god."

-- i declare that i will faithfully executed my responsibilities of president of the united states, and then i will support the constitution of the united states, so help me god." [cheers and applause] that is what we want to hear. that is what we want to see. and with god's help, that is what we will make happen. thank you. god bless you. and go ron paul! >> all right. thank you, the honorable glenn massey. he is a close friend of mine and i love saying that. now we will sing two songs, one being due to me and to all of -- der to me -- dear to me and all

of you. two verses, verse one of "america the beautiful." ♪ oh, beautiful for spacious skies ♪ for amber waves of grain ♪ for purple mountains majesty ♪ above the fruited plain ♪ america, america ♪ god shed his grace on the ♪ and crown thy good with brotherhood ♪ from sea to shining sea

♪ o beautiful for heroes proved ♪ in liberating strife ♪ who more than sell for their country loved ♪ and mercy more than life ♪ america, america ♪ may god thy gold refine ♪ till all success be nobleness ♪ and every gain devine [cheers and applause]

>> at this time, i have the distinct privilege of introducing to you someone>> he has had a tremendous -- someone who has had a tremendous impact on state government and the legislative process and standing for truth, standing for the constitution, and standing for the principles of the people -- that the people indeed govern themselves through their elected representatives. at this time, i would like to introduce to you senator kent sorenson who has a special endorsement that he would like to share with you tonight. >> tonight is a little tough for me.

i have been serving as michele bachmann's state chair for the last year. michele bachmann has been fighting dearly for my values. but i believe we are at a turning point in this campaign. i believe we have the opportunity to elect a conservative. when the republican establishment will be coming after him over the next few days, i felt it was my duty to come to the debate. -- come to his aid. -- [cheers and applause] just like he came to my aid during my race, which was a very nasty race. it is difficult, but it is the right thing to do because he fights for the values that i hold dear as well. i just want to tell you guys that i will do everything i can in the next few days to help in iowa and beyond. we will take ron paul all the

way to the white house in 2012. [cheers and applause] >> we were fighting what was called the viet cong -- >> we went hand-in-hand -- >> nine out of 56 came back in that whole year. that is hard to take. >> with 75 killed, 115 wounded. >> we had never been thanked for our service, never. >> ron paul got my medals and

presented them to me. that was an awesome feeling. >> they get the medal that they finally deserve >> ron paul is a veterans best friend. >> that will always be there. >> i am ron paul and i approved this message. [cheers and applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, with your help and our work, the next president of united states ron paul! [cheers and applause]

>> thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you for coming. thank you. it sounds like we are getting close to an election. [applause] thank you very much for being here. i want to thank all the veterans your on the stage and all the veterans who are here and those who have come. i want to introduce you to to family members here. i have two granddaughters with me, lisa and linda. they are sisters. [cheers and applause]

i also want to thank kant's sorensen for stopping by. that was very nice, was it not? [cheers and applause] this is a wonderful evening because we will emphasize our national defense, our veterans, and our military, which is, of course, very important. as has been said, the constitution is a rather important document and that we should uphold it. [applause] the constitution is very clear. the constitution is very clear on what the responsibilities are at the federal level. the defense is a vital function of the government. [yelling and screaming]

[applause] [inaudible] [yelling and screaming] >> there are a lot of problems. the problems are manifested by a lot of people being upset in this country. we are all upset and we want to change it in washington. as a matter of fact, that is what our purpose is. >> i am a veteran, too!

[screaming] >> if we get the diagnosis right, i will get the treatment right. right now, most people in this country know that there is seriously wrong. there's something seriously wrong with our foreign policy. [screaming] >> i am a veteran. my husband is a veteran. my father is a veteran. >> of course, we all know that there is something seriously wrong with our monetary system and with our federal reserve system. [cheers and applause] the best way to boil down the crisis that we face is the debt crisis. we are in too much debt. it is unsustainable. our productivity is going down. special interests have

benefited. wall street gets bailed out and the debt is dumped on the people and that needs to be reversed. let me tell you. [cheers and applause] but we are in this trouble because we have not followed the rule of law. the rule of law is the constitutional. article 88 tells us exactly what -- article 1 of section 8 tells us exactly what we are allowed to do. we are not allowed to do anything that is not explicitly given to us in the constitution. [cheers and applause] as a matter of fact, the constitution is mainly a document of prohibitions against the federal government entered -- in treating into our lives and in treating -- intruding into our lives and

intruding and our economic condition. there is no authority in the constitution to become the policeman of the world. [cheers and applause] and although there is clear evidence that we should have a strong national defense, which is a vital function of the federal government, we also know that, if you do not take care of financial affairs at home, the problems that we can get from the problems we are seeing today magnified. -- from the problems overseas magnify. we have to maintain a healthy economy every bit as much as we have to have a strong national defense. [cheers and applause] one of the reasons we have gotten into trouble overseas has been that we have not followed the rules. it has been a long time since

this country declared war. the last time we did it come after we were attacked and properly so, we attacked both japan and germany. guess what. it was declared by the congress and supported by the people. it was over in approximately four years. we had proper authority and we were together. since that time, we have not done it. i maintain that a president should never take a country to war unless there is a declaration of war. [cheers and applause] for many years, young men and women have been called to service. some of us have been drafted.

others have joined with the purpose of providing defense for this country. but because so many of our young people have in the past and currently joined to defend this country, they can become disillusioned if they find out that the fighting and killing and the spending of the money does not provide national defence that we are not under threat. sometimes we go looking for trouble and put our troops in harm's way unnecessarily. [cheers and applause] and because our country is literally bankrupt, we cannot pay our bills and we have to keep borrowing, we keep spending, which keep printing money, and we cannot maintain this presence around the world. therefore, we cannot even afford to take care people back home. my suggestion is to look at our foreign policy and question whether or not we should be in 130 countries and have 900 bases.

i say that is way too many and it is time to come home from many of those places. [cheers and applause] too often, when we have been called to duty and so many of us have gone, coming back home has not always been the best of receptions. as both a physician and a congressman and having been in the military, i have to deal with a lot of veterans problems. it is very, very frustrating because, so often, veterans are shunned. they do not get the treatment they really desert and the money is being wasted elsewhere. [cheers and applause] it took a long time for the

victims of agent orange in the vietnam war to finally get their treatment. persian gulf war syndrome. even today, we are currently suffering from the abuse of our veterans when they come home. hundreds of thousands are looking for help. i had a young man the other day who just got out of the military. he was sad and despondent about fellow soldiers who were killed when he was over in iraq. but he says, if you notice happening now? some of my buddies are committing suicide. it is like an epidemic. something is terribly wrong with the system where it ends up so tragically and the help is not available. i believe that it is related to our foreign policy. foreign policy should dictate how we go to war. we should obey the constitution. go very sparingly.

and we should go to preserve the peace and prosperity and the safety of this country, but not to go looking for trouble in different places of the world. [cheers and applause] we have had a foreign policy that does not make a whole lot of sense. we go around and find a from the -- find a friendly dictator and we say that our national security is best if we prop of this dictator. we have done it numerous times and we give him a lot of money. then it goes badly and he changes his mind and we have a fight. and then there are other countries that do not want to cooperate with us and we go ahead and use weapons and destroy their countries. so we have enforcer money. -- so we either use force or money.

there has to be another option. how about talking to them once in awhile instead of using force and intimidation? i was called to duty, called to service in 1962 during the missile crisis in cuba. that was resolved rather quickly, but then i was in the air force five years later. i did not go to vietnam, but it was during that time. the french were there and the decade that the americans were in vietnam, how many people were killed? maybe 1 million vietnamese, tens of thousands of french soldiers, and then 60,000 americans? then we had to leave after all of this money and waste. what did that usher in economically? we can have guns and butter at the time was said. then they give us the 1960's,

which was a very bad time. but the argument for us to go there was not to go to congress whether or not we should declare war. the argument was, if we do not go there and stop communism from growing over there, there will be a domino effect and the whole region would turn communist. it turned out that, if we had walked away from there, china had become less communistic when we left. they became capitalistic in many ways. and now they are our banker. so what has happened in vietnam? has it gotten worse? have they gone communist? no. they have become westernize. they liked what we were doing. they started trading and interleaving with us. we travel there. we invested there. they come here. just think what has been achieved between our two countries in peace and what was not achieved in war and waste.

we need to look at that. [applause] a strong america is necessary. a strong america will give us a much better chance for peace. but also, what we need is we also have to have prosperity as well. so that is why is economic conditions are imported. -- important. that is the big problem we are facing. even if somebody would say, no, we cannot cut a nickel out of the military budget, just remember that the military budget is different than the defense budget. the military budget is the money that all of the military- industrial complex ones. but the leaders of both parties are not interested in cutting one nickel out of overseas expenditures.

most of them want to increase it. and they are furious if you do not meet the automatic increases. my suggestion is that we have problems here at home. we're spending too much money overseas. we are getting into much trouble. our obligation is to take care of the people at home and long time before we are to be the policeman of the world. [cheers and applause] so this means cut spending by $1 trillion in the first year. [cheers and applause] this would take some change in attitude. like i said, we have to have a change in foreign policy, not

sacrifice one penny for defense, but stop spending so much money overseas. that should be a lot easier for we, the people, to come together, both liberals, moderates, and conservatives if they want to concentrate on taking care of america. why can we not come together and stop the spending overseas? i would think that is the easiest place to cut spending. so half the spending i'm proposing in the first year would come from overseas spending. [applause] but it would mean that we would bring the troops home. we would bring them home from korea and japan and germany. [cheers and applause] there may well be an immediate economic benefit by all of the salaries and wages of the military spending their money here at home instead of germany

and japan. [cheers and applause] but that still would not be enough cutting. you'd have to cut some more. so i think five departments can be cut. then go back on the budget levels of 2006. government was not like to small in 2006. if you go back 2006, the budget would be balanced. the only reason this does not happen is because people in washington are in denial. they do not think there is a spending problem today. the president announced that he will ask congress to raise the national debt by $1.20 trillion. [booing] absolutely not. but it was the congress to have

this resolution, when they created this super committee that would solve all our problems. they may deal with the president. this is the way it works. the president goes to the congress and says i need to raise the national debt by $1.20 trillion. if congress does not do anything -- if congress does not reject the request, in 15 days, it becomes law. it is automatic. he will ask for this increase while they are on christmas vacation. so the debt will go up automatically. they are on autopilot. believe me, this economy will not sustain it much longer. this is a worldwide phenomenon. it is a dollar phenomenon. it is a monetary phenomenon and it is intertwined. we are very much engaged right

now in bailing out europe. we're doing this through the federal reserve. the federal reserve does not even get audited. until we get rid of the federal reserve, we ought to know what they're doing. [cheers and applause] [chanting] we are approaching a crisis time, economically speaking and politically speaking. our liberties are a threat. not by outside invaders.

we have the strongest military. we have done a great job militarily. but we have also taken an oath of that we should aware of enemies both foreign and domestic and we have a lot of freedoms under threat right now. we are at a crossroads and we need to make a decision. this is a decision that the founders had to make because they got sick and tired of a king. they got sick and tired of taxes and their people being put in jail. and we need to make a decision once again -- what should the role of government be? the founders wrote the constitution and said that the role of the federal government would be very minimal. right now, the federal government is very, very large. that means that every power and authority that the government gets undermined your personal liberty. the goal in all political action, from my viewpoint,

should be the promotion and preservation of individual liberty. [cheers and applause] if our military has been so successful and we do not have to worry about anybody invading us, then what are our concerns? to me, it is the economy and the way we have live beyond our means and the way we have become careless with our liberties. we allow our government to do too much. we had a major crisis, a major event that was so terrible for us to withstand. that happened on 9/11. 9/11 was a very bad episode and a lot had to be done. but we did not do exactly the right things at the right time.

for instance, one of the first things they did within days before they decided who did what and where do we go, they passed a long piece of legislation that had been floating around for years and they show a bit on the -- shoved it on the floor. within an hour, it was passed and no one had time to read it. that was the patriot act and that the boy your fourth -- took away your fourth amendment rights. we do not need the patriot act. [cheers and applause] and, of course, just recently, we have had some other changes. as a matter of fact, earlier this year, the president announced a policy change. he said that it was proper for

him to have the authority to assassinate an american citizen, even if they have not been charged with anything, if he thought it was necessary. [booing] of course, the person they picked out was probably a very bad guy, but he was never charged with anything, never had a trial. look principle is that the president is very, very dangerous. the following week, they said that his son looks like a sheet -- shady character, too. they sent another missile over to get his son. they got him, plus his cousin. they were in the backyard barbecuing. kill them both. the sun was 16 years old. this is not the way america is

supposed to be. we are supposed to be a nation of laws, the rule law. [cheers and applause] in one sense, when we go into the military, we take the oath and fight and endanger ourselves to protect our constitution. at the same time, our constitution is being eroded here at home. two weeks ago, the national defense authorization act has in it -- i am always impressed that so many people know about it appeared that means we have a healthy society and the internet is working. [cheers and applause] that bill essentially eliminates -- it institutionalizes military law. the military can arrest an

american citizen for no reason. -- can arrest an american citizen without charges, can be denied an attorney and held in a foreign prison. fortunately, we are able to get some information out. a lot of what we have done in our campaign makes use of the internet. also, there is an attack on the internet right now. they are opening of the doors to know everything you do and to measure everything you do to protect you from yourselves. government cannot protect you from yourself and they do not need to be taking over the internet either. [cheers and applause]

all of these things are done to take away the fourth amendment -- they call that the patriot act. for the internet, is the stock online piracy act. when the patriot act was being voted on, i sat next to someone who was voting for it and i was voting against it. [cheers and applause] i said to him, why are you voting for this? you haven't even had a chance to read what is in it. >> i know that. >> why will you vote for it? he said, well, the conditions are that we just had this attack and people want us to do something. and it is called a patriot act. how can i vote against the patriot act. what do i do if i have to go home and explain it to them?

but that is your job. go home and explain it to them. [cheers and applause] we will have to make a decision really soon, whether it is six months or two years, i do not know, but really soon. we cannot tell when these events will come. austrian economics fully understood that there was a housing bubble. we knew there was an asset bubble. so there are certain events that are coming that will happen. they will be very dangerous. but they may come in a day or a week or a year. but the foundation of the system has been eroded. so the collapsing of the system -- the financial system is on shaky legs. the militarism that we have overseas is very shaky because there are plans right now to

spread into syria and how soon can we start bombing iran? that is very precarious. so we now have a system where our personal liberties are not being protected and there could be problems in the street. we have had some indication that people are speaking out and they have every right to and they should, whether it is the tea party movement are the occupy movement. they're desperate because they are dissatisfied with the government and they're looking for answers. but we have to work our way out of this and respect to the honor and rule of law and respect individuals and protect everybody, not just certain people from all of these crimes. [applause] i talked a lot about the war's going on overseas. i did my best to try to stop

them. i remember the first speech to give on the house floor about trying to stop something in iraq. it did not happen in 2001 or 2000. it happened in 1998. that is when they passed a bill that it is now our policy to have regime change in iraq and it would lead to war. we know what they're trying to do and we have to work our way out of it. that is why i want work on spending. but i want to take care of the people who have become so dependent on government. you take the elderly, on social security, but we cannot honor that contract if we keep spending that money overseas. so i would take care of those people on medicaid and medicare and the people at home on social security. but you cannot do it the way we are doing it today. if we continue like today, you'll have runaway inflation and an economic calamity. you will have violence in the

streets and that will be very dangerous. we are not immune from that. we have let something very wonderful slip away from us, something that we have all benefited by. you and i and our families and for years -- even today, we still have a lot of apparent wealth. but our wealth today is all based on debt. if all the bills had to be paid, there would not be much wealth. what if we had to pay $3 trillion to the chinese? you cannot have it based on debt. but what has happened is we had a great constitution, we have maximum freedom, we had a continent that was special with a lot of natural resources protected by the oceans, and we got soft. we had so much wealth then as a people. we concentrated more on the wealth rather than our liberties.

and now our liberties are slipping away and our wealth will as well. when you do not have true liberty, your wealth cannot last. i do my share of criticizing the president. i have already done that this evening once. it was not this administration. it was not just the previous administration. it has been decades of bad economic ideas and bad foreign policy and bad monetary policy. that is where the problem is. [cheers and applause] this system bred the interest in government being taken over by the special interests. you would do much better by having a high-paid lobbyist that producing a product. producing products became more difficult because over-taxation and over-regulation of the

monetary system. we have chased our businesses away. it became such that lobbyists in washington became the most important thing. medical reforms, new legislation, republican or democrat -- guess who gets involved? it is the lobbyists of insurance companies. people are not represented. they might tell you that. but you are not really represented. in a free society, you do not have the government involved. it works differently. look at this effort to give everybody a house? now everybody got a house and ended up losing a house. what about the government taking over education? they have done that for many years. i do not think that is a good idea. we should not have the department of education. [cheers and applause]

but the results have not been good because we became more dependent on the government and the government would take care of us and provide for us. in the old days, like when i was in college and medical school, i was able to work my way through school and it was not so expensive. but today, how difficult it is. it is so expensive and it is hard to get a job. so the enticement is to become an indentured servant to the government, borrow the money, and owe the government money for years and not be able to train for menial jobs. -- and not be able to train for the technical jobs. there are lots of jobs available today, but they are technical jobs. our current students zero more owe more money more than

their credit cards. it is a failed system. people are giving up. i think it is a healthy attitude. do not depend on the government. the government is supposed to protect us and give us our freedom and let us take care of ourselves and not be dependent on the government. [cheers and applause] there is one other war that i wanted to mention that i think has been detrimental to our liberties. it is a war near home. we have a problem on our southern border. i know that is a long way off from iowa. but we have a problem on the borders. in the last five years, it is estimated that 45,000 individuals, probably mostly mexican, have been killed on the border. so there is a border war going on down there. but here we are spending hundreds of billions of dollar losing our troops are trying to decide where the boundary line is between afghanistan and pakistan. i think we should be more concerned about our own borders here at home.

[cheers and applause] but the war that we have on our southern border is complex. we have the issue of illegal immigration. my argument on illegal immigration, if you did not subsidize it, you would not have so much of it. -- you have a lot less of it. the war on drugs has been very detrimental to our personal liberties as an excuse to invade our privacy and due to the many things that are unnecessary and it does not solve the problem. [cheers and applause]

before 1914, there were no federal rules or regulations on drugs. the real war came up in the 1970's. we spent a couple trillion dollars on the war on drugs and there are still a lot of people using the drugs. and a lot of times, they are using prescription drugs, more so than the illegal ones. but prohibition of alcohol did not work. there is something we should think about on this. if it is not working, why are we doing this? the one basic principle is that alcohol is a very deadly drug. if a person becomes an alcoholic and asks for help, we show a little empathy and treat them as a patient. we have centers where they go to. but if someone is caught using a drug that they have made illegal arbitrarily, you become a criminal.

maybe it is because i am a physician, but i like to think of the drug problem more as a medical problem than throwing people in prison for using it. [cheers and applause] freedom is a wonderful experiment. it has not been tried all that much. most of history has been run by tyrants, dictators, and kings and pharaohs, and even, today, i fear that our government is becoming more tyrannical. we do not have property rights and they do not need search warrants to come into our houses. we are losing a whole lot. but freedom to me is so wonderful because people use freedom in different ways. you do not have to decide what your religion are. there was a time when the

government decided the major religion. but we do not believe in a theocracy. we should not be domineering. people understand this pretty well. you can pick and choose your religion. you can pick and choose your intellectual material. but so often, what we have done is that anything we want to put in our mouth, the government has to give us permission. if we are expected to deal with this, what army raising it for our own bodies and making our own decisions? the encouraging part is that a lot of people are excited about some of the things we are talking about, where america went wrong, and the greatness of our constitution.

we do not have to give up our defense. for you to be safe, you do not have to give up your liberties. that is nonsense. you do not have to give up any liberties to be safe. [cheers and applause] the other warning is that you are going to have to sacrifice. if i can wave my wand and i give you back your liberties, your life is your own, they give you back your freedom to act as you choose, why is that a sacrifice? that is not a sacrifice.

that is what you need. there is a lot of excitement going on. i hope everyone comes out and votes. as important as the election is and what we dealt with, and i have been doing this for a long time, interest is growing because we need some answers. this is something that is an intellectual fight. we have to know what we want. we have to be convinced that freedom works. we have to be convinced that we cannot depend on others. we have no right to tell other people what to do. if we use that golden rule, we

ought to know how to use it on international relationships. if we do not want other countries doing anything to us, we should not do it to them either. because of the crisis that we are facing, there is a lot of independent thinking. people consider themselves belonging to parties. one area is the students. they know what liberty is all about. that is what they want. then there is another group. sometimes i forget about them. some people of a older age

remember what it was like to have more personal freedom and responsibility. some of them have been about and have dropped out. they have not been interested. they have been stung too many times. there is always a prominent in society no matter how bad the society is. just think how bad it was in communism. they were parts of the remnant that held the truth together. [applause] there is a large number of people coming out of the woodwork. they say maybe we see a chance of a real change. it is galvanizing. it is getting exciting. i do not think it will be easy.

if we do not put our minds to it and work our way out of this, and we do things like this, it is worth the fight. that would be very bad. that is what i am here. it we do not need the status quo. we need to restore the greatness of america freedom and the wonderful country that we live in. thank you very much. [applause]

>> my hero. and i hope he is yours as well. [inaudible] start in front of the podium, platform. start here. work this way. we will give you the opportunity to have a photograph. >> that is it. thank you.

it is a scary time. you are our only hope.

[inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] >> the race is tightening, according to polls. next tuesday is the iowa caucus. with the iowa caucuses next tuesday, january 3, our cameras are following candidates and events throughout the state. every morning, political guests are taking your calls on howard "washington journal," program.

we have new features, like candidates on the campaign trail, candidates on the issues, which led to see what they have said. at social media buzz, hear what the candidates and people like you are saying on web sites like facebook and twitter. coming up this evening, our road to the white house coverage leading up to the iowa caucuses continues. we will have live coverage in ames, iowa, on c-span radio. later events from earlier today starting at 8:00 eastern. rick perry in cedar rapids. after that, michele bachmann on the radio in des moines, iowa. and more from ron paul, on the radio, from earlier today.

>> with the iowa caucuses next week and the new hampshire, florida, and south carolina primary later in the month, "the contenders," looks back candidates that ran for president and lost, but had a long time affect on the presidential campaign process. "the contenders," every night at 10:00 eastern on c-span. >> a look at the moines, iowa, as the gallup poll this afternoon releases its latest results, with mitt romney edging ahead of newt gingrich. ron paul, the right, at a deep third place. -- they are writing, at a deep third place.

coming up, more on the michele bachmann campaign from this morning's "washington journal." host: now, live from iowa, the state capitol is on the screen. that is des moines, and the state capitol is in downtown. and we have our temporary studio. and that is alice stewart on your screen, communications director for michele bachmann for president. and she is our guest for the next 40 minutes or so here on the "washington journal." i want to start with the story that is in all the papers this morning and all the political websites, bachmann's iowa chairman jumps to paul. sorenson, who was working for your boss, is now jumping over to ron paul. why is that? guest: obviously, you certainly would have to ask him that. first of all, thank you for having me on. i look forward to speaking with you. you would have to ask ken for his reason for jumping ship. we found out last night. it was very disappointing. he campaigned for us until yesterday afternoon and shortly

after that event he went across town to a ron paul event and announced he was joining the team. we are disappointed but quickly we announced that a very well respected state senator who has been campaigning vigorously for us for several months is our new state chair and we are excited to have him on. kent had indicated to michele in the past two days he was offered a large sum of money from the ron paul campaign to change his alliances, and he did, and we certainly wish him well but we are moving forward. we are campaigning hard across the state. and this is certainly not going to slow us down at all. if anything, we are thrilled to have brad on board. to bring us to victory on tuesday. host: where is michele bachmann campaigning today? guest: today we are going to be all over the state. we are going to start off the day here in des moines, she will be on the jan mickelson show, and i believe c-span will be covering that.

we will wrap up the 99-county tour that we have been doing for 11 days and i can assure you, it has been exhausting and very exhilarating. michele is from iowa. and she wanted to make sure that in this last push to the caucuses that she had the opportunity to meet as many people as she possibly could. and we started this out, as i said, a little over 11 days ago and we hit every single county in the state. last night, around 10:00, we have gone through 94 of the counties. we have 5 more today. coffeeshops and diners and bowling alleys and pizza ranches across the state. but the great thing about this is michele has been able to connect with the people and visit with them and talk to them and listen to them. i have seen all the candidates out on the trail and she is the best retail politician we have in this race because she likes

to hear from the people, she likes to know what they have to say about the issues. she enjoys connecting with them. she wants to hear what they have to say about the issues on their mind, what they talk about at the breakfast table. and she listens and she takes it to heart. a lot of times she makes decisions on issues based on love pulse of the people in iowa and, like a set, she does a better than anyone and look forward to finishing up the 99- kantor and we will hit several other city -- cities as we work our way through the caucuses. host: we want to put our phone numbers up on the screen. our usual division. we will put those up in just a minute. but on top of that, we set aside our fourth line for iowa residents -- alice stewart, 1774 precincts will be holding caucuses on tuesday. how do you organize for that? guest: it takes a lot of planning and groundwork.

fortunately for our campaign, we started out before the straw poll with less time and resources than any of the other candidates and started building a ground game. the show, as you know, went on to win on the straw poll. we started a great ground game and build an organization and build on that sent the straw poll in august. we have precinct captains across the state, county chairmen in virtually every county in the state. that is no small task, i can assure you. but the county chairman of the precinct captains are going through and assigning people to different caucus sites. michele herself will speak at a caucus in her hometown of waterloo, iowa. we will have several other family members going across the

state and speaking at caucuses, and surrogates will be speaking. getting out there and meeting with the people. because the great thing about the caucasus is it is a last- minute opportunity to hear about the candidates. as you travel the state as we have over the past several weeks, virtually 45% of the electorate is still undecided. they see what is on tv and they read the paper and a year the polls and they make up their own mind after having met the candidates themselves for being a family member or a surrogate looking at how the stand on positions. and often people go into the caucus meeting themselves without making their mind up. it is critical we have the right people on caucus night to go and share michele's message of being a consistent conservative, the only consistent conservative we have on this race in terms of the social issues, on life, and

marriage, faith, family, and certainly on economic issues. she has fought hard in washington to appeal obamacare. she stood up against tarp, stood strong on fiscal issues to turn the economy around. these are the kinds of issues we will share with the electorate on caucus night and it will make the decision she is the one who best represents the views and values of people here in iowa. host: polls have her not in the top 3 or 4. she won the iowa straw poll last august, but what is it going to take -- what are you going to consider to be a win? guest: we certainly would expect to launch out of iowa with a first-place winner, that is what we are shooting for. nobody expected us to win the straw poll and she won, with less resources and time than any other candidate. she worked extremely hard to go out and meet the people. the people of iowa take their voting extremely seriously and they are not swayed by the polls and pundits.

they met -- make up their own minds. as we have gone through the process, the betting process, of the campaign, it has been tremendous for them to vet the candidates and as they peel back the layers of other candidates and michele, they will say that she is the one who represents their views and values. she has gone out and it showed the contrast, whether at a debate, a town hall, her media appearances, she shows a contrast between herself and other candidates and the people of iowa are responding well. we had tremendous turnout in extremely small towns in iowa, those who had 300 people -- we had tremendous turnout all hours of the day and night on our 99-county tour and many of us have come to our event undecided and as michele has shared her message and explain to voters where she stood on issues, they say they will go to the caucuses and the vote for her. we are encouraged by this tour where we have been able to connect to the people, and we do expect as the people we meet

today and over the next several days, that they will see michele, where she is on the issues, and we expect to come to the caucuses and give her their support. host: yesterday, alice stewart, bob vander plaats of the family leader was on the program any talk about the fact that the evangelical vote was split. >> as i said, we are not going to talk down any candidate. they all have a lot of assets to bring to the table. they are all people we could galvanize around. but the advantage for mitt romney is these votes will be fragmented and he will be able to come out of the state of iowa. that is a predicament that we are in. but what i try to do is lead. there will probably be coalescing movement to say let's

give rick santorum a chance, he has not gotten his rise yet. i think when he does, he will handle the vetting and the scrutiny extremely well. i think he will be the best choice against barack obama. host: alice stewart? guest: i think the world of bob, a tremendous leader in the faith community but he is by no means the voice of the entire faith community in iowa. he himself could not get the consensus of his own group, the family leader, to rally around his choice for president, rick santorum. while rick is a fine candidate, he is not a general consensus for the faith community. michele -- more from pastors and faith leaders, the endorsement of more than 100 pastors and faith leaders, traveling the state and speaking

for her. we have a former leader of the family leader who has been traveling us on this county to war. we have had concerned women for america speaking for us. these are leaders in the faith community that have vetted all the candidates and looked at where they stood on the key issues of concern of the christian and faith community and they see that she is the most steadfast and consistent and true on the social issues that they are concerned with, and that includes on life, when it comes to marriage, when it comes to family and faith -- those are issues that are of critical concern for them and they see michele has been unwavering on those issues. we have other candidates who have been pro-abortion in the past, and now because it is politically expedient, they are pro-life. we have others who have signed gay marriage licenses as governor and michele has been staunchly supported that a marriage is between one man and one woman. these are issues people of the

faith committee did not want someone who was on the other side of the issue in the past and now they are running for president as a republican, that they understand where they need to stand on the issues. michele has never wavered on the issues. she has been married to the same man for 33 years. they have five wonderful children and 23 fantastic foster children. and she is not only politically but personally has been a pillar in terms of the faith community and her values and being a true role model in terms of what the faith community leaders are looking for. host: let's take some calls. caller: hello, ms. stewart. i would like to ask a question. i am concerned that president obama has allowed iran to conduct these war games. they have already established themselves as a national security threat. i would like to know just what her stance is.

or if she seems to be -- and i am hoping to see more as an increase in a more aggressive stand point. operating in such an anti- israel, anti-american way, and acting like it will get it done. host: before we get an answer, carl, are you planning on caucusing? and for who? guest: right now we are undecided. we view this republican field as week. we view mitt romney as nothing but a liberal shrouded with conservative clothes. frankly, some of the candidates same tune not know what they

stand for in the debate. if they are on c-span or what have you, they moved it away. that is what we're trying to figure out, up early in the morning. host: thank you. guest: thank you so much for calling in. we appreciate your really looking at the issues and abetting the candidates. we hope that we have your support next tuesday. michelle very passionately spoke about where she stood. she had a back and forth with ron paul on this regard. first and foremost, when it comes to national defense, michele strongly believes in peace through strength. we have to show military might in order to have peace around the world. in terms of what we need to do with iran, she made it quite clear that she supports israel

on all levels. we cannot take the iranian leaders' words that they're not developing nuclear weapons. mahmoud ahmadinejad said that he was researching them for peaceful purposes, and it is simply not the case. most importantly, her continued support for american military might and continuing to show that america is the greatest nation in the world, we have exceptional as some because of our military might. first and foremost, she will stand vehemently against any development for nuclear weapons for any other countries. she wants to make sure that other countries are aware that she is adamant on that. she will not support the development of nuclear weapons across the world. >> democratic line, new jersey.

>> good morning. how are you? i have two questions that i will try to get in real quick. i have not heard michele bachmann say anything about what she would do to improve the affordable care act. all that she would do is dismantle it. if it is dismantled, american people would die. no. 2, she says she is a christian. i want to know what bible does she believe? she uses jesus' name in vain. jesus did not take from the poor and give to the rich. she must get her teaching from lazarists. can you respond to that? host: health care and christianity, alice stewart. guest: when it comes to health

care, she thinks strongly that obama care is the absolute wrong way to go. she thinks everyone should have access to health care, but obama care is not the way to do it. an individual mandate, forcing people to purchase health insurance, she thinks it is wrong and unconstitutional. she fought against it in congress. she led 40,000 people to washington to show the disapproval for obama care. there are better ways to go about spreading health care to the american people. as president she will go about making sure that there's quality, affordable health care to the people. but individual mandates, which is what we had in massachusetts with governor mitt romney, is not the way to do it. we do need to have quality, affordable health care for people across the country. your next question, she is certainly a question. she certainly believes in her

god and her strong faith as something that she lives every single day. in terms of providing care to people and making sure that everyone has a good quality of life, she has lived that in her daily life and political life. as i said, she is a mother of five children and has brought in foster children in her own home. no better example of someone who opens up her home to children. she is a strong woman of faith and a strong christian. she not only lived it in her political life, but personally as well. host: you served as the consultant for the mike huckabee campaign. he won the iowa caucus.

good morning. caller: people that i know, republicans and democrats alike, are giving obama his boat. i think he deserves the vote. he has created more jobs and improved relationships with foreign countries. i agree that the world would not stand for nuclear proliferation by any country. he has done a wonderful job bringing republicans and democrats together. requesting that the rich pay is another wonderful thing that he has done. i believe is not the government's place to be so

involved. i feel that obama is deserving of the vote, and i am a republican. host: alice stewart? guest: i appreciate your wanting to enter a dialogue on this, but i strongly disagree with you. unemployment is through the roof. he promised a stimulus package that would not go over 8%, but we went over 10% and we are still hovering in the 9% area. in terms of the economy, it is in the toilet. there has been a lack of certainty amongst the american people and it is horrible. he continues to blame the current economic crisis, the crisis we have in this country,

on the previous administration. " where we are in terms of the economy and menem -- and unemployment, he owns that. the disapproval of obama-care that should never have gotten through, he put his focus on health care, a critical issue. we needed to create jobs and he had his eye on surprise at the time. that is why our economy is in the straits it is currently in. for him to go to other countries and apologize for america, that totally takes away from the american exceptional is and that we have. abroad he has done a lot to tarnish the image that we have in this country. we need new leadership. someone who will turn the economy around and create certainty angst the people and

our washington leaders. we do not have that right now, so we need to get someone in there like michelle, who will create a stronger american military and go back to the american exceptional as some that we had years ago. host: new polls showing rick santorum is currently in what they call a surge, now third place. is he competing for the same caucus-goers as michele bachmann? guest: sure, they share a lot of the same constituency. but, it is important to note that he is pro-union, something the republicans do not support. in the past he has endorsed pro-

abortion candidates. something that you cannot walk away from. those are things that you cannot walk away from. michelle's record has been consistent. she has certainly never endorsed anyone who is pro-abortion when it comes to faith, family, and issues important to the faith community. she has talked the talk and walk the walk, when it comes to politically and personally. that is the large contrast that she has between herself and mr. santorum. he was not elected backed and she was. the key difference between the two of t