political offense from now through january 3. >> jon huntsman wanted to announce he will not be competing in the iowa caucuses. of originally, he said it would be too difficult to read this morning, he dismissed -- difficult. this morning, he dismissed the important. not an of original thing. the new hampshire governor coined that here is a look. in 1992, bill clinton became the nominee and then president. in 2000, new hampshire chose john mccain over george of the bush. in 2008, voters in new hampshire selected hillary clinton over barack obama. >> the iowa caucuses are five days away, and we continue our

campaign coverage tonight on c- span. next, governor rick perry campaigns in cedar rapids, iowa. then congresswoman michele bachmann takes questions from voters. on our series of other contenders," a look and -- at the life and political career of your home trip. >> it is a three day holiday weekend. on book tv, the 3000 year history of jerusalem. saturday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern. a narrow scientist on free will and the science of the brain, at 10:00 p.m. -- and it is. mark stein believes the u.s. is destined for collapse and decline if current political and cultural trends continue. sunday, live at noon, your calls and e-mails in-depth with pulitzer prize winner chris hedges, the author of nine books, who writes about religion

and more and its impact on civilization. his latest is "of the world as is." >> republican presidential candidate rick perry meets with voters at the blue strawberry coffee company in cedar rapids, iowa. he calls rick santorum a prolific in marker -- ear marker. >> he is a good man. [applause]

>> how are you. good to see it. thanks for being here. >> 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. you senator, i'm calling 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] they're coming because they know 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. thatre just good people 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. [applause] 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. i understand how to do that. 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. [applause] fewgoing to answer a 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% of our proven federal reserves. 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. di u gikf? -- do i golf? [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, d.c., you're going to be hard pressed to pick one 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. [unintelligible] 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. [applause] 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. [applause] 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. theglad he gave me 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]

>> thank you. take care of yourself. thank you all. i hope i have got your vote. thank you very much.

>> thanks so much for taking my question. >> i appreciate you being here. back. we've got your >> god bless you.

>> thank you for coming.

[crowd chatter]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[crowd chatter]

>> she is probably in the air

coming here now. come here. get in here. thank you all. thank you, ladies.

see you later. that way they get to pick the top of signature they want. >> good luck to you. >> thank you so much.

>> now we will hear from presidential candidate minnesota congressman michele bachmann. she was on the jan michaelson radio show in the morning and talked about four and policy and the departure of her iowa campaign chairman. this is about 50 minutes. >> thank you for joining us this morning. we have ron paul coming in a little bit later, and we get a

chance to talk with you here this morning. did you park the edsel out front? >> yes, we did, and it is of u.d.. >> in her biography, she actually admits and seems to be proud of that her family owned an edsel station wagon when you were a kid. >> it was huge. it had great horsepower. it was lime green, 1959 edsel station wagon. i don't think there was another one made like it across the country. we drove from waterloo to my uncle's farm and my dad would go full out. we would say faster, faster. they would get it up to about 90, and we were so excited. >> there is no statute of limitations for a speeding ticket. [laughter] you have had a busy last several

days. you have been all over the place. >> we are on our 99-county toward here in iowa. we were in boone county and before that -- we did 11 counties yesterday. >> no one could keep this schedule straight. you guys are all amazing. >> we will finish your final four counties today. it is one of the best decisions we have made. it is taxing to do 10 counties a day, but we started the day after the sioux city debate, the fox debate. the next morning we started our tour ended about 10 counties every day. we have been all over iowa. it has just been electric. the best way to campaign, going everyplace from the dinky cafe,

where we have just been. >> i have not heard of that one. >> it is not a chain, but it was packed to the gills, and we had a ball. >> i have to get the internal political stuff out of the way. your campaign has been experiencing a little turmoil because you lost one of your supporters who abandoned ship to the ron paul campaign. what is going on with that? >> what happened is that the ron paul campaign had contacted one of the people on our campaign and offered the money to come to their campaign, and he went, pure and simple. that is what it was. >> that is unusual this late in the game. >> i would think so, but it was a financial decision, and it was made. he said it was a great deal of money, and he said he had to provide for his family, and that

was the decision that was made. >> the downside, he left you with bragd. >> after the sioux city debate -- that is where i went after ron paul on the issue of iran having a nuclear weapon, and it is no question that there is a desperate difference between every candidate and ron paul. ron paul 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, of whether or not. -- >> the international atomic energy agency issued a report in november that said it ron was perilously close to having the

technology for nuclear weapon. we deal with the nation's classified secrets. >> we have ways of making you talk. >> no, you don't. [laughter] >> we have a number of baptists who know how to use waterboarding. >> there is a clear reports that evidence is that iran is perilously close to having a nuclear weapon, and ron paul was essentially denying that the report exists. he said the report was not worth anything later, but the whole point is that ron paul would be a very dangerous precedent for the united states, because of his frightening views on foreign policy. after that debate, it was almost like an electric light switch went on across i will. we begin our tour there in that area, and the next day, that is all people wanted to talk about. we saw people on the spot.

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 propelledfirst fewe candidacy. this is why the tea party latched on to you vicos you said obamacare is the number one issue. 80% of the public said, we do not want this. we are going to regroup in a

moment. and we are rejoining our audience right now. ♪ are was just asking about the fire but the initial part of her candidacy was propelled by obamacare. the tea party adopted new early, and the political thrust on the american people despite 80% approval. other candidates came into the race after got, and to some degree your support has softened. we have been playing musical chairs with candidates, but to what degree is the issue still important? you are still high lighting.

>> always. we finished the 95th county last night. in every single town hall meeting we do, people resonate with issue of getting rid of obamacare. it is widely unpopular. it is not just republicans. it is independents and democrats. they do not want the united states to be the land of socialism, and the crown jewel of socialism is socialized medicine. government controls you when they control health care. we have to get rid of this. we are broke. obamacare will cost trillions of dollars we do not have, and it is going to be a 15-appointed board that will be making all of our health care decisions for us. 15 people will make major health-care decisions.

i am unwilling to see the united states lose that. >> a number of people invited political candidates to sign on for a pledge to embrace those principles. newt gingrich has been highlighting this. did you sign the pledge as well? >> i did. i signed that. >> the only one who has not i think is mitt romney, and was talkingonway with mitt romney, and mitt romney aide said he did not know what it was triggered is that -- mitt romney, and he did not know what it was. is that remotely possible? >> i have no way of knowing.

>> he has been asked over and over to sign it. >> we were happy to do it. i signed the pledge, and i was delighted to because i am a private businesswoman, and i know in my own company if we did not continually change, we would be out of business. that is the essence of this pledge. >> can that be applied to the government? >> i intend to. i think all of us recognize the federal government is bloated beyond impossible recognition. it has got to come down in size, because when you have a government but spends 3.7 trillion dollars a year but it only has 2.2 trillion dollars in revenue with us and greeted with a deficit of 1.5 trillion, that means you are broke. no business could act like that.

this is not monopoly money. this is real money, and the sad reality is our kids are going to be having to hold two or three jobs in the future just to keep this ship going, and this is going to mean a reduced standard of living for our generation. i am unwilling to do that. >> you have expertise in tax policy, and you also have expertise in the immigration issue. this is one of your strong campaign point. i do not like to do this normally, but i have been playing sound bites from candidates. this has become my rishaad test -- rorshaak test. alan greenspan has written of

books, and he was talking about policy on immigration. we usually talk about out of control stuff on the southern border, and he is talking about skilled workers, encouraging skilled labor to come into the country, and i want you to hear why he wants this to occur. >> one of the most controversial things i have gotten into a book is to augment immigration of skilled labor. we pay the highest skilled labour wages in the world. if we open up our borders more than we do, we would attract a substantial quantity of skilled labor, which would suppress the wage levels, because we have been subsidizing by government,

meaning our competition is being kept outside the country, but if we bring in other workers to suppress the level of wages relative to lesser skilled, we will reduce the degree of inequality. but that is the guy who used to run the printing press. >> this is so typical of government intervention as thinking. milton friedman, they reject government intervention as i do. what you have just heard is the same idea of having more government intervention. the genius in the elite circles who think they know best what wage levels should be. they want to bring in more to bring the wages down. to benefit do?

>> he says it would reduce wage inequality. >> my thinking is it is exactly the opposite. i want to bring wages up for everyone at every level, and my plan is the one that works. i will abolish the tax code. i will reduce the rates for businesses and individuals so we are among the lowest in the industrialized world. i will have a field day getting rid of government regulation, and what i am going to do i think is further than what any other candidate is willing to do. i want to dismantle the modern welfare state, because if we do that, we can get our budgets to balance. we cannot balance our budgets with the welfare state and we have today. >> let me give you a softball. >> i have the best record of any

of the candidates on immigration, because i will address the problem and make english the official language of the government, and i will end the practice of anchor babies, which is granting automatic american citizen status to babies born here illegally. >> you have to change the constitution to that? >> no, because authority passes to congress and the president to pass the laws of the land. >> the 14th amendment is being used to say it grants citizenship. why is that bogus? >> the courts are granting that, but congress makes a lot, and that is the separation of power. people have representation through congress and through the president. the courts are not the people's representatives. they need to pass the law, and

is enforced. >> the guy who wrote this said it does not apply to the children of foreigners. >> very good. >> would you fire burning key? >> i would fire him. >> right up until this point you and ron paul are on the same page. >> on economics we are. and ron paul would legalize heroin and cocaine. i would not. i also believe strongly in marriage which is one man and one woman. ron paul would not have federal protection of marriage. i also believe in the sanctity of human life from conception. ron paul would not overturn roe vs. wade. then there is the issue of foreign policy. while the economy is the number one issue, i am probably more

worried about our vulnerability to foreign aggressors. we cannot have someone on willing to take on foreign aggressors. >> we will take on ron paul during the next hour. the litany could easily be made. i do not think he would agree about your assessment of rove vs. wade. he said, you do not have to go through a constitutional amendment to overturn a bad law. >> i would agree with that. i would agree we should have legislation and protects a personhood of the individual. this is somewhere where congress and the president needs to reflect people's values and up: the sanctity of people's lives. >> -- uphold the sanctity of

human life. >> i am done with my questions to michele bachmann, and the rest of the segment will be phone calls. give me one second. it will take a second to get all of the switching necessary. we are back live with our c-span audience. let's talk with james. good morning, james. >> thanks for taking my call. first, i would like to suggest some of the things she said. i was a friend with cindy mccain last year, and israel is not an ally of america.

deliberately murdered american marines. michele bachmann is willing to overlook that. she is also wrong about ron paul. he is not going to put our country at risk. michele bachmann is willing to get us into world war iii by issuing a war with iran. ahmadinejad never threatened to wipe israel off the map. you can go to my blog for more on this. >> he is on the ron paul grant. address it in a way you wish. >> i do believe israel is our ally, and i believe we need to stand by israel. that is the problem with president obama. he is the first president since 1948 to not stand with israel. that led to the heightened aggression of the 22 hostile neighbors surrounding israel. hence you see the rise of

radical islam in egypt, tunisia, and libya. this is changing the course of history. we need to have a president who understands international dynamics and who will stand up for the united states, because these aggressors are not content to stay in their backyard. they also see the united states, and some say in may be that the united states will one day find out what it is to be in israel's shoes in the middle east. >> part of the was the attack on the uss liberty. we had an intelligence-gathering ship. israel took it out. whether it was a mistake or an act of war is still a big question, but they later paid

reparations and said, we screwed up. >> i stand by my claim. i believe ron paul would be a dangerous precedent to the united states because the number one threat is iran gaining when nuclear weapon. now all you have to do is do a google search, and there is ample evidence of ron paul saying -- of ahmadinejad saying he will seek to wipe israel off the map. if there is anything history has taught us in the last 100 years, when a mad man speaks, listen, pay attention. be smart. i will. >> how are you? >> 3. -- great. my question is about a year-and- a-half ago there was a question

about rebuilding the electrical infrastructure of america. there was enough submitted a year-and-a-half ago that would replace all of the existing electrical infrastructure in america, replace it with up-to- date stuff on the ground and the internet grid on the same time. putting in place infrastructure for natural gas, and we pay for it as we go. it is $15 per person over 18. and what i am wondering is if this is something she is aware of and if it is still on the table in the pipeline. >> we are going to rejoin the listening audience before we answer that question. ♪

welcome back. we are in the studio with michele bachmann, and later, ron paul is going to join us. we might have another guest or two. we are not sure. the fellow was just asking about the possibility of developing many more infrastructure issues like natural gas and internet grade. >> i am all of the above. i want more energy in the united states, less dependence on foreign oil, because opec has a stranglehold over us, and i want us to have our own development. we are the number one energy resources rich nation in the world. the problem has been the federal government has put energy resources under lock and key. we have more oil than all of

saudi arabia. we have 20% of the world's coal. one of the largest natural gas finds ever discovered is in pennsylvania, and the epa is trying to crack down on us not being able to access natural gas. i want all of it. >> i have to drop suthe f bomb. >> frakking? we have trillions of square feet. why not access it? i believe in all energy. let's use it all. all we have to do is legalize it, and it can be paid for by the private sector. the subsidy levels required by the federal government for some of these grades is something that has to be looked at, because we are broke. >> wouldn't it be nice after

hearing iran plans to block it -- >> tuesday to bad. -- to say too bad. why president obama would not have an all out effort in favor of the united states is beyond me. and we should be laughing at them. >> this is john calling from the people's republic of windsor heights. >> thank you. i would like to ask congressman bachmann because i am reading a statement about the political director saying, i will not think much about the situation beyond this. i can say that when sorensen's

decision was not financially motivated. i cannot not watch a good man like sorensen be attacked as a sellout. can you explain those statements about him taking money and the political director saying he did not? >> i can tell you the conversation i had directly. it was very clear this effort-- they were coming and deciding to vote for michele bachmann, and that was when the ron paul campaign offered money from sorensen to my ears telling me he was offered a great deal of

money, and that is why he left. >> taking what was previously said, you would get rid of the koran fellow. >> yes. >> how about the fed itself? -- you would get rid of the current fellow. >> yes. >> how about the fed itself? is it time to get rid of the federal reserve as a system? >> i think that is a concept that should they evaluated and potentially be put into place. if you look at the original and labelling act that created the federal reserve, the scope of power congress gave to the federal reserve was breathtaking. it was never before utilize until 2008, and then we started

to see the fed utilize that power but was always sitting there. when they use it, it was as though we have never seen before, and i believe because of those circumstances, i think a case could be made for ending the fed. >> the president wants another 1.2 trillion. are you going to give it to him? >> not me. i was the one voice that said do not let congress borrow more money. that makes us a servant to china when we are the debtor, so what obama is doing is putting us into indentured servitude to china economically. i am unwilling to do that. we have got to sober up and stop spending money we do not have to regard i would refuse to do that. i would call all members of

congress together and say we are not spending one more dime than what we take in. my parents would never have considered spending one dime more than my dad's a paycheck. he was in manufacturing, and what we need to do is get our house in order and say we cannot afford all these programs. i will then the department of education. i will and the epa -- i will end the department of education. i will end the epa, because those things need to go to the states. >> i understand the philosophy some people have trying to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. i think it is a dangerous game, because if we attack iran, there could be serious consequences.

i am having trouble reconciling our policy towards north korea to what we want to do with iran. if you take a look at north korea, they have an unstable government. they have nuclear weapons. they have attacked south korean twice and killed a bunch of people, and yet a lot of people in the government have been unwilling to do anything about that. would you attack north korea for what they have done if you're willing to attack iran? >> this is not about attacking iran. this is about preventing them from having a nuclear weapon because of a clear statement about what they would do with that nuclear weapon. what would you have us to do? we have to consider the possibility that if iran has a nuclear weapon, they will use it to kill millions of people.

>> ahmadinejad. i do not think the rest of the country is willing. >> it is a radical beliefs they hold. they hold it, and the figurehead is ahmadinejad, but he is in sync with the radical muslims. >> you are not talking about military action, then what are you suggesting? >> i am talking about potentially military action. i am talking about putting everything on the table to make sure it never happens. >> why not military action against north korea? >> north korea has not said they will use a nuclear weapon to by israel off the map or against an american citizen to kill millions of people. that is a big difference. north korea is a bad actor. they are the wal-mart of missile delivery systems, and they are for sale.

there is a new axis of evil that has emerged between north korea, pakistan, china, and iran. russia has misapplied nuclear scientists to help iran a nuclear weapons. what is amazing is that ron paul who is to the left of president obama on this issue. that is why i say ron paul would be a dangerous precedent to the united states when it comes to foreign policy. >> that was a pretty sweeping statement you just made. to declare all of those countries as the new axis of evil, ronald reagan said about the cold war communist states. would that be reflective of

michele bachmann foreign policy? the new axis of evil is all those countries, including russia? >> i think we need to understand where these aggressors are coming from. we need to take are politically correct glasses off and look at the world the way it is. we need to look at that and understand where our vulnerabilities are. only a fool wishes for war. i do not wish for war. i would not put our troops in harm's way without a clear american interests. that is the problem with president obama and libya. i oppose the effort in libya. >> you left off china. >> i thought i said china. >> i misunderstood. >> china is definitely part of

that. >> we will go to our phone lines later. ron paul will be joining us, and you are welcome to join us as well. make the transition of the top of the hour as quick as possible. michelle is talking to some of the listeners are around the country, and this is dan from grand rapids. good >> i have a question for michele bachmann. she mentioned obamacare that only 30% of the people agree with it. she needs to do some research. a hecks are getting of a break this year, and she

says we are going into socialism. that is where we are. there are so many americans that do not have insurance at 55 or 56 and even younger, and they have so many problems, it costs taxpayers so much money i really believe we need to do something similar to obamacare, but they do not think they have anything to replace it. uni pay for the with insurance. >> -- you and i pay for that with insurance. >> of looks like the medicare system could collapse under president obama because it is running out of money. it will be broke by 2017. the point of this is president

obama of contention is that all americans from cradle to grave would fold into obamacare. that is the federal government deciding what our health care will be for all americans. i want to see americans have choice in their health care. i want them to have the best health care they can, and the real problem is cost. president obama said we would save $2,500. we have not. >> we are back with our radio listeners. we have one last segment. what a fine view? how would you like to be defined if you had eurozone dictionary? >> i am the most pro-growth candidate running for political office. i am not a politician. i have no interest in being a politician. i went to washington as a

conservative living in the real world, and i went as a fighter. i fought against out of control spending, because that is when pelosi and president obama were in charge. good i am not a part of the establishment your good -- i am not a part of the establishment, and i understand the tax code. i know what it takes to run the economy and create millions of jobs. i am the one with the backbone to do it. i am the most electable. i won four elections in the last five years in the state were no republican woman had ever won before. i won in a tough races. we needed the most conservative candidate to defeat of jimmy carter, and like margaret thatcher, and who won in a

difficult race and became the iron lady. that is what we need. now i will hold barack obama accountable. i will defeat him like ron paul. i will be the candidate who wins. >> the new say you were the most electable? >> i did -- did you say you were the most electable? >> i did. and i won the iowa straw poll. who else can say that? >> this is true. what is on your mind? >> i have three questions. who put some dom in power -- who put saddam in power in the first place? >> you are asking for a history

lesson. >> history is the most important. who put saddam hussein in power? we put saddam hussein in power .o counter iran's threat >> let me borrow your questions. we suck at international relationships and foreign policy. >> that is why i should be the next president of the united states. of all the candidates no one has more correct national security experience than i have, and our next candidate will be tested on foreign policy. our next president have to understand this issue. >> would you agree we are not good at this? >> we can be a lot better. that is why i am running for president, because i believe i am the best candidate to be able

to conduct foreign policy. >> what would you like us to know more than anything else? >> i would like you to know i am the candidate who can beat barack obama in this election. i will stand up, and when i go to the white house i will do what i said i will do. i need people to come out. i need their vote. i will be the cannon shot that will change the course of history for the better. >> you just heard for the nra spokesman. >> i am break on that issue as well. we are going to the city. >> he has done that with rick perry. rick santorum admitted he had to steal and warned sweatshirt from the department of

transportation -- to steal a sweatshirt from the department of transportation. would you bring your own? >> i have a great range for that. i helped pass a concealed and carry law. i scored in my class and any of the men, too. >> that is a combat weapon. >> i love it. is a great gun. i like being accurate, and that is a great gun. but apparently many shops. -- >> apparently many shots. is it legal? >> of course it is. >> thank you for joining us.

>> thank you. >> what do you predict? >> we think we are going to do well. this is the thing to do. with all of the candidates attacking one another, we thought we should go to iowans. iowans are independent people. i know them, and it has been of the lights, so we will be going to iowa and then to marshalltown. good >> nv. i cannot explain it. >> i am from waterloo and cedar falls. >> thank you so much. for c-span viewers, we're going

to have to play musical chairs next. that was really cool. we did not tell you until this morning sees them was going to be here, because i did not know until late yesterday afternoon. >> i just want to say welcome back. >> we are always happy to be here. thank you. but he is welcome anytime he wants. >> with the iowa caucuses tuesday, january 3, cameras are covering the events, and every morning, a political guests are taking your calls. you can also stay up-to-date with the campaign 2012 and website and with new features and bio information and videos. it lets you see what candidates have said on issues important to you. read what the political

reporters and people are saying on sites like facebook and twitter. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> more campaign of land to tell you about. ann romney holds a campaign rally in des moines, iowa -- mitt romney told a campaign rally in des moines, iowa. here on c-span, newt gingrich will hold a town hall meeting in des moines. he is joined by frank loves. later, rick santorum will meet in marshalltown, iowa. that is also here on c-span. >> with the iowa caucuses next

week and the new hampshire and florida primaries later this month, and we look back of 14 candidates who ran for president of loss but have a long-lasting impact on policies. today hubert humphrey. friday, george wallace, and then on saturday, and george mcgovern followed by the billionaire businessman ross perot. every day ahead 10:00 p.m. eastern. >> the u.s. government announced an agreement on the sale of fighter aircraft to saudi arabia. officials say the nearly $30 billion sale reinforces u.s. commitment to stability and security in the region and would support more than 50,000 american jobs. the first delivery of the aircraft is expected to be in early 2015.

this is about 20 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. we have a special briefing on u.s. foreign sales to the kingdom of saudi arabia. we have the assistant secretary of state and the principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, james miller, so without further ado. >> can we talk about the nature of this? >> thank you for coming this afternoon, and i am joined by the undersecretary of defense, dr. miller. as you may recall, in october, 2010, i officially announced and plan -- announced a plan that included fighter aircraft and

helicopters. we are pleased to announce over this past weekend the united states and saudi arabia signed an agreement for the sale of up to 84 advanced fighter aircraft. it also includes new missions, spare parts, training, maintenance, and logistics. this sale is worth $29.4 billion. these aircraft will be among the most sophisticated and capable aircraft in the world. this agreement serves to reinforce strong and enduring relationship between the united states and saudi arabia. it demonstrates the u.s. commitment to a strong saudi defense capability as a key component to regional security. since announcing in june an

attempt to conclude the sale, the department of state and defense worked closely with the saudi government to finalize the deal. jim and i made separate trips to saudi arabia to discuss the sale. let me outline a few reasons why this defense program is so historic. this will send a strong message to countries in the region of the united states is committed to stability in the gulf and the broader middle east. it will enhance saudi arabia's ability to deliver external threats. when it will advance interoperable loyalty between our countries through joint training and exercises. this agreement will positively impact the u.s. economy and further advance u.s. jobs. this agreement will support more than 50,000 american jobs.

it will engage 600 suppliers in 44 states and provide $3.5 billion in annual economic impact to the u.s. economy. this will support jobs not only in the aerospace sector but in our manufacturing base and support shane, which are crucial to maintaining and national defence. i also want to note the sale was carefully assessed under the conventional arms transfer policy. this requires such sales are consistent with the country's legitimate security needs and support u.s. regional security objectives. with this agreement, the united states and saudi arabia have accomplished a historic achievement. our longstanding security relationship with saudi arabia and other partners has been a

primary focus of regional security for decades, and if further illustrates the firm commitment of the united states to the security and stability of the gulf region. i will turn to jim miller, who has more to say about the package and how it advances military interests. we will be happy to take your questions. >> thank you, and good afternoon and happy holidays to everybody. let me start by saying the united states is firmly committed to saudi arabia, as we have been for seven decades, and the united states and saudi arabia have a strong regional interest in the gulf. close cooperation is essential, and we are announcing the most recent example of that cooperation. in september, the united states

and saudi arabia finalized a letter of acceptance for the purchase of 84 aircraft and for the upgrade of an additional aircraft. this foreign military sale at $4.7 million. this would be the most cable and versatile aircraft, and it will be one of the most capable aircraft in the world. now they will have the latest computer power, and radar technology, in for red, and electronic systems. -- infrared, and electronic systems. now this would include the latest technology that will ensure saudi arabia has the

capability of operating against arab threats. this will include missiles which provide radar and infra red now. they will be able to strike day and night with a variety of ammunitions. this includes laser-guided and gps weapons along with missiles. the harpoon in particular, for maritime attack. communications systems will allow the u.s. air force and saudi air force to operate in the same airspace. it will allow both countries to participate in coalition training, and in fact, this package includes not just munitions' but the training and

logistics support andrew talked about, and is very robust. much of the training will occur alongside u.s. forces. approximately 5500 salaried personnel will be trained, further striking a bond between our forces and our countries. i provided a high-level review of capabilities, and i know the air force and boeing co. will be glad to offer more details. the u.s.-saudi relations have been a pillar for decades, and this demonstrates the firm commitment and reinforces our mutual commitment to security in the gulf. i appreciate your questions. >> you said this sends a strong message to the u.s. is committed

to security. i would like to ask about two countries that are not mentioned. how easy was it to overcome any sensitivity israel might have about this sale? does it affect their advantage that you seek to preserve? in iran, and presumably that is the biggest threat to saudis in the region. do these planes come equipped with a map and have israel blacked out? what is the specific message to iran? >> let me say then file lock,

-- and by law, sales to the analyzed.t bee we conducted the assessment, and we are satisfied this sale will not detriment israel. as far as regional threats, aircraft last four decades, so they are designed to address career security threats as well as reps the main and merge down the road as well. -- as well as threats but may emerge down the road. >> i cannot give you to use the word iran? >> it is designed to allow saudi

arabia to address threats to sovereignty, and they believe this aircraft is able to provide that capability. >> where do you see that coming from? >> in the middle east there is a number of threats. they have border security issues. they have threats in the gulf as well. one of the threats in the region is iran, but this is not solely directed towards iran. this is directed towards our defense needs. >> welcome to the state department briefing. the time of this, today is today and there is a standoff with around region with iran.

can you definitively say there is no connection? >> we have been saying this since before the deal was struck. we have been talking with saudis about how to provide for their air power needs for a number of years. we did not note together the package in response to current events in the region, but this is part of a longstanding issue about how to address their needs, and we are announcing it because it was signed on christmas eve, which would not have been the right time to announce it.

>> i am curious. did they decide to go with engine?he ge has there been arabia expressed any interest in some of the add- ons >> let me take a question about delivery. we expect the first delivery in 2815 and expect -- the first delivery in 2015. with respect to the internal capability of the aircraft, it has substantial capabilities. i will give you just a bit more.

we have the joint direct attack commission. a very capable system with the ammunitions the sponsor, which is -- ammunitions sensor, which is incredible against moving videos, -- moving vehicles, so very significant. there is always the possibility saudis will ask for more. i know we have ongoing discussions that should be provided in the future. >> on the engine, did they go with ge? >> i would like to defer that to the boeing company n. >> i want to ask you if any

conditions were put on the sale in saudi arabia, considering the situation that has happened recently, whether it can be applied to other countries. >> this was designed for saudi defense needs. we are interested in working with all of the gulf nations in developing regional architecture that would allow them to meet the challenges and threats across the region. however this would be used by the saudi air force to defend its sovereignty. good >> the question was relating to bahrain, so i think

the question is are there restrictions so the saudis can not blown them out richard blown them out or send them for use against protesters and -- cannot loan them out or send them to use against protesters. >> any attempt to transfer requires our approval. there has been no request, and if they wanted to transfer these to any another golf partner, they would need our approval. >> i do not think it is a question of transfer. they require our assistance, but it would include saudis sending planes to bahrain.

are there any restrictions for that? >> i am not going to get into hypothetical situations, particularly when they are not delivered. these aircraft are to help with security needs and to protect their sovereignty. vice was there anything that was not granted -- >> was there anything in the request of was not granted? but all of the crust -- >> all of the requests were met. >> as you know, we are looking to solve a different set of capabilities. this is a capability that includes some of the best attributes we have in our

inventory, and some things that go beyond what we have, and we will look to bring these capabilities to ourselves. i would not compare them. we are looking to provide a significant capability with a heavy focus on air to air capability. >> i am just curious. is saudi going to be entering any of the work in country? >> it is not government to government, but it is between the companies, and as you know, it is standard to have something. i would defer the two boeing

company. -- i would prefer that to the boeing company. >> what is the reaction from iraq, and the d.c. any reaction for these sales -- to you see any reaction for these sales or problems of any kind? >> i am not going to get into discussions of israel and other than to note that our evaluation is the this will not impact qualitative reaction. this has been long in the making, discussions over providing aircraft for saudi air force have taken place over a number of years. it was announced last year in

2010, and we have negotiated the agreement over the past year, and it was signed on christmas eve. 5 how is the payment going to be -- >> how is the payment going to be? is there a timeline? >> this will be analogous to many others we have done. the first payment will be due in the coming weeks and months, and they will, over a number of years. >> when you mention 2013, when is it completed? >> it will be several years after that. >> five or 10? it goes without saying, but i

want you to say this is an indication you have faith in the stability of the saudi monarchy and think it is going to be around for at least a while longer. >> this is around for several decades. we expected to continue >> so you have faith in the stability of the saudi monarchy? i am waiting for how many years does it take for this deal to be completed? >> there are various elements of it. we have the aircraft over a period of several years after the initial delivery. the trade will occur over a period of 10 years. it is a sustained effort. and it shows sustained commit between the u.s. and saudi governments.

>> is there no real end date for when all of the plans are delivered? >> after 2015. i will give you a precise answer. >> how long do you expect this deal to sustain the 50,000 jobs? >> round numbers, up over a decade. >> thank you. >> we will we back in about five -- we will be back in about five. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> we will continue our look on the iowa caucuses on tomorrows "washington journal per if off

and we will talk with chuck grassley and get the democratic party perspective on the republican field by r.t. rybak. later, a discussion on i was economy and population. david swenson is our guest. "washington journal," each morning at 7:00 eastern on c- span. >> more campaign coverage coming up later on c-span. ron paul takes questions on a talk radio show. then, mitt romney has a campaign in iowa. next, our series, "the contenders." we look back on the vice president -- the vice presidential career of hubert humphrey. he ran for president and lost to richard nixon. this is two hours.

>> from minneapolis, the life of hubert humphrey is profiled in "the contenders." [shouting] >> stay right there. do not move. >> mr. chairman, my fellow americans, my fellow democrats,

i proudly accept the nomination of our party. [applause] this moment, this moment is one of personal pride and gratification. yet one cannot help but reflect the sadness that we feel over the troubles and the violence which have erupted in the streets of this great city.

and for the personal injuries which have occurred. [applause] >> that is hubert humphrey accepting the 1968 democratic nomination for president. it was at chicago's hilton hotel. the democrats had gathered for the convention in the midst of the vietnam war while thousands of protesters demonstrated outside. the unsuccessful candidate in 1968, hubert humphrey is the focus of this week's program. we are live from minnesota history center. mick caouette is the documentarian of hubert humphrey's life. we are standing in the middle of an exhibit about the tumultuous year of 1968. i want you to set the stage for people. as 1968 dawned, this country was in an uproar about the vietnam war. set the stage. >> the vietnam war had been going on for 15 years.

it was obvious to everyone that the war was not being won. it reached all the way to the american embassy in saigon. approval johnson's ratings just plummeted. mccarthy had been in the race in the fall. bobby kennedy was joining the race. it was utter chaos. right after, president johnson resigned, three days later martin luther king was assassinated. the first part of the year was a terrible chaos. >> people were turning on their radios to wake up and there seemed to be another huge story every day. we will try to tell some of that story. we will be here for two hours. as we are here, we will learn more about the history of the time and the biography of

senator humphrey. we will begin taking your telephone call so you can be part of our discussion. what is important for young people to understand is what is different about the wars we fight today is the draft. this was real in the sense for american families. a very different way than the professional army that we have today. can you talk about that? >> the draft was the point at which the protest started. when the draft was instituted. now people have a choice. if they are against the war, they can stay away. in those days, there was no choice. you either went to canada or did something to get out of being drafted. that is what caused the protests. people were not even able to vote until they were 21, but they were being drafted at 18. that is probably the biggest difference. >> was it fair to say that every american family had a personal connection to this war?

>> some have someone who went to the war and someone who was against it in the same family. in fact, lyndon johnson and robert macnamara, their kids were against it. families were broken over it. much like the civil war, i guess. >> the other thing that people should understand that made this real was television. television was bringing it into people's living rooms every night. when you talk about the effect of that? >> it was wide open because nobody had really done any kind of -- television was not restricted. it was all brand new. nobody in the administration had any control over it. the journalists were just going out there and getting whatever they found. we do not have that now. it is much more controlled on the battlefield. we were seeing things that you would not see now.

people being wounded. it had a profound effect on the country. another reason why people came out against the war because they were seeing it all the time on television. 300 body bags were coming back every week. they were showing the body bags coming back. it had a profound effect. it changed the average person's mind. >> we have to remind people that the war started before lyndon johnson's term. it had been raging for 15 years. lyndon johnson's attitude about the war was what? >> i think he was confused about it for a long time, but it was important to him to win the war. it colored everything that he did. when people tried to talk about any kind of settlement, he would not do it. he was interested in winning the war. once he got into it, he did not have a lot of options.

that was the only one he wanted. he had no other options. it affected when he left office, too. he wanted someone to come into the office to continue this war policy. >> lyndon johnson and hubert humphrey became teammates in 1964, following the assassination of kennedy. lyndon johnson ran in his own right. what was the relationship like? how was this period for senator humphrey? >> the intensity in vietnam started at the same time he became vice president. the tonkin gulf incident in the summer of 1964, there was a resolution in congress that lbj pushed for and it was passed. humphrey signed on to that. he was not yet vice-president. as did eugene mccarthy and others. the convention came later in the summer and humphrey became vice president. he walked into the beginning of johnson's involvement with the war.

campaigned all through the fall. they never really talked about vietnam during the campaign. it was more about barry goldwater being trigger happy. humphrey and johnson were the peace candidates. goldwater was the war candidate. vietnam was not talked about. >> in 1964. >> in 1964. >> they were talking more about nuclear annihilation. they won by a landslide. in the spring, in the early part of the year, there was another incident in vietnam. johnson called a cabinet and adviser meeting. he has already decided to bomb north vietnam in retaliation. he asked people around the table what they thought of this. everybody pretty much agreed and humphrey said it was not a good idea. and he backed off. he had written a memo earlier that we should not get involved.

this is not a good idea, both to you politically and for the country, people will not understand it. he brought it up again at the meeting. he spoke up again at this meeting. johnson got angry. humphrey went back and wrote another memo, long and detailed. at that point, he was completely frozen out of any discussion about vietnam. >> we have two videos to show you. the first one is 1964. lyndon johnson had been operating without a vice president. this was after the kennedy assassination. there was a great deal of speculation coming into the convention about who his choice would be. here is a film from the 1964 convention as lyndon johnson announces his choice for vice president. >> the next vice-president of the united states -- my close, my long time -- [applause]

my trusted colleague -- [applause] senator hubert humphrey of minnesota. [cheers and applause] >> democrats and most republicans in the senate vote for education legislation, but not senator goldwater. [applause] most democrats and most republicans in the the senate voted to help the united nations and its peacekeeping functions when it was in financial difficulty, but not senator goldwater. [applause] >> i cannot help but think that particular moment how far we had come, all the hard work and

effort, this was a great moment in my life. >> mr. johnson said in his judgment, mr. humphrey was the best man to be president in case anything happened to him. no longer is the vice presidency just another job. ♪ >> that video is from mick caouette's documentary on hubert humphrey, "the art of the possible." first of all, the scene of the energetic hubert humphrey addressing the crowd and having the crowd eating out of his hand and the cutaway to lyndon johnson, who did not seem to share the moment. what was happening? >> he did not like the spotlight being taken from him. humphrey was believed to be a better public speaker.

he was a little bit upset about humphrey taking the show away. he was that way. that was lyndon johnson. the goldwater part of that speech was written by a number of people. >> it was written by bill moyers. he wrote that. there was a call and response kind of thing that caught on. that was an early one. >> call and response? >> "not senator goldwater." and then the crowd respond. >> senator humphrey had ambitions for the presidency for quite a while. he toyed with it in 1952 and made a real bid in 1960. harry was finally at the convention accepting the vice- presidential nomination. you can see how excited he was about the moment. he earned the nickname "the happy warrior." he loved politics, right? >> he loved politics. he was joyful about politics.

he believed it was a way to better the country, to change the country. it was an innocent way. he believed in the american people. he really believed in our system. that was the way for him to change the country. >> another clip, and this was later on in 1974 when hubert humphrey made audiotapes. thosegoing to use some of throughout the program. he talks a bit, and this is just one example, of the relationships you referenced. and how it became very testy between lyndon johnson and hubert humphrey over vietnam. he reflects on some of the ways that lyndon johnson used the powers of the office to keep his vice president under control. let's listen. >> if anybody would ever tell

you that johnson was extravagant, it surely was not with this vice president. many times he would say to me, it was better to take a smaller plane. if you have a plane that is too big, there will be too many people who want to ride with you. you will be encumbered with people that see there is an extra seat that has not been used. from time to time, on short trips, up and down the atlantic seaboard, i would take one of the smaller planes that were available. for our longer trips, we used the jet star. never, in the continental united states, did we use air force one or two. those were to be only used for overseas trips. at no time was i ever permitted to bring a newspaper man or a

person of the media with me on any trip within the united states. the president forbid it. i respected his command and his wish. i gather he felt that the vice- president should be heard and seen, but not reported upon too much. >> of course, lyndon johnson had been the majority leader in the senate. these two men had a long relationship and served in leadership together. could you talk more about how johnson used the levers of power to control hubert humphrey? >> he had an argument with johnson about vietnam, and johnson froze him out for at least a year. about any talk about vietnam or any foreign-policy, basically. he cut off his privileges. he shortened his staff.

he did not want him speaking out about vietnam. at one point, he tapped his phones. he did a number of things to control humphrey. he did not want him speaking out against vietnam. he did not want him speaking out about anything. he wanted him to keep quiet. he had a way of calling them "my planes" and "my boats." he had a possessive attitude about that. humphrey dealt with it a lot. he would give three or four speeches a week, and he would have to call and get permission for a plane for each one. the freeze lasted about a year. >> did hubert humphrey talk about how he reacted to this? he had been unhappy. >> he was miserable for a long time. johnson was shutting him out of the inner circle. he was on the outside. he was not happy during that time.

he wanted to be involved in what was going on. it was a bad time for him. then he went back to vietnam and things changed in 1966. >> we are going to walk around this exhibit tonight and give you a sense of the exhibit that has been put together. showing the year 1968. a focus on politics. i want to remind you about your participation. in about 10 or 12 minutes, we will start taking calls. here is how you can do it. the telephone numbers are on the screen. we really look forward to your comments on 1968, the year in which hubert humphrey was a contender for the president of the united states. why don't you walk along with me and we will go to our next stop here? how did you first get interested in hubert humphrey? >> i grew up here, so he was always in the air when i was a kid.

i spent some time working here and saw his archives. for a documentary filmmaker, that is a gold mine. >> hubert humphrey had four children. are they still here? >> his daughter is no longer alive. she died a couple of years ago. his grandson is more involved in politics than the others. the sons are basically in sales. one works for an advertising agency. >> we are at the exhibit about the politics and political life of hubert humphrey. it really was his life. he was not born in minnesota. >> he was born in south dakota. 90 miles from the minnesota border in one of those little railroad towns. he was born in 1911. it was a remarkable little town. his father was the druggist.

his mother was methodist, a social gospel christian. he got politics in his father's drugstore and then the social gospel. as bill moyers said, great combination of the preacher and the politician. >> he went to a pharmacy school himself. how did he end up in politics? >> he went to pharmacy school for a job. he always wanted be in politics. he did it for a short time to help his father with the drug store. i do not think he ever really want to be a pharmacist. >> he ended up getting a doctorate as i understand. >> he went to get a master's degree. >> why was he studying politics? >> initially, he was going to get a doctorate and teach. that was his first idea. he was so good at public speaking and so good at communicating, a lot of people convinced him to run. he ended up coming back to

minnesota and becoming the mayor of minneapolis. >> when did he serve as mayor? >> he came back from lsu from grad school. that was in 1940. minnesota had been a republican state and never elected a democrat to the senate. the non-republicans were divided between the democrats and the farmer- labor party. he helped to unite the two parties. he built himself his own political base. the city was corrupt, all kinds of problems with segregation. when he first came, the "nation" magazine called it the capital of anti-semitism in the united states. when he left, he got an award from the national council of christians and jews for what he did. >> is the dfl still active in politics today? >> he was the greatest negotiator of the group.

>> what does it stand for? from an ideology standpoint? >> at the time, it was a group of farmers and laborers who had differences with more professional democrats. fdr democrats. there was a split there. they just did not like each other and humphrey was one of the people that convinced them they will never win an election if they did not get together. >> he ran for senate when? >> he ran for senate in 1948. >> we will talk a little bit about the speech. i have a clip from 1960, when he first seriously thought about running for president. this is one of those joy of being a politician.

let's watch. >> how do you think your race is going? >> it has been an uphill fight. i think we have been doing quite well. >> what has been the most exciting part of the campaign? >> right now. i just had it. >> thank you, senator. >> this is good fun. politics ought to be fun. >> yes, sir. >> ♪ vote for hubert, hubert humphrey, the president for you and me ♪ >> you see him enjoying life. did he bring this to his politics all the time? >> he would light up the room. >> it would be 11:00 at night and he would get off of a plane and work until 3:00 in the morning. he would still be like that. >> what were some of his other

characteristics? i read that he was known for talking a lot. >> absolutely. he was also a good listener. people missed that part. he did talk a lot. he would come with a prepared speech and talk for an hour. he knew a lot about a lot of things. he was really intelligent. astounding memory. they estimate that he may have known up to 5000 people by first name. >> what a gift, to be able to remember names. >> he could remember their name, the family's name, what they did for a living. remarkable memory. >> we will start taking some calls. and then we will learn more about his political philosophy. first up is ohio. >> it is a wonderful program to be participating in. >> thank you. >> you mentioned 1948. i remember hearing an actor

named ronald reagan who endorsed hubert humphrey in 1948 for the u.s. senate. when you think about it, were they on the opposite end of the spectrum? even though they were both democrats at that time. i want to find out what hubert humphrey's relationship was with barry goldwater in the senate versus what their private life was like? did hubert humphrey and jack kennedy get along very well when they were running against each other in 1960? in 1956, when they vied for the vice-presidential nomination to run with adlai stevenson? >> thank you so much. we're going to take those in order. his relationship with ronald reagan? >> he was a lifelong friend of ronald reagan.

ronald reagan was pretty much the same politics back in those days. he was the head of the actors' union, the actors' guild. he was a democrat and he had the same philosophy. ronald reagan changed, but humphrey remained the same. but they did remain friends. a great respect for each other. >> goldwater? >> they were even better friends. the best story i've heard about their friendship, they were giving speeches in iowa on the back of a hay wagon. they ripped each other apart. later on, someone saw them having dinner together. they were good, good friends. >> before we talk about kennedy, talk about the united states senate. people still recognize the names from history books today. was there bipartisanship? did people work across the aisle? >> there was a lot of camaraderie.

humphrey was friends with a lot of republicans. it was more cordial and there was more camaraderie than there is now. i am not in the senate now, but they were very close. >> jfk and their relationship? >> in the early years, they voted together on many of the same bills. humphrey helped him with farm legislation because he knew nothing about it. their relationship changed dramatically in 1960. during the primaries and then the elections. >> in what way? >> they have these debates in the primaries in wisconsin and west virginia. they got to know each other that way. when kennedy became president, humphrey gave him many of his ideas to use in the

administration. he was the idea factory in the kennedy administration. the peace corps was one of his ideas. >> let's take a call from indianapolis. jerry, you are on the air. >> how are you doing? i love your show. i have a question. back in 1948, humphrey spent time with martin luther king -- >> we will spend quite a bit of time talking about the civil- rights movement. what we get into that part? this is from your film. hubert humphrey talks about his view of the world and his brand of liberalism. let's listen.

>> [no audio] >> we do not have that clip. we are getting it ready. help us understand what informed this? >> to answer the question, the civil-rights was in him from the time he was born. it was not new to hubert humphrey. lyndon johnson had to deal more with the idea of the issue of race and getting elected. it was quite different for him. humphrey felt and believed deeply what he was up against. what he did in that speech, lyndon johnson called the most courageous political act in the 20th century. he could have destroyed the democratic party. he could have destroyed truman and his own career. he really believed in civil- rights. >> the caller was asking about humphrey's commitment compared to the other two, to lyndon johnson and to john kennedy.

can you make a value judgment? >> johnson was more in line with humphrey. kennedy was a reluctant civil- rights person that he came to later. bobby came to it even more. it was an issue for humphrey from the beginning. and it was an issue for johnson for many years, too. humphrey was involved with the african-american community. he did know a lot of the leaders. he did not know martin luther king in 1948, that early. but he knew other leaders. >> let's listen to cynthia in iowa. >> good evening. i was a member of the television news team in iowa, but i happened to be in washington, d.c., reporting the day we

withdrew from vietnam. i had the pleasure of interviewing hubert humphrey on that very day. i asked him how we felt about losing the vietnam war. he said he, too, was a casualty of the vietnam war. he was quite emotional and had a tear in his eye. i wondered if you could talk more about his vietnam policy. >> the two trips he made to vietnam while he was vice- president -- the first trip was scheduled for him. it was a proscribed trip with all the stops planned for him. he was watched pretty closely. he saw only the good side of the war. the second time, he decided to go out on his own. he went to hospitals, talked to people. at that point, he quit cheerleading the war. he found out about the corruption in the south vietnamese government. all the other things going on what the war. he realized it was lost. he came back from the second

trip knowing that the war needed to be over. he was boxed in. but he had been speaking out for the war for the last year. lyndon johnson was not going to let him speak against the war. he was in a bad situation. that conflict lasted all the way through 1968. >> the two great issues in his political career were civil rights and the vietnam war. the 1948 speech really launched him on to the national stage. we're going to listen to that speech to the convention in philadelphia in 1948. we will be joined by another guest will me come back. juan williams, the author of a number of books that deal with civil rights and american history. to the 1948 clip now. >> mr. chairman, fellow democrats, fellow americans, i realize that in speaking on behalf of the minority report on civil rights that i am

dealing with a charged issue. an issue which has been confused by emotionalism on all sides of the fence. i must rise at this time to support the minority report, the report that spells out our democracy. a report that the people of this country can and will understand and a report that they will enthusiastically acclaim on the great issue of civil rights. [applause] to those who say that we are rushing this issue of civil rights, i say to them, we are 172 years late. [applause] after all, i have been the destroyer of the democratic party, the enemy of the south, the, quote-unquote, "nigger lover." i never felt so lonesome and so unwanted in all my life as i did in those first few weeks and

months as a united states senator. >> that second clip was hubert humphrey reflecting on what it was like coming to washington in 1949 after his big speech in the 1948 convention. juan williams, welcome to our conversation. how important in the history of civil rights was hubert humphrey? >> that 1948 speech was truly a landmark. that is the moment at which you see organized politics get behind what we think of as the modern 20th-century civil-rights movement. the democratic party shed some much of the paralysis. it had been reliant on the dixiecrats. remember, the south dominated the democratic party politically. you see someone rise up in the democratic party in the form of this very public convention. his voice is heard nationwide at the convention.

he is saying to people across the land, this is an abomination. this is not what the democratic party, not what the american people should be standing for. he is speaking in terms of national morality. and they call to justice. he does it as a cost. many of the dixiecrat leaders walked out of the convention. it has a tremendous consequence that will fall like dominoes throughout american history. >> name some of those who walked out of the convention. >> i am trying to think. strom thurmond would be the big one. you had eastland, you had some of the other governors and members of the senate who were right there. >> how risky was it for hubert humphrey to put his neck out on the line for civil rights? was it as controversial here at home?

getting your talking about after he became senator. >> know, when he was running. >> he was still mayor, but he was a candidate. >> to speak out for civil rights, was that considered -- >> it resonated here fine. he came back as a hero here. in other parts of the country, it was a real problem. >> was there any risk for truman? >> absolutely. >> how did truman feel about it? >> when he first started the speech, truman called him a pipsqueak. he was really upset about it. he thought he had ruined the election for him. he was upset. truman condemned him for it. he learned later on that it had helped him. he turned it around and used it to get the african-american vote in the north. and that helped him win. >> want inflamed his commitment to civil rights? where does it come from? >> nobody knows.

he got it from his father, but where did his father get it in the middle of south dakota? his father raised him to believe that people are people. and they had their own form of color blindness. it was remarkable. there were no african americans in the small town he was in. one catholic family, one jewish family who both had crosses burned on their lawns. no one can come up with a reason. it certainly was there. >> let's go to another call. andrew from new york. >> good evening. how are you doing? >> your question? >> i was hoping that you could comment on the relationship between senator robert kennedy and hubert humphrey and how it developed from 1960 to 1968 when they were vying for the democratic presidential nomination?

>> ok. >> the rfk relationship started in 1960. he did not have much of a relationship with him before that. it did not start off well. the cause of the way that humphrey was treated in the primaries by the kennedys. he learned to like robert kennedy. he campaigned for kennedy in 1966 when he ran for the senate. in 1968, they had a meeting. they agreed that if humphrey got the nomination, kennedy would support him. if kennedy got the nomination, humphrey would support him. he was a party person. bobby kennedy, and so was humphrey. >> next up is ron from washington. >> i would like to jump forward to the 1968 campaign. can you elaborate -- my

recollection is that president johnson tried to scuttle humphrey's effort. that was one of the closest popular elections in history. it is my recollection that it -- the bombing pause, if that had been started a month earlier, it might have made the crucial difference. can you elaborate on that? thank you. >> did lyndon johnson tried to scuttle his bid for the white house? >> he did not help him very much. he did these kinds of things where he had nixon at the ranch and then hubert humphrey at the ranch. he would tell humphrey that no press could be there. part of the belief among historians is that johnson believed that humphrey might end the war and make him look bad. nixon played a few dirty tricks, and so he came out for humphrey at that point.

he thought he might lose texas at the end. he was really late in the campaign when he started working for humphrey. >> i want to bring the story back to civil rights. civil-rights legislation is being pushed forward. tell that story. ashumphrey's involvement is the democratic whip. you have lbj as president. basically the inheritor of kennedy's attempt to get civil rights legislation passed. kennedy, there was some doubt about his commitment, was he willing to pay the price in terms of the southerners that would oppose it? after the assassination, johnson had a commitment to get

this done in honor to president kennedy. >> does he make humphrey the point man? >> humphrey becomes the point man in the senate. mike mansfield is the majority leader, a democrat. but it was humphrey, the man who has been persistent in terms of calling for civil rights and justice as part of the democratic agenda. he takes up the cause in the senate. he is up against it because the rules were different then. you could filibuster to no end. i believe the numbers were something like 67 votes required in order to end the filibuster. if you look through history, there are few points at which you get enough votes to end a filibuster. it is almost unheard of. it takes a great deal of effort by hubert humphrey to hold off a republican effort to prolong the filibuster.

he was finally able to do it. what is interesting is the legislation cannot even be put through the normal channels. if you put it through the judiciary committee, it would go through senator eastland. it is kind of an extra judicial process being put in place. and in the bill gets its overwhelming passage. >> what were the opponents to civil rights constitutional arguments? >> we have a right to run our business. we have a right to allow whoever we want in. the constitution allows us to do that. that was one of the main arguments. there were a number of them. the dixiecrats, the southern democrats were the biggest obstacle for him.

he had a number of republicans that were on his side. there were a coalition of republicans and democrats that made it happen. there was no way you're going to change any of their minds. it was an interesting group. the opposition was conservative republicans. barry goldwater was against the civil rights bill. and the dixiecrats, those were his obstacles. >> the drama of this filibuster coming down to the wire. we have another clip. this is hubert humphrey and strom thurmond debating the 1964 civil-rights bill. two clips back-to-back. let's watch the debate.

>> we know that fellow americans who happen to be negro have been denied equal access to places of public accommodation. denied in their travels a chance for a place to rest and to eat. >> it is not public accommodations. it is invasion of private property. >> in the city of birmingham, alabama, there was an ordinance that said if you're going to have a restaurant and you were going to permit a negro to come in, you have a seven-foot wall down the middle of the restaurant, dividing the white from the colored. how foolish this is. isn't that an invasion of private property? >> we live in a country of freedom. under our constitution, a man has a right to use his own public property as he sees fit. these bills create no jobs. so who jobs are these negros going to take, the white man's jobs or the negro's jobs?

>> we must as individual citizens speak out against prejudice and discrimination. we must be willing to accept the fact that every american is entitled to equal rights under the constitution and under the law. no less than that. >> the most difficult task that i have as the floor leader of the civil-rights bill is just being there. having to watch every move and make sure that we have 51 senators present or readily available. one of the tactics of the opposition is to call for repeated quorums. it means we have to produce 51 senators to answer the roll. >> that story, always to have 51 supporters of the legislation on the floor. how did he organize people? >> he had teams that would rotate.

if they didn't get a quorum, the senate would be shut down. it would work in the favor of the anti-civil rights people. they were able to bring only two or three people. they had this rotating basis. they did things like drive to baseball games and take a senator out of a baseball game. they did all kinds of things. they had a list and they had a schedule for senators. it was well done. they had some moments when it did not work. they had to get people from outside the senate. >> was the opposition largely regional? >> you had goldwater, for example. he is a westerner. he was from arizona. his opposition was libertarian. this is a free country, a matter of private property.

you should not be telling a man what to do. you see much of this gets reflected in strom thurmond's language. he is not speaking in terms of racism. he is saying this is a violation of my rights as an american to make personal choices and freedom. humphrey is saying, this is ridiculous. this is not a genuine argument. what you are doing is perpetrating the worst kind of racism. that becomes the argument. it is interesting to go back and listen to that clip. we have such arguments today about the jobs in our country. you can hear strom thurmond saying, this legislation does not produce jobs. he says that negros will take the white man's jobs. clearly, he was comfortable saying this. it had some effect in that era.

it is not as if he was speaking into a void. to the contrary, it was generating a political response and strong opposition to the civil rights legislation. >> let's take a call from west virginia. >> i am so glad you called me. this is wonderful. i haven't spoken but to one of the sons of senator humphrey. and last well, since he died over the years. i am the fellow who sang the hubert humphrey songs. i have such a wonderful love for him. over the years, he took me everywhere. i sang everything. he taught me politics. he had great respect for me because i came from a family -- my father worked railroad, my grandfather mccoy worked the coal mines. hubert humphrey heard me sing

on a radio station in 1960. he gave me $25 a day to travel with them. teddy white became one of my best friends. teddy taught me a lot, and everyone in minnesota that i have met throughout america, the henry fondas and the presidents and vice-presidents, people all over this country. i am 77 years old. i did records for capitol records for years. i'm doing the stories about the hatfields and the mccoys, my mother's family. hubert humphrey was, to me, like my father. >> thank you so much for that personal story. do you know the songs?

>> i will not sing them, but i know them. he traveled with him all the time. he was with him very closely. he is one person i had lost in this whole search for interviews. i am glad he is alive and well. >> 77 years old. thank you for calling in and adding that personal touch. we have to get one more relationship established. he developed a friendship with martin luther king? >> he had a relationship with king around legislation. if you look inside the reaction of the black community, there were lots of people who were militants who did not see the value of this legislation. king is saying, this is a necessary step. if you go back to the great march on washington in 1963, in large measure, it is to say to the congress, pass the civil rights act.

humphrey is one of the great supporters of this. he is at the march on washington. he is someone who is emphatic in his support. even as you get people saying, we should not have a march on washington. they're just trying to pressure us politically. humphrey thought it was a good and necessary step. >> at the early stages of the filibuster, he met with martin luther king. he said to him, i want you to know that we are on the same page. his policy was to treat them with respect. use the humphrey way rather than the johnson way. if i say things to them in public that you do not like, i am just saying this because we want this bill to get passed.

>> we can hardly do justice to his career before he ran for president. at least to get some sense of his work on the national stage in 1968, he decided to run for president. we did not establish this, but lyndon johnson made the decision early in 1968 that he would not seek the office. that is setting the stage. at that point, how many democratic contenders are thinking about challenging lyndon johnson? >> bobby kennedy and eugene mccarthy. >> and they were anti-war candidates? >> yes, they were. >> when did johnson announce? >> early in 1968. >> was that a surprise to the nation? >> it was a shock to humphrey. johnson showed up at humphrey's apartment. he said, "listen to my speech. i have two endings. i am not going to tell you which one. you should listen to the

speech." he had not decided yet. humphrey was in mexico. he was called out to watch this broadcast. he announced that he was leaving the office. because of the chaos, they thought they heard that he was immediately leaving office, which would have made humphrey president. there was all this commotion. they realized he was leaving at the end of his term. it was a complete shock to him, and the country. >> susan, as you asked about who was running against him, it really was mccarthy. he is the one that was in new hampshire. he was taking on johnson. johnson is not actively campaigning, but he had people all around. mccarthy is the anti- establishment, anti-johnson candidate. he has support from people who were superstars.

we still know barbra streisand. they were people who were anti- vietnam war. all of the college students are emphatic about mccarthy. gene mccarthy does surprisingly well in new hampshire. it legitimizes the idea that johnson is vulnerable. that is after mccarthy's success, is when you start to see robert kennedy willing to jump in. people are questioning why he is jumping in to block mccarthy's momentum. that sets the table. even as hubert humphrey is thinking that he is trying to pull back on the war, he is pressured by the fact that he is loyal to the man who gave him the vice presidency, lyndon johnson. it is one of those wonderful political stories. hubert humphrey is a good guy. he is not going to put lyndon johnson in a position where johnson feels that he is being undercut by his number two.

but at the same time, and as you discussed earlier, johnson is totally dismissive of humphrey. especially his contribution or desire -- this war is not the right war. >> let's get to another call. this is larry in sherman oaks, california. >> i am a big fan of humphrey. for many years, it took me quite a while to accept the fact that he was never going to be president. even after his passing. i was able to channel that into putting up my own humphrey website. in 1998, i visited the humphrey institute. we looked and the catalogs and did not see any items surrounding middle east war. i would have thought humphrey would have made some speeches or interviews or something. i did not see anything.

that surprised me. >> was he involved in middle east policy? did he speak out on it? >> i do not think that was at the forefront. there was too much else on his plate. i do not remember seeing anything either. i have been through all of his archives. >> the early primaries and lyndon johnson's announcement sent things into warp speed. it was the year of assassinations, the first being the assassination of martin luther king. what happened in the country with the king assassination? >> it is hard to summarize it. you have riots in cities like washington, d.c., chicago, kansas city. it becomes a national moment of crisis. you had people fearful that there was going to be a large- scale racial war in the country.

the unrest that surrounded the vietnam war is still present, but now it becomes a background. king was an opponent of the vietnam war. he said it was an unjust war. and why are black and white boys dying in this war? there were people who were trying to join the civil rights movement with the anti-war movement. king, who had not been political, is becoming more political. there are people inside the civil rights movement who recognize that johnson has been so supportive in terms of civil rights. why are you, dr. king, challenging this administration? it has been so supportive of us. king says he feels a moral

imperative to say that this is part of an injustice that is being perpetrated by america. america is on the wrong side of world history in pursuing the war effort. you have half a million americans at war, record numbers of debt. he is out there speaking against it. a year before he is assassinated, he is atin new yoh that gets lots of attention. he is on the cathedral in washington, d.c., speaking against the war. it puts him in the position of being an opponent of the johnson administration. >> thank you very much. i have a quick comment and a

quick question. i have a video at home. the title is the words of a true friend, and it was about hubert humphrey, and it was towards the end of his life, and he knew he was almost of the end, and at the end of his speech, he said, i would rather live 50 years as a tiger than 100 years like a chicken. i met a guy 20 years ago who said he worked on the humphrey campaign in 1968, and he said he came home after working on the campaign, and he was at this hotel, and he was looking at this park, and the news came on and said there was violence in the park, and he called humphrey the next day when they had a meeting, and humphrey said, i

know nixon has been traded for a while, and there is nothing we can do about it, but nixon was doing it to try to link humphrey to anti-war protesters. i wonder if you have ever heard anything like this. >> there were stories about it. there was no way to know for sure. but on the civil rights from the were very important. they are trying to get them to understand racial acquitted.

they are part of that legacy, so here they are now linking hands with not only randolph but also dr. king to support know what she -- the march on washington. he has got several people right behind him in that video, and you can see others right there with him, so ipsa -- so it becomes not just a matter of support but for people who want to have leverages of control over the civil rights efforts. >> robert kennedy assassinated in los angeles, but let's listen to the dean, and we will talk about.

>> i am in the construction trade. i do not want this to turn into a union rally, but my first political involvement in politics was with hubert humphrey. i live in the city of brooklyn ohio. you can imagine what was happening, and he sat down for a couple of hours with our mayor. i also got drafted the following year, so thanks for having me.

>> hubert humphrey, the happy warrior is the name he was given through his career. there is a beautiful building. we are using that as our backdrop to talk about the presidential campaign of 1968. unsuccessful in this bid, but he made a major contribution to american history, and we are learning about that. in june, the california primary and the next figure to be gunned down, and robert kennedy. what happened? but >> he did not feel comfortable campaigning at all under those circumstances, and it sent him a way back.

that is really the beginning of his numbers sliding. earlier in the year, in the early primary season he was ahead 10 points over every candidate. after robert kennedy was shot, it looked like the democratic party was falling apart. when he got back on his feet in july, he was already behind nixon. >> what stands out to my mind is we were talking a moment ago about the king assassination. robert kennedy gives an amazing speech that so many people still remember in indianapolis on the night of the king assassination. there was rioting all over the country. there is racial anger and unease. he talks about the king assassination in terms of his own brother's assassination. all we can do to try to ease the pain. the patience that is required. just a few months later, here he is laying dead in los angeles. i think the sense is that america's leaders are being

killed. people who are the idealists. people who are to carry on the grand traditions of liberalism, people challenging the establishment are being eliminated. there is a sadness and despair in the american body politic at the moment. it is hard to capture the extent of it. sometimes we have arguments today about polarization that people always said, if you were here in 1968 you will understand how bad things could have been. it felt like the country was coming apart. we do not know the forces of evil at work and why so many great american leaders are being killed at this moment. don't forget president johnson's approval numbers are in the low 30's. he can't even come out at a major event. he will not be able to go to the democratic convention.

it really is an incredible moment in 1968. hubert humphrey was there. you talk about the happy warrior. he wants to stand up with people and say, there is reason to hope america can do it. he is seen as an establishment figure because of his association with the incumbent lyndon johnson. >> our cities are burning, kids are rioting, leaders are being burned out. people are trying to bring america to the next stage. we're going to go to the next stage as well. we will listen to a call. our next stop will be about the opposition that's gathering with george wallace and also the republicans. listen to jim from new york. >> hello. how are you? >> we are great. what is your question? >> let me first say how much i am enjoying the program. i appreciate it. my question really deals with

the first draft lottery, which i believe was either in 1967 or 1968. i do have great recollection of being eligible for that. i had a very low number which upset everyone in my family. what was hubert humphrey's position relative to the whole concept of the lottery? what did he do in that issue? >> i do not know if i ever heard hubert humphrey say anything about the lottery. i do know later on he worked to raise the voting age because he thought it was unfair people were being drafted at 18 and could not vote until they were 21. later on his life he had different ideas. he probably felt the draft itself was probably not such a good idea. at the time i do not know if he said anything about it. >> the summer of 1968 and the country is in disarray.

the assassination of both king and kennedy. on the republican side, richard nixon who had also been in the senate and former vice president wanted to be president as well. what was his campaign's reaction to all of the turmoil? how are they positioning their man? >> the principal response from richard nixon was law and order. he wanted to restore law and order in the streets and get the counterculture -- all of the young people and their antiwar efforts and protesting on campus -- he wanted to get that under control. he appealed to a group of the silent majority in american politics who felt they were being put upon by all of these young people, some of which you had supported mccarthy. richard nixon in this period is a guy who himself has concerns

about the war. he has questions about it. he positions himself as a staunch supporter of the military and the war as a counter to some of the democrats -- democratic efforts into separate himself from the johnson forces. >> hubert humphrey still suffering from being loyal to his president. the two candidates were able to distinguish themselves. but let me just say, it is interesting if you look on the republican side, it is not only richard nixon running but you have romney. romney was trying to position himself as anti-war. it leads us to what we will remember in george romney's presidential run, he says he has been brainwashed by the general and political leaders about what is going on in vietnam. it alienated some of the silent

majority base. they wanted to see the war continued and to win the war. romney thought that he could outflank nixon by be in the anti-war republican. turned out he hurt himself with his base and he was never able to challenge richard nixon after that. then you have people like rockefeller in that mix. guess who, ronald reagan is in that mix. ronald reagan is the strongest conservative as opposed to richard nixon at the miami convention. it ultimately, it comes down to reagan and rockefeller knocking each other out and allowing richard nixon to have a clear path to the nomination. >> let's take a call from fred. >> hello. i wanted to mention one of my

stories about hubert humphrey when he was the mayor of minneapolis. the mayor's office overlooked the bell telephone companies across the street. he saw them taking in food. taking in food to prepare for a long strike. they had already emptied the building and all of that stuff. the strike. hubert humphrey was always a great friend of the working people. that is my comment. >> thank you for telling the story. let's move right on to another

call from nancy in virginia. >> i was 14 years old in 1968. i was visiting in washington. my older cousin was a hubert humphrey supporter. i was always proud of that. i wanted to add since i heard on msnbc earlier that the occupy movement is coming to d.c. in december. i was wondering what your guests could offer in recognizing provocateurs. i know that dr. king was for non-violence in knoxville, tennessee. all of the 99%ers i approve of is nonviolent. thank you. >> he studied at the highlander school as did rosa parks and others involved with the civil rights movement. initially, it is there to help

people with union activities fighting against coal miners and teach them how to organize. those tactics expanded to civil rights protest and the like, obviously in the case that dr. king and rosa parks become so well known for. extending that to the lessons she would take to something like occupy, remember when king is assassinated, he was attending to lead a poor people's campaign. the poor people's campaign was going to be on the national mall right in front of the u.s. congress and the capital and the ideas dr. king expressed was he wanted to share the leaders of the free world that there was still poverty including in appalachia. also in the big cities. he was going to build shanty huts right there on the mall. talk about an occupy movement. there was a fear that this was going to attract all kinds of

anarchist elements. that is what we're seeing in occupy. >> we have a clip from a little bit later during the general election. talks about the fact there was no debates during the general election. a lot of discussion was of whether there would be. here is richard nixon talking about not debating. >> i happen to be of the opinion we need a debate in this country. i think you and hubert humphrey -- >> i think mr. hubert humphrey as having a great time debating himself. >> you are prejudiced, mr. nixon. if you do not want to debate with the third-party candidate whose name shall not be mentioned, why don't you get your friends in the house of representatives to pass a special law permitting you and mr. hubert humphrey to debate. >> have you ever looked at the

membership on that committee? it is always amusing to be when people said, why don't i get the republicans to do something of a debate. let's remember that the senate is 2-1 democratic. the house is 3-2 democratic. anytime that hubert humphrey with his influence on his side wants a debate, i would think he would be able to get the democrats to pass it. i think that my power in terms of what i can get the republican members in the house to do is greatly overestimated. that is the problem as you know it. they are not opposing the debate. they are sitting with wallace getting 21% of the poll -- i am sorry. i should not have mentioned his name. with wallace getting 21% of the poll, they are insisting that they cannot go back to their constituents and laws that provide him an equal chance. >> if you got your friends and mr. humphrey got his friends,

you would have enough friends to bring this thing on. >> i do not think he has that many friends. [laughter] >> richard nixon talking about the 1968 campaign. the focus of our discussion is hubert humphrey, democratic candidates for president unsuccessful in 1968. we will take a call from jim. >> great show. hello. >> we can hear you. go ahead. >> i have a purely speculative question i want to ask to mick dealing with the power of celebrities in 1968 that supported mainly kennedy and mccarthy and after the announcements of a bombing halt possibilities, many of them came flocking back to humphrey.

many participated in an election telethon. many of these stars were there like frank sinatra, paul newman, sonny and cher. there was a poll taken the next day on election day saying humphrey would win. my question is do you think that if these stars and this telethon taking questions on air, that humphrey might have pulled it off if they would have come to him earlier in the fall in 1968? >> it probably would have helped if he had come earlier in the year and joined the humphrey campaign. nothing else was going on at that time besides the telephone. they thought they had peace in vietnam the weekend before his

poll ratings just kept going up. he almost passed nixon in most polls because peace in vietnam would have won him the presidency. richard nixon convinced the south vietnam's leader to not come to the peace talks because richard nixon would give him a better deal with president. this is documented all over the place. he backed out of peace talks. many people think that is what lost the election at the end. >> right behind you is a campaign poster for george wallace. when did he come into the race and what block did he represent? >> he represents southerners who were alienated not only by hubert humphrey but by the

student protesters. he is representing working- class people even in the northern cities who i think are frustrated with the entire climate. they think there is a lack of law and order. they think the minorities and the blacks are out of control. they think nobody is listening to them. this is the archie bunker element. that is who wallace comes to represent. a lot of people would have been democrats -- they argue in people or seven as per ed they are not in line with what has become of the democratic party in terms of mccarthy, they're just not there. wallace formed to their feelings. >> in the interest of time we have to fast forward to the story. the republicans meet in 1968. democrats convene at the outset of chicago. the party had series fractions about the war.

chicago was what kind of scene? >> where do you begin with chicago? humphrey tried to get the entire convention moved to miami because he knew it was coming. johnson would not do it because he was so close with daley and he promised daley there would be a convention there. there were all kinds of strikes. there were baracades up. they expected 15,000 protesters. it was chaos. he was worried about threats to his family. there have been threats to kidnap his wife. he arrived at the convention without a peace plank. johnson squashed it right at the end. he ended up coming to the convention. >> did he have the nomination in hand when he got there? >> people were nominated in different ways. it was not by primaries, it was by the delegates. he had the most delegates by way of lyndon johnson.

he had some sway with the delegates that would nominate him for president. >> that is a critical moment in terms of political history. humphrey is the last nominee who gets the nomination not through the primary process. you get people but the other big city leaders and union leaders to get behind humphrey almost out of anger at the counterculture movement and the anti-war movement. daley is not only beating up on protesters in the street, he is beating up on media inside the convention. it is a horrible scene. in terms of the american public that is watching this, a huge turn off. >> richard daley was determined to have law and order.

>> the police were there and the national guard are all on the streets. they are whipping heads. it is a really horrible scene. humphry is put in a position of saying he stands with the bosses against people who are breaking down law and order civilization. the anarchist in the streets and the drugs that are being featured and the free sex. he is trying to appeal to the silent majority in saying he stands for law and order. democrats are not an out of control party. it is ironic. hubert humphrey is a guy who was not a great supporter of the war. he was an idealist. in this moment he becomes a representative of the big city mayor union boss, lbj bullying hardball politics. >> mike is watching us from honolulu. >> i really enjoy your program.

i am 69 years old now and i remember in 1961 i was in high school. i worked for kennedy. he was running against hubert humphrey. humphrey had a little campaign slogan or a campaign jingle to the tune of "give me that old- time religion." i remember that. of course, we go back to 1968 and i was married it then. i voted for hubert humphrey. my question for the author is this. was there this animosity between the humphrey camp and the kennedy camp because of his anti-catholic campaign in 1960? thank you. >> i assume he means was it

still there in 1968. i do not think so. i think it was gone at that point. the things that john kennedy did to hubert humphrey in the 1960 campaign paled in comparison. he basically bought that election in west virginia. >> we have a clip we did not show from 1960. i am going to take a call. we have jfk talking about hubert humphrey from 1960 to help show some of the relationship. let's get to john in tennessee. >> hubert humphrey and mccarthy were close friends for many years as fellow dfl'ers. mccarthy told humphrey he would come out and support him soon. i think the assumption was something like september. mccarthy never did.

that was a terrible burden for humphrey. probably mccarthy could have swung enough votes to get humphrey elected. i am just wondering whether our experts share that view or whether they have some other view. >> thank you. >> we interviewed walter mondale and he said if mccarthy would have come out on the stage at the convention and said humphrey is not our best candidate and we are against the war. if we need to vote for him instead of richard nixon, they would have won the election. they had a couple weeks before the convention where is that he would come out for him by mid september. he never did. they were talking constantlyall

throughout the campaign trying to get mccarthy to come on board with humphrey. he would not do it. he left the country for a while. nobody knows why. >> if you have joined us along the way, mick caouette has done a documentary. we will show you the cover along the way. many clips we are showing are from his research. this is from 1960 talking about his relationship with hubert humphrey and his influence on his presidential campaign. >> this week i had the opportunity to debate with mr. richard nixon. i feel i should reveal that i have a great advantage in that debate. i am not referring to anyone's makeup man. [applause] the advantage i had was mr. nixon had just debated with krushchev. i debated with hubert humphrey and that gave me an edge. >> debating with hubert humphrey gave him an edge.

greg, you are on. welcome to the conversation. hello? >> hello. i was just -- this kind of relates to what you were talking about earlier. humphrey and lbj's relationship, why would he have to attack his own over vietnam? >> why did lbj attack hubert humphrey? because lbj wanted to win the war and he did not want anyone telling him -- getting off of it. he wanted people to do what he told them to do.

humphrey had reservations about the war and he knew it. he had been a free spirit his whole career and suddenly he was in a situation where he had to be controlled. johnson really cost and some damage. >> i think basically he was protecting his own legacy. >> we are going to close out our conversation with a clip of the 1968 national guardsmen who were students themselves in the street holding back a student protesters. this is hubert humphrey in a clip from the convention as he accepts the nomination. >> where there is hatred, let me show love. where there is injury, pardon. where there is doubt, faiths.

where there is despair, hope. where there is darkness, light. those are the words of a saint. may those of us with less purity listen to them well and may america tonight resolve that never, never again shall we see what we have seen. [applause] >> i was heartbroken. all at once there was this total disarray. what do i do under these circumstances? >> that was a clip directly from the documentary about

hubert humphrey reflecting on the terrible turmoil at the 1968 convention. we have about 35 minutes left. we are going to move along to the next part of the exhibit and it takes some seats and round out our discussion of the life and career, continue taking telephone calls. as we do, we will show you some of the humphrey commercials of the 1968 presidential campaign. we'll see you in a couple of minutes. [no audio] >> democrats have paved the way for them to get good summer jobs. you have more money today for little luxuries because democrats worked hard to push

into a higher minimum wage. you do not have to worry about supporting your mother today and she does not worry about being a burden on you thanks to social security and medicare. quite an accomplishment -- you know it, and you only heard one minute's worth. what have the democrats ever done for you and yours? think about it. >> paid for by citizens for humphrey-muskie. >> the vice-president of the united states. >> we have seen the terrible results of violence for this country. it would be intolerable if a handful of violent people -- and that is what it is, just a handful -- could harden us to needed change. i have seen a violence that perverts the spirit of the america. i saw it at the republican convention in 1964 when governor rockefeller were shouted down.

i saw it in minneapolis when a man i disagree with, wallace, was heckled into silence. it happened to me in philadelphia. we should give notice to this violent few. there are americans that are willing to sacrifice for change but they want to do it without being threatened and want to do it peacefully. they are the nonviolent majority. black and white who are for change without violence. these are the people whose voice i want to be. >> the preceding was a pre- recorded political announcement paid for by citizens for humphrey. >> mr. richard nixon, where do you stand on federal aid education? where do you stand on expanded medicare? where do you stand on aid to

higher education? mr. nixon, where do you stand on the program? where do you stand? i must say -- >> you know something, richard nixon has not won an election on his own in 18 years. let's keep a good thing going. >> those were campaign commercials for the 1968 campaign as we talk about hubert h. humphrey, our featured contender in our series on 14 men who lost the election but changed history. we are live from the minnesota history center. this is a special exhibit they are doing in 1968 which i am told will travel to other cities. >> chicago for sure, and i believe atlanta or charlotte as well. >> chicago is certainly appropriate as we talk about this. >> it is time to talk about the fall campaign. juan williams on my left and mick caouette on my right. both have written a number of books about the civil rights

era. in the fall campaign, we have wallace, nixon, and hubert humphrey all fighting for the white house. we had riots in the spring, did they continue? >> there was some rioting that persisted. it was not of the major kind of smoke in the sky variety that we saw earlier in the year. the racial tension was palpable throughout the country. it is interesting the way that nixon presented himself was as someone who was going to restore order in the big cities. this also had a strong appeal to people who felt this civil rights movement had sowed chaos. it is way beyond a just a matter of the quality. it is creating instability in the country. combined with the anti-vietnam war sentiment, you get richard nixon as the guy who is a man of stability, law, and order. a man who said, we can win in the vietnam even though we will

know he goes on to be somebody to start the pullout from vietnam. he understands he is appealing to the silent majority and that is what his campaign is it out. >> hubert humphrey comes out on vietnam still tied to lyndon johnson's policy? >> probably worse. lyndon johnson has funding he is holding onto. the democratic national committee has no money. he has no money. he has to borrow money to start his campaign. no tv ads. the promotion whatsoever. he is 20 points down in the polls. that is how he starts his campaign. >> how does it play out? >> it runs into -- it continues like that until the end of september. he is booed offstage in seattle by protesters. it continues and nothing

changes. then he gives a speech in late september on september 30 in salt lake city where he has little left to lose at that point. he makes a break with johnson in a real subtle way where he call for a bombing halt and to bring the troops home. things change instantly. he gets something like $1 million in cash come into him. people saw it as a chance. the next place he went, it is humphrey ,we are for you. >> here is a scene from those months. a popular refrain he met from protesters -- dump the hump. >> i proceeded to go out the main door walking with students and protesters on each side of the sidewalk pushing and shoving and cursing. there were throwing everything they could it to harass me. one of the things that were doing is throwing urine, cans of urine at me and my party, and other things.

it was a terrible ordeal. i walked every step. i did no running. i got to my car. i waved back at the students and we started to drive away. >> i believe that -- >> dump the hump! dump the hump! >> the republican candidate owes it to the people to come out of the shadows. >> dump the hump! dump the hump! dump the hump! dump the hump! [unintelligible]

>> what you heard and saw was hubert humphrey reminiscing about a visit to stanford university and scenes from events in boston and seattle. this is shirley from dallas. >> i first heard of you for humphrey when i was in my 20's. he was the mayor of minneapolis. he was on a program called "town meeting of the air." he made a speech in favor of civil rights and similar to what he did in 1948. since then he was always my political hero. i would like to ask a question. was he not active in the anti- nuclear weapons toward the end of his career? i would like to hear more about that. >> earlier in his career, he was

actually the force behind the disarmament agency and the test ban treaty. he could not get in the middle of the 1950's -- he could not get the senate and congress because of the cold war to talk about disarmament and talk about negotiating with russians. he started a subcommittee and set this up by himself. the treaty was signed by president kennedy who turned to humphrey and said, this is yours and i hope it works. >> we talk about the general election in 1968. george wallace is there. george wallace's vice presidential candidate is curtis lemay. he suggests that the united states might use nuclear weapons in vietnam. people are alarmed by this. people have not forgotten what

happened in terms of the a-bomb. it just is an example of how extreme and harsh in this year was and how the 1968 campaign is about war and its bets and social change taking place in the country. we talk about the civil-rights movement and the idea of assassinations. there is also a feminism movement, campuses are on fire. young people are just angry. the draft is going on. there is great discontent over this period. that has become -- this perido where we are going to seek the change coming out of the primary progress. after that, no longer is it the case that the big union bosses and the mayors are dictating everything. you will see the need for the democratic party to come back together and it does not do so

for a very long time. it receives a trajectory and which the south becomes republican. >> he mentioned vice presidential nominees. hubert humphrey chose ed muskie. how did that alliance come together? >> he had known him for quite a while. everyone wanted a southern candidate to pull the south. he said, i want somebody who will be a good president if something happens to me. assassinations were very fresh. the vice president was a heartbeat away. he wanted someone he liked and was stable. did not help him much politically. he was not thinking along those lines. i should say as well that he also spoke to nelson rockefeller about being his vice president. crossing party lines which would have been pretty remarkable. nelson rockefeller gave it 24 hours and said he could not do it. they were friends. rockefeller did not have any

special liking for nixon. >> the next telephone call is from virginia. >> hello. i am enjoying the series. i was intrigued about the comment earlier that humphrey was the originator of the idea for the peace corps and a lot of other ideas for kennedy. i wonder if kennedy ever gave him credit for those ideas and what some of the other ideas of his work. >> i think pretty much publicly, he gave him credit for the food for peace program. i have a speech where he did that. i do not know what he said about the peace corps. i think he might have said that humphrey helped them -- these are humphrey's ideas, some of these ideas. he took them on the 1960 campaign.

when he lost the primary to jfk, he said i want to get my ideas into this administration. he worked on them. >> hubert humphrey was 57 years old. he was born in 1911. in 1968 he was 57 years old. how did he present himself as a candidate? we have all of this change going on in society. was he conventional? >> extremely conventional. we talk a little bit about the difficulty he had portraying himself as an opponent of the war. he was born in 1911. he is not a counterculture and die. there is no way he will be standing around in a dashiki or with long hair and be credible. he is trying to say that he understands the need for stability and law and order even though he is not a law-and- order candidate. he is in a suit and tie and he has difficulty even with the kind of poetics that robert kennedy had employed when king was assassinated. that is not hubert humphrey. hubert humphrey is a great speaker. but how you speak -- you have

people screaming at you and they see you as an operator for lyndon johnson who is unpopular. he is in a political vice. >> it is impossible for him to present himself as anything. it was done for him. he did not have much of a chance to beat himself. interestingly enough, he was the revolutionary in 1948. he was in the other role in 1948 and he became part of the establishment he attacked in 1948. >> a lot of change from 1948 to 1968. next telephone call. >> hello. i worked for hubert humphrey. my husband in the 1960's was his press secretary. i worked for muriel humphrey. i was her press secretary. >> oh, my goodness. >> we were involved in his 1960

campaign. we were with him for all of 1968. we were at the democratic convention and the horror and tragedy of what was unfolding. i have the experience of escorting muriel humphrey and their children through the basement of the convention center with tear-gas seeping all around us as we were going into the convention hall on the evening that he would get the democratic nomination. on that night from the hotel room at the conrad hilton, we were with him as he stood there looking out the window at the violence and the terrible tragedy unfolding in grant park. the atmosphere in the room was almost of a funeral.

humphrey was the saddest man you could ever imagine on the night that he had achieved his greatest political victory to be the democratic presidential candidate. this was a man whose ideals and integrity carried through his whole life and in his personal life when you knew him at home or with him privately he was the same person with the same passion. the same conviction for civil rights, for working americans, for the concerns of world peace that you heard in his public statements. i do not think we have had somebody with his gift in the years since.

>> pat, our time is short. are we doing your boss justice tonight? is there one aspect of his political career you think it is important for our viewers to hear about? >> i think you are doing a beautiful job on him. you have touched on so many things. i was happy that he was being given some credit for the tremendous array of ideas and programs that he actually generated and then championed during the kennedy administration. >> thank you for your call. what is your family name? >> my last name is griffith. >> my husband wrote a biography of hubert humphrey in 1963

called "humphrey -- a candid biography." >> thank you so much for being a part of our program. we have just 15 minutes left. we still have the long life of hubert humphrey to cover. let's talk about election night. where did he watched the returns? >> i think he was in the hotel in minneapolis. >> what were the results like? >> they really thought they had a chance at the end. illinois, ohio, and a couple of other states came in at the very end. they were very close. and they were ahead for a while. he basically went to bed thinking he probably was not going to win and what he woke up found out he did not. >> it was very close. ohio, illinois, and california

which all voted richard nixon. they do not go to nixon by a lot. it is very, very close. i think it is just a of a percentage point difference in terms of absolute percentage of votes in the national election. >> a close popular vote. the electoral college vote, 301 for richard nixon, 191 for humphrey. george wallace got 46 electoral votes. who did george wallace take votes away from? >> that is a good argument. i think if you think about the fact that the south was still mostly democratic and they are reacting to civil-rights efforts, i think those would have been available for a democrat who was operating at the behest of the democratic machine. the union bosses, the mayors, the wealthy in the country. that was gone. the had fallen apart. they were trying to pull together for a country as part of lbj's machine. lbj was not actively supporting. he did not let the money go. he did not make the effort to

try to give those people a reason to vote for humphrey. if i look back on it, i take it those were democratic votes. we've not talked about african americans were coming into the process. what happened if king lives? does king get more involved at this point? as king say that he is for humphrey? he might have. would king possibly launch a third-party effort? i do not know. that would have changed the dynamic markedly. >> what was the african-american turn out like in 1968? >> it was pretty good. i do not know the exact numbers. this was right in the aftermath. you get the voting rights act in 1965 and the civil rights act of 1964. much more in the north and west. in the south, there is still intimidation going on. but blacks are turning out in numbers. >> i would say the block of

states or southern states, alabama, mississippi, georgia. if you look at it a different way, if they had a choice of only nixon or humphrey, they might have gone to nixon. it is hard to know where those votes really came from. >> wallace also took louisiana, arkansas, mississippi, and georgia. let's take a call. hi, jim. >> i would like to mention that in 1968 when johnson made his speech and he stepped down that two days before on friday, march 29 -- which i have to correct your guest on the date. on march 29, mr. humphrey agreed to speak at a school. the speech was scheduled for

three weeks later. on sunday, march 31 is when johnson made his speech. i always wondered since that event whether he had a clue on that friday because he scheduled some other speeches later in april on the same date that johnson was going to step down or he was simply anticipating that the possibility may exist. because of that speech, i was able to sit in the front row of his announcement speech on april 27 at the hotel along with the other students that helped invite him. i was also at the capitol the day the civil rights act was passed in 1964. i feel like i will always have somewhat of a privilege from a front-row seat in parts of his life.

finally, i would like to make a comment that most of the progress of legislation and programs that evolved during the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's were a result of hubert humphrey's forward agenda. it seemed at that point when he ran for president in 1968, those who he supported with legislation turned on him and he suddenly became outdated or a little bit too conservative in their eyes. the progressives for civil rights did not view him as a strong advocate, anti-war party did not consider him a strong advocate. >> ok, jim.

we are going to jump in because i think our guests made that exact point earlier. he was a great influence but when it came time for his campaign -- >> he had his signature or hands on over 1000 bills for 10 years. the problem 1968 was there was only one issue and all of the rest were forgotten. it was only vietnam. all of that was lost unfortunately. >> richard nixon won. the war waged on for a couple other years. what about humphrey's life after this? >> nixon did not say he was going to end the war. he said he was going to win the war. >> that plan that he had. >> the secret plan. >> he had a secret plan. that was the effort to appeal to the silent majority. the problem for humphrey again, we talk about how he is trapped

in being lbj's vice-president and lbj is feeling he needs to win this war. he is also trapped with the larger argument with nixon were he wants to say, i am for stability. i am not for things going out of control. this is at the same time nixon really says he is a law-and- order candidate. humphrey can never be that because nixon has the space occupied. even as humphrey is trying, he is alienating people who would be his supporters. >> i will take a call. this is gavin from new york. >> hello. you touched upon this earlier. if george wallace had been out of the 1968 presidential race, would you have seen the outcome being even closer than it was? in all of your opinions, who would it have been closer for? would it have been humphrey on the top where would it have put more ahead? thank you.

>> do you have any more to say on that? >> i do not know why, but from my perspective, i think wallace beat humphrey. i think a lot of working-class union folks who had some allegiances to the democratic party going back to fdr, i think they peeled off. they went with wallace. i do not know if they would have done to the republican party and to nixon. >> we see that in the north. i think the south -- if wallace was not in the race in the south, nixon might have gotten those votes. >> did hubert humphrey give up his aspirations after his defeat in 1968? >> he came close to trying in 1972 but then he backed out to mcgovern. he decided not to do it. he began to be ill at that point. >> but he did go back to the senate? >> in 1970 he took mccarthy's seat in the senate.

his popularity had dropped and he left politics and humphry took it. it was one of the largest landslides of his senatorial career. he served there until 1978 until he died. >> how was his second stand? -- stint. >> he was at the bottom. he was a freshman. he had no committees. walter mondale was the senior senator and he was treated like somebody who was just starting. he was given no respect. he found his own way and with a short time he was working on bills again and he passed a couple of different bills during that time. he got back into it. >> let's take a call from michigan. hello, amy. what is your question? >> my question is since senator humphrey served during the mccarthy era, what was his relationship with joe mccarthy? did mccarthy go after him because he was a liberal? >> that is a complicated question. he tried to pass something

called the communist control act where he tried to make it illegal to be communist. that was done in some part because he was trying to make joe mccarthy -- to bring the truth out and force his hand so he would have to prove somebody was a communist and would be illegal. he could not be quite so he could not be passe, he had to incriminate them. he did not like john mccarthy or any of his tactics. -- joe mccarthy or any of his tactics. >> we have two minutes left. hubert humphrey was very ill with cancer. >> he had bladder cancer. the end of dying in january 1978.

the time before he died he was brought back to the capital for what seemed to be an unusual tribute. >> it never happened before. it was the first time. >> tell us about that. >> it was the first time congress and the senate met for one senator. they met and to honor his work. he died two months later. paul simon spoke. senator paul simon. >> >> he called nixon in christmas and nixon said i do not think i can do it. he showed up at the funeral. intogoe got nixon back washington. >> how did hubert humphrey

change in american history? >> >> hubert humphrey seems to me to stand at the top of that order in terms of people who held elected office, who put themselves out as advocates. on the right side of history. he was well ahead of the curve in terms of pushing the democratic party, pushing politics in the direction of passage of the civil rights act. so much of the change we have seen when it comes to race relations. in political terms you think about barack obama as president today. that does not happen without some of the changes that, as a result of the democratic party. here is to bird humphrey.

he is the last -- hubert humphrey. in the aftermath of his defeat in 1968, you have allocation of delegates based on primaries and process. that is part of hubert humphrey 's legacy. we think about the social programs. the end of the new deal. which nick has been mentioning. efforts on the social justice scene. social programs -- the work of hubert humphrey's fertile mind. >> we have run out of time. we will encourage people to find your documentary. you make the case about how it hubert humphrey changed history. the art of the possible. it is widely available wherever you buy your videotapes. thank you for being here. hubert humphrey died as we

said, in minneapolis. his tombstone has this description. i have enjoyed my life. its disappointments away by its pleasures. i have loved my country in a way that some people call sentimental and out of style. i still do and i remain an optimist with joy and without apology about this country and the american experiment in democracy. as we can close -- we close, a bit of video from that unusual session. some familiar faces on this clip. when he was invited back for a tribute and a celebration months before his death of his long political and let's let career. thanks for being with us. -- his long political and legislative career.

and thanks for being with us. >> we ask you here so we could tell you, we love you. [applause] >> mr. speaker, knowing full well the dangers of what i'm about to do, i yield as much time as he wishes to consume to the senior senator from minnesota. [applause] >> i know where i am standing. i am standing where the president of the united states gives his state of the union address. my goodness. i wanted that opportunity. [applause]

>> with the iowa caucuses next week and the primaries letter in the month, the contenders looks back at 14 candidate to run for president and lost. who had a lasting impact. george wallace on friday, saturday, senator and congressman from south dakota, george mcgovern of followed by billionaire businessman ross perot. >> the iowa caucuses take place next tuesday. up next, presidential candidate ron paul takes questions on a talk radio show. then mitt romney holds a campaign rally in iowa and rick perry meets with voters in cedar rapids. we will continue our look on

"washington journal." we will talk with chuck grassley. also the democratic party is perspective. dnc vice chairman artie rybak joins us. also david swenson is our guest. "washington journal" at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> it is a three day holiday weekend on book tv. the 3000 year history of jerusalem. saturday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern. on court afterwards, free will and the side of the brain. monday at 7:00 p.m., mark stein believes if current political and cultural trends continue with the u.s. is destined for collapse. your calls and emails "in

depth". chris hedges writes about religion and war and its impact on civilizations. his latest is "the world as it is." >> we will hear from ron paul. the texas congressman was on the jan michaelson show. this is 55 minutes. >> good morning. over here. your seat is warmed up. thank you for coming. make yourself comfortable. you timed that exactly right. >> guess which book you got me to read?

>> currency wars. he puts it in good context. >> welcome back. we're simulcasting with c-span. taking as many calls as we can. ron paul has joined us here in the studio. this is informal as it is. you are used to the cameras and people -- people are following year round. as if you will see something new after 25 years. >> every single morsel. perceived>> you are the frontrunner and they are coming after you big time. you are the guy at the top. >> they have been looking for the flip-flops and searching and searching.

>> if you could provide them some flip-flop this morning to give them something to work with. >> i was indecisive today -- should i exercise indoors or outdoors? >> we will be in the 50's here today. that will give an advantage to mitt romney, according to the talking heads. if there was a blizzard, you guys would take it away. >> people in the media must be desperate if the temperature will determine the future of the world. maybe there's a little bit of truth to that.

i hope people are more serious about how they make their decisions. >> i would like to think that, too. you said that you read a book. >> "currency wars." >> he is a good economist and that is a good book. do you agree with the assessment? we're in the crossfire? >> this is probably a more significant issue them world war ii-type fighting. i think that is passed. there will be fighting and killing. the battles are economic. i have complained about us spending ourselves into such great debt. the chinese are buying up resources.

but then the competition starts. there is a great potential for a trade war and the currency war. it has offended the chinese. it would all be solved with an international standard of money. you could not have currency wars. you would need the integrity of countries are obeying the rules of something of real value and you would not have this going on. this looks like for the real wars are going to go. the likelihood of someone militarily attacking us -- we are so powerful. our military is so strong. i fear the financial timebomb that we're sitting on. the dollar is holding up right now. if push comes to shove, which could be brought down for financial reasons.

we were able to contain the soviets. they were brought down by economic reasons. >> you have some of these protesters banging on the windows. >> i did not hear that. >> they did this to mitt romney's office. they are vowing to make a ruckus and disrupt the caucasus. -- caucuses. it would be sad if they did. there are only about 25 of them. they are trying to occupy your office. >> last week we had a rally and there were occupiers there.

there was no ruckus and afterwards i shook their hands. an open view point about the constitution and attacking some of the things that they do not like. they do not like the bailout, and i do not like the bailout. there are some things we can agree on. they don't trust government anymore. that is why i think i can connect with both groups. >> it looks like if we were in the currency wars, you would have won. we talked about this before. people have evaluated your portfolio. for as long as you have been in

office, you are one of the few members of congress that refused to take a congressional retirement. you chose not to invest in theirs. the reason why you did that? >> i consider it unfair. i was complaining about the problems on wall street and they offered me the pension fund and it seemed like to big of a boondoggle. it would have contradicted everything i was saying, my complaint about what washington and congress was saying. so i turned it down. >> you are up 547%. interesting what you did invest in. that is better than warren buffett. we should have been following you instead of warren buffett's advice. 547% over last 10 years. >> i don't know if i want my wife to know that. >> you put your money where your mouth is. you have been talking down the

fiat currency and the federal reserve. there were doing what yothere were doing. you invested in gold and hard- currency. >> every once in awhile, gold will not go anywhere and stocks will go up. "just think of what you missed out on." the stock market boomed for a while and then it went down. i decided that the dollar would be devalued after it was delinked from gold. which was in 1971 when i started those investments. gold was $35 an ounce. today is higher. >> gold is about $1,600 an ounce. it has been as high as 19. it is not flopping around. the president wants another $1 trillion. is he likely to get it? >> there is no resistance. he is going to get it. all he has to do is make a request.

they have to act and turn him down. he asked for it during a recess. if they do not respond -- that is something. i believe he will get it. this is where i understand it. it will be automatic. that was part of the deal. that was part of the grand compromise to have this super committee. it looks like a super sneak attack on the american people. automatically raising the debt limit. in this manner. >> we have lots of folks who want to get in on this conversation. i can tell you right now. your organization, they are legion and they are active. they are not casual observers. of the political market marketplace. they are activists. sometimes you have to calm them

down. a lot of folks would like in on this conversation. now your high profile. you have detractors. they used to ignore you and hope you would go away. now that you're running into the top of the pack, now they are digging into your history and wondering -- "what did he say back in those old times?" they are digging into your history. we have lots of people that want to get in on the conversation and we're simulcasting with c- span and will continue in a moment. so what we do -- ok. i'm sorry. we're on c-span and so we'll continue talking through the commercial breaks and we can take listener calls from all over the country. we do not want to waste anybody's time. tehran not to get violent this

time. -- try not to get violent this time. tried to control your language. we're broadcasting live on c- span and thank you for your patience. c-span has been gracious in allowing us to do this. we can communicate with our audience and take calls. i hate dead air. good morning. dr. paul is listening. >> i love you. >> are you talking to me? >> everyone. >> do you have a question? >> i just wanted to say i love you. >> this is sam. a lot of americans going for job interviews are often asked to answer this question. i like to have to answer it. what is your greatest weakness?

>> i think my greatest weakness is my ability to deliver a message smoothly. i am so convinced about the message of liberty. i think i can always improve on my delivery. that is what i work on. i get by. i think it is the strength of the message and what the constitution says and what america is all about. that is where my strength is but i could always do better. >> you talk about that message. you are filling a college campus auditoriums with the next generation. some of the most ardent

supporters are college kids. why do you think that is? >> i have not quite figured that out. the answer is not always the same. you like the constitution and we like people to stand on principle. we like the issue on the money. so many students are interested in money politics. that strikes their fancy. they realize what terrible shape we're in. they could end up paying a lot of money into social security. i offer a different solution to that. how we can take care of that and allow people to get out of that. they are attracted to free- market economics. i try to connect economic liberties with a personal liberties.

to keep the fruits of your labor is attractive, especially to young people. to have your right to your life is attractive. to lot of other people as well. they are seeing the failure of the government. -- failure of the dependency of governmenon government. >> michele bachmann said you energy are on the same page when it comes to economics. you part on foreign policy issues, legalizing heroin. i had a lady called me -- let's rejoin the audience.

a local audience in just a moment. ♪ right back to the conversation. we're talking about legalization of drugs and you would be pro-abortion as a president. these are perceptions that exist. a lady has called me. these are perceptions that exist. you're a physician and you were an abortionist. that is what a lady told me yesterday. i pointed out in reading the first chapter of one of your books, you are one of the most pro-life candidates that i've come across. how did those perceptions come across? this lady was convinced it was true.

>> she doesn't know me. and she should. i wrote a whole book on the abortion issue. i have one bill that would repeal roe versus wade with a majority vote. it did not have to wait for constitutional amendment. you did not have to change the supreme court. remove the jurisdiction of the abortion issue from the federal government, and i do not get a lot of support for that. if iowa has a pro-life state, it could not be appealed to the supreme court. when we have the majority in the congress, they could've done it by majority vote and this could have been done 10 years ago. think how many millions and millions of abortions could have been prevented. that would have essentially repealed roe v. wade. >> there are two levels to what one caller just said.

you were writing 20 years ago there were fixes and jurors that didn't require a constitutional amendment. you are way ahead of the curve on that. people are still saying that roe versus wade is the law of the land. it is not, is it? >> it can be reversed. it is now part of the constitution. it was a ruling of the court fireboats to four. >> and courts do not make laws. >> it should never have gone to the supreme court. they did. they wrote a lot into it. if you read it there is a lot of medical management. you can do this, this, and this -- it does not meet muster as far as the constitution is concerned. >> have you expressed a willingness to sign on to the personhood amendments?

>> i did with qualifications. i wrote some of the exceptions. i do not want the 14th amendment to repeal the ninth amendment. i'm still much in favor -- i support the definition of personhood. i think the states should deal with this like a deal with all acts of violence. >> your critique is that it is an act of violence. does the preborn have a moral status? haveit has -- and doesn't a theological status -- doesn't it have their logical

status? should it have legal status? >> it does. there shouldn't be any question about that. if a woman becomes pregnant and the father dies, is still has inheritance rights. if it weren't comes to see me in the first month or two or 3, and i'm taking care of her and i give for a medication that is detrimental, i can get sued for this. it is legal. they want to turn it around and they will throw to me as a libertarian. i am libertarian on personal behavior. they say, "why would you get involved with a woman in her rights to abort a fetus?" the fetus has a right to choice, too. it is an unusual, a different situation. there are two lives involved

that are interconnected. it can make a parallel. with a one time thought our homes were our castles. why don't we just kill the baby? i say life is precious to take a human being and deserves protection. i say that life is a human being. there are complex issues. there are some difficulties and this is why i think the founders were right in making this a state issue. >> i did not mean to go on to this particular issue and park it here. you're still an intern, a resident. the book says you were a resident. >> i was a resident at that time.

>> you're visiting a surgical suite and a fetus was placed in a bucket and was struggling to breathe and soon the baby stop crying. that moment helped to define your world. >> abortion never came up in medical school. it was in the late 50's. -- 1950's. that occurred after 1965. that is when i was a resident. >> the hypercritical nature of this has become how can ron paul columns of pro-life -- if he did not rescue that two-pound child from that bucket, he is not pro-life. >> it probably was like a

fleeting two-minute thing. we visited different operating rooms. i walked in and saw what was happening. and walked out. i did not have the facilities. what can i have done? >> that's how vitriolic this is. >> people who still have a misperception -- all i ask is people to be open-minded about what i've said and written about. >> this is david. good morning. >> thank you for taking my call. i have a question and a brief follow-up. how confident were you at the time that the newsletters that bore your name represented your views on taxes, on monetary policy, and the second

amendment, all the things that you hold dear -- how confident were you? that the newsletter accurately portrayed your views on these things? >> the newsletters were written a long time ago. i wrote a certain portion of them. i would write the economics. >> this was in between? >> this was an investment letter. this would be material that i would tournament and it would become part of the letter. there were many times i did not edit the entire letter and other things were put in. i was not aware of the details until many years later. these were sentences that were put it, eight or 10 sentences. it wasn't a reflection of my views at all.

it got in the letter and i thought it was terrible. i had some responsibility because it was not under my name. i was like a publisher. sometimes there's junky stuff in newspapers. the type of newsletter -- every month since 1976. this is probably ten sentences out of 10,000 pages, for all i know. i disavow all these views. people who know me best have heard these stories for years and years, and they knew they were not reflection of anything i believe in and it never hurt me politically. people are desperate to find

something. >> many of your newsletters are filled with conspiracy. you had one newsletter. from start to finish. fearing the $50 bill, and that we should be afraid that maybe tomorrow they will require us to turn our old money -- >> the paper money is pink. we have not had a runaway inflation. i still fear that. i fear the consequences of the inflation was my concern and i am still -- we talked about the currency wars. we do not have runaway inflation but we have the runaway debt. the collapse of the whole world economy that we're facing today. i was very concerned then and

more concerned now. i continue to deal with these economic issues. >> your people knew that you were going to be on this morning. i got dozens and dozens of links pduhe time that you were a physician. i am assuming you are aware of this. a black fellow from texas whose wife was in distress giving birth in a hospital and she was having trouble, and there were having trouble finding a doctor who was willing to give them service by implication because she was black and she was a white woman and she was having trouble finding an emergency physician. here is the sound of some of that.

>> there was prejudice around this area. it was between 1922 and 1973. my wife was sick and i was trying to get some attention to her. nobody came to check. they just left her there. maybe me being black and her being white -- every time i said something to the head nurse, she would get upset. they finally called the freeport police department. ron paul came to the rescue. he stepped in and went to work on my wife. after 10 minutes, she had a stillborn boy child. he said as far as the bill, he

would take care of everything, which he did. i never got a bill. he was a doctor of medicine and that is what he was doing, practicing medicine. >> that is an amazing story. that is a long time ago. >> i just saw this a little while ago. i am amazed about how they found that. to me, i do not remember it because that was just when we practiced medicine, or at least what i practice medicine. it was a non-event. that's what i thought my responsibilities were.

>> we will continue with congressman ron paul in the middle of iowa. you're listening to w.h.o. radio and we are simulcasted on c-span this morning. we will be updating our farm markets. c- now we're back with our span viewers. i could see that have an emotional effect on you. >> it did. >> you are not given to oprah moments. >> it was touching. sometimes you get banged over the head and thinking that they are making a sound like a terrible person. first off, you invited this

problem by being in politics. there have been times i would vote by myself in trying to make these points. i say that truth wins out in the end. if i'm telling the truth, eventually truth comes around rather it is foreign policy or whenever. if you believe it it is the truth, i think you'll eventually win. i think we're starting to win some of these fights and people are starting to listen. >> because of youtube and video and modern technology has so changed the way politics is done. there is no place for anybody to hide anymore. you cannot deliver a message to

one group of people and go across town and deliver the opposite message anymore and get away with it. you have to be consistent. there is no place to hide. i was doing some research and came across some old video. i was stunned to watch him getting your face. he called you every name in the book. it goes into what michele bachmann said during the last hour. you will have legalized heroin. how do you deal with those issues? >> that is what we had before 1914. there were no restrictions. there were put on by the states. alcohol is a dangerous drug. they tried prohibition.

they still drank. the status quo said we like alcohol but we do not like marijuana, we have to imprison people on marijuana. they decided that everything except alcohol would be a crime rather than a disease. today we treat alcoholism as a disease. we spend trillions of dollars on this. and undermines our personal liberties. we have these breakdowns doors in the wrong apartments and people get killed over these things.

the tragedy in our southern borders has what to do with drugs. so many people have died on our borders in recent years. >> some people misunderstand part of the libertarian message. you have freedom to be stupid. the rest of us should not have to pay your bills. you take away the safety net. should i grabbed one here? we're coming down in the countdown. spane simulcasting on c- this morning. ♪ we're talking with congressman ron paul in the studio and lots of us are eager to ask him a bunch of questions. i will get to you on the line in just a second.

proxies for other candidates are all over the place. i consider this a personal attack against you. i'd like to give you the opportunity to respond. it was an attack on your integrity. a former congressman is proxy for newt gingrich today. here is what he said. >> ron is accusing the speaker of being a hypocrite. i was in congress with ron. he would put in hundreds of millions of dollars of earmarks and then he would sit on the floor and he would wait until the vote was certain that his remarks would be funded. then he would put his card in the slot and vote no so we could then say, "i did not vote for earmarks." there are hundreds of millions of requests that were honored. but then he does not complete the deal.

>> he would vote against the>> n earmarks of knowing they would pass. >> it is amazing when people change when they become a spokesman for other people. we were good friends in the congress. he is in attack mode. he is completely wrong. >> here in iowa, we just say they are full of shinola. >> that is not too bad. >> it is important. he is completely wrong. everybody knows i vote no on every appropriations bill since

i've been there. i have never voted for an earmark. >> that is your position. >> that is gobblede-gook. i think every penny it should be designated. these guys that are harping on me about earmarks -- if you let earmark for an embassy, that is not considered an earmark. they take money from our district and for how we funds and you have a request for highway. you mark it down and send it in. if congress votes down an earmark, that money goes to the executive branch.

"i will do that if you vote for this weapons system that we do not need." then it is a big trade-off. every penny should be designated by the congress. money flows to the executive branch. obama did not ask for money to get involved with libya. plans are being made to go into syria. they did not ask for designation there. congress should act on their own responsibilities. >> this is julio. not deliver these powers to the

executive branch. >> i am here in chicago. always great to speak with you. i studied broadcasting in college, just to see the lack of a journalistic integrity from small-time bloggers. chris wallace of fox news saying if ron paul were to win the iowa caucus -- i hope people truly do their own research. turn off the tv and do their own research on candidates. it is clear by the way they have been attacking you, congressman paul, there's no journalistic integrity through the media. in terms of the economic war -- i'm 22 years old and investing in silver.

i did research on john f. kennedy's executive order and when you talk about going back to the gold standard -- but the price of gold per ounce. silver, $30 an ounce. how can we get our currency back to where was? i going back to a gold standard? -- by going back to a gold standard? >> you cannot too quickly and less people change their minds about what the role of government should be. you can use gold and silver as legal tender. you cannot police the world. that requires a lot of money, more money than we have. we cannot tax the people to pay for it. soon people will not lend us money. that is why we have to print

money. we have to print money. people's minds and attitudes have to change. if we did these things -- people are joining me and recognizing that the government will be limited. we could restore a gold standard. we did it after the civil war. there was a three-year transition period, and it worked. but were not running up deficits. they had greenback's back them. it can be done. i want to legalize the constitution and compete with the paper currency and i think that would take care of itself because people would give up on the paper. >> this is not a new position for dr. paul. he has been saying this for a long time. you're involved with the gold commissioned wrote a fine history of gold and gold currency in this country.

it is still a good primer. on our own history most of us was never taught. i recommend it highly. it is called "a case for gold." thank you for your call. this is sharon. >> good morning. >> we have some feedback. there were go. go ahead. >> thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to say it as an african american woman who has been voting with the democrats that i'm so happy to hear a candidate address the issues that are important to the majority of the country. we should not be policing the world when we are going broke. the federal reserve banks should be reined in. i'm so happy to of a candidate

who is speaking to these particular issues in addition to other ones. i want to say that i love you, ron paul. if ron paul is the candidate for the republicans, i am switching my vote. >> thank you. >> she brings up the subject of the spending and the wars. sometimes in our debates there will say, will discuss on foreign policy but not economics. they have to be connected. even the great austrian economist said war is a detriment and always drains and hurts the economy. people who say they agree with me on economic issues but not foreign policy to not understand economics and they don't understand foreign policy. they are connected. if we could bring back our

troops, just think of them spending all that money here instead of germany, japan, and korea. but the policies do have to be changed. we have accumulated over $4 trillion in debt in these wars that i think have not served our interest in one way. >> we have to take a break. where are broadcasting live with c-span. i am jan mickelson. you're watching congressman ron paul who was been a frequent guest in this election cycle. we allow similar conversations because we share a common affinity for honest currency and a limited government philosophy. the use to define what the iowa republican party or the conservatives or tea party, the folks in this election cycle.

he is trying to woo people on that side of the aisle. we will continue in a moment. ok. i'm getting e-mails from c-span viewers. one was adamant in boldest letters possible. "ask ron paul if he will end the ethanol mandates." >> i do not like mandates. yes, i think that that would be a good idea. i think ethanol quite possibly has a role to play. it has not been proven yet. i'm not against tax credits. but they should be given to everybody equally. mandates mean that you have to

have a certain percentage and the protection that if you could import ethanol at a cheaper rate, why pushed a gasoline price up five or 10 cents if you can get at the oil cheaper? the market always takes care of the consumer. >> people used to ask a question about getting rid of the subsidies. it is going away anyway. the epa had to replace the nbte's with something with oxygen in it. it was an epa mandate.

>> price would determine what we use. brazil makes ethanol from sugar cane. >> they have a shortage right now in brazil. they are importing it from us. >> they use a lot of other countries. >> that is inside baseball for iowans. this is -- i'm sorry. this is roy. good morning. >> it is an honor to talk with you, dr. paul. voters give us the right to safe access to cannabis, and yet the obama administration considers me a criminal when i have no

record, they have taken away my second amendment rights and give automatic weapons to the mexican drug cartels. the injection of cannabis has never killed anyone. dispensary owners are being needlessly prosecuted. >> he is still in with people who enforce laws and they call themselves compassionate conservatives. make them feel much better. it helps people who are on chemotherapy and other diseases. it should be freedom of choice. we should not have the federal government over ruling state law. if we understood the ninth amendment and the 10th amendment. >> time to declare a truce or

surrender in the drug war? >> we should surrender. it has totally failed. and file its precepts of the constitution. and the ninth and 10th amendment. it doesn't work. we should allow people to make their own choices. we allow people to make choices to do with their spiritual hereafter. people do what their intellectual life -- what do we say people can deal with their own bodies? >> we're rejoining the w.h.o. listening audience with our c- span audience. welcome and u.s. some feedback on what you've heard so far. just a few moments remaining with dr. ron paul. this is joelle. good morning. >> i want to say a quick comment on how the social security and medicaid situation is going on right now.

dr. paul said he would take care of the situation. very understandable for me. there's a lot of people that are depending on the programs that do not understand what he is referring to. i would like to clarify that. what would you do when it gets too far or south carolina when the state's down south voted for obama? >> let me build on his question. >> you are likely to do well on tuesday night. some say you're likely to win it. if not, it will be a close race. kenny duplicate its success in iowa in other parts of the country? and embellish. >> i would have to assume that is the possibility. i do not think the numbers are there. i was able to convince people

over the years in my district and we're doing very well here and the next tour would be in new hampshire, and the message is a powerful message. i think we can do exactly that. >> what was his question about florida specifically? help me understand what your position -- a question of florida was. are you still there? >> there is a lot of blacks in florida. and hispanics. >> how can you go after the obama -- >> i don't think we should have penalties -- whether they are hispanics or blacks or whites, everybody should love freedom. you can keep the fruits of your

labor. freedom means we will leave you alone. no one will tell you what to do. you can have equal justice in the courts. these drug laws are so biased against the minorities. if you think about it, it is one of the worst things left eye and racism in our country. if you look at the numbers, the minorities are overwhelmingly punished by the drug laws and punished with the death penalty. for minorities are more likely to receive the death penalty than whites. >> just a few moments left. what would you like us to know more than anything else? >> liberty is the answer. america is a great country. we lost our way. we need to look to our past and we can find the answers to many of our problems. believe in the constitution and the rule of law. >> thank you, sir. we are off with our local audience but we of a couple more seconds to chat. more seconds to chat.