>> we will focus on that. and then what makes me think i can do this? that is a good question. we have put together a plan that says we will cut $5 trillion in five years. we will take on the entitlement programs, not in 10 years, but right away. why? because the problem is right now, not 10 years from now. i have a lot of respect for paul ryan and others who have put a lot of people who are for entitlement reforms. they wait 10 years to do them. why did they wait 10 years? let me ask you this question. how many folks who have retired in the last 10 years or so and are going to retire in the next 10? got a few of them? when you were growing up, you got the eligibility age for

social security was what? 65. what is it now? 66. it is going up to what? 67. when did that happen? i suspect nobody in this room knows when that law was changed. do you know y? why? they did it 28 years ago. they did it long before any of you were at or near retirement so you would not blame them for doing it. when they passed its bank, they said in 20 years, we will move the retirement age up and all of you folks who were 45 and younger would not care. and guess what? it worked. paul ryan and all of these folks have learned by that lesson. if you make the changes out far enough you can do a lot more than if you make them sooner.

here is the problem. we cannot wait. we are in a serious problem with respect to our debt and deficit. [applause] i know that is not a popular thing to say. i will be pummeled by many who think, what are you going to cut? the reason you are pummeled is because politicians will come out and say, not the truth. they will say we can wait. they will say there is no problem. they will say we can handle these deficits, as they have been saying for a long time. we are in a situation with respect to our debt to gdp, which is 1-1. we will have to increase the debt ceiling again with president obama. we will see how that works out. it is no different than most of the countries that are in crisis in europe. the difference is we can print

our own money and the greeks cannot. the italians can not. we are in a serious problem. our credit rating was downgraded in the first time in history. how many more signals do we need to? imagine if interest rates decide to go up and the cost of borrowing on that $15 trillion begins to spike. we are playing with fire. why? because we have leaders who will not lead. we have a leader who will not tell you the truth. he will hide the ball to play politics with it and to scare people. that is what this president does. he puts people one against another and try to scare people. -- tries to scare people that is the game plan. that is your formula to win. it is also your formula to

destroy america. [applause] i will specifically go out and deal with the entitlement programs. we need to take the bulk of them, cap them, cut many of them, block grant them to the states. most of these programs are administered by the states. there is no reason the federal government has to the minister these programs and have expensive bureaucracy. it is a model of something that i actually worked on all lots. -- a lot. welfare reform. the former speaker says he did welfare reform. as the author of welfare reform when i was on the ways and means committee, speaker gingrich was in the leadership and he was

part of the leadership that ask us to draft the bill. but we drafted the bill. i was the chair of that working group that drafted it. when i came to the united states senate, i worked with each share of the finance committee and drafted a version of welfare reform. as a freshman senator that even one year into it -- it was my first year in the senate -- i managed the most important fiscal policy change that conservatives accomplished in probably ever. the chairman of the finance committee resigned the two weeks before the bill was supposed to come to the floor. no one else understood the bill well. in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king. and there i was. [laughter] i remember going to bob dole and say, what do i do? i know more about this bill and i have been working on this a

lot longer than anybody else. he said, get up and ask them if you can manage for a minute. if they say yes, and they don't like it, they will tell you to leave. they did not tell you to leave. i worked on the bills through one veto and another veto. did i compromise? you bet i did. president clinton kept vetoing it hoping it would change. we never bent. no growth, giving the money to the states. being a time limit on welfare benefits and putting in a work requirement. did i been on public transit and

the welfare to work program? yes. but those are good compromises. that is doing less of a good thing instead of getting -- instead of working with democrats and doing less of a bad thing. the compromises i will strike as president and will have to will always be doing less of a good thing. we will always work in the direction of smaller government. it will not be doing more government, but less of it. we have been doing that for 80 years in this country. it.have got to stop doing we need compromises that are different. the reason the media is so apoplectic about the lack of comedy in washington, d.c. is because the expectation is always to do less of more. if you want to do less, that is

simply, we cannot do that. that is not a reasonable compromise. the reason there is such acrimony is because there is a group of republicans and folks running for president -- i would include everybody on that stage -- who is saying, enough. we are not doing more. we are not compromising on doing more. we are doing less and you are going to compromise on how much or more less you are going to do. [applause] to finish your comment, i would not cut the defense department. the number one priority of this country, the federal government, is the defense of this country. [applause] if you look at defense spending as a percentage of the budget, it is roughly 20%.

60 years ago it was roughly 60%. since it is the only thing the federal government does that nobody else can do, that is the thing that will be held firm. the rest of the military budget will be frozen. finally, we need to take care of discretionary spending. we need to make been cut. we need to get into entitlement reform.

and going after specific programs. i am not an across the board carter. let's find out what works and what we should -- i am not an across the board cutter. there are some things the federal government should not be involved in, picking winners and losers. we will put forth an aggressive budget that puts us on that path. finally, the other way you are going to deal with decreasing the debt is increasing economic growth. we have put forth a bold pro- growth tax plan that simplifies the tax code. you can throw out the old tax code and replace it with a 10% rate and thighs deductions. children, charity, pensions, housing. everything else goes away.

the corporate rate, cut in half to 17.5%. get rid of all the loopholes and deductions. have been manufacturers and processors with a 0% corporate tax. why do retailers like wal-mart get restaurants and floreists treated differently than anybody else? because restaurants do not move to china. they have to compete. they are the high-value jobs in our economy. the reason that blue-collar america is suffering is because we have let our manufacturing base decline. not in dollar terms, but in employment. we have not taken advantage of

being cost competitive. we should be growing our manufacturing base under our plan. we will also increase the -- decrease the deficit by doing so. why do you think i can do with? because i have done its bank. a lot of pundits have been critical of me because i have got it. -- i have done it. i can tell you anything about what i am going to do. why would you delete it if you have not seen anything in my path that would indicate -- why would you believe its if you have not seen anything in my path that would indicate i can do it. when you go to washington, d.c. and you deal with the sharks around here in the media who are coming at you and calling you all sorts of names because you just don't care about anybody

and all you care about our rich folks. do not identify yourselves because they know who you are. thank you, david, from "the new york times." i have had them call me the nasty names. i have had them go after me. that is ok. i remember who -- where i came from. i remember what i promised when i ran for office. i was willing to stand up in good times and in bad and stand up for the things i believe in. i did not change who i was and what i told the people of pennsylvania i was going to do. i am not going to do it with you. [applause] ok. no tough questions anymore. let's go four quick questions. go ahead. all right, how am i going to

solve world peace? >> no. in iowa, we take it as a privilege to be the first state to pick the candidates. we study hard. you should consider your standing at the end and honor. most of us consider many candidates. after the candidates are elected and they get to washington, d.c., we often wonder if they remember us. i would like to know what you have known -- have learned from visiting the 99 counties? when you become president of the united states will you remember that there is a midwest between the two coasts? and what our concerns are because we feel so courted and then so abandoned. >> pennsylvania is a little bit like that, a microcosm of the united states.

it is, geographically, too. pennsylvania has been described as alabama in between. you have the coast and you have the heartland. i did not forget the heartland. i note chuck grassley always gets mad when i refer to this. i will -- i know chuck grassley gets mad when i refer to this. i did it every county every year. i am not try to one up you, chuck. i was the first senator in pennsylvania for 100 years to serve on the agricultural committee. i put my economic plan together by traveling to so many little towns that had lost manufacturing jobs. i've understood how that was the

heart of small-town america. we did a thing called the faith, freedom, and family tour. i realized it was not properly named. it should be the sfaith plus family equals freedom tour. [applause] they are integrated into every

aspect of american life. what am i going to do to help the economy? i will do everything i can do to strengthen the american family. you want to strengthen the economy, strengthen marriage, strengthens rather good. [applause] -- strengthen fatherhood. someone called me to encourage me. he said, when i left prison in 1975 -- that is chuck, not me. [laughter] when chuck left prison, he said there were 250,000 people in jail in america. there are now millions of people in jail in america.

he said, let me tell you what the reason is. in 1975, a lot of people are married -- are not married, but have children. he says 78% of the men he met in prison had no father in their life. if you want to save money on prison -- i talked to bill bennett this week, too. bill bennett, the former secretary of education. someone the president called -- he created a program called best friend. it is a program to teach young girls not to have children before wedlock. the obama administration said they can no longer teach abstinence only. that they cannot teach abstinence only.

and that they cannot teach marriage -- the importance of marriage -- because marriage is simply one of a variety of different relationships of equal value. i love it when the left says, do not impose our values on us. do not be a the occur at -- be a theocrat. do not impose your religion on us. they have a religion, too. it is not based on the bible. it is not based on social science research. it is based on another who knows what i deal other than religion itself. ladies and gentlemen, this is what we are talking about in this election. it is the values of the people. there are a lot of people on the

coast who share these values. that is what i will be talking about in this election. hopefully, the people i will give me the opportunity to do its . [applause] that was long, longer long. now hopefully, short and shorter. >> what can you do to get us jobs in this economic crisis? >> i talked about the economic plan i put together with respect to manufacturing. if you look at reducing taxes and getting rid of the death tax and reducing the capital gains tax and what we have done on corporate taxes. in addition to that, regulation. regulation is crushing america. contrary to what the president would have you believe, this

administration is the most burdensome regulatory administration in the history of our country. in the last two administration, the average number of regulations cost businesses over $100 million. most of these are billions. the average number of regulations under clinton and bush were about 60 a year. this administration is approaching 150 this year alone. that is the difference. what we need to do and what i pledge to do is that i will repeal every single one of those regulations. some i will repeal and get rid of. some i will repeal and replace. we will work with business so they can be competitive and still comply with the law. third, we will say that we need an energy policy that is not

only from a national security point of view, but for creating jobs and keeping energy prices down so that manufacturers and other businesses can compete. one regulation that the obamas administration just put in place is a regulation that will require 60 coal-fired power plants to be shut down over the next two years. i know they want to get to 20% green energy by 2020, but i knew -- i did not think they would get there by cutting fossil fuel energy. we would cut that regulation and put together a program that eliminates subsidies for all energy. we need a marketplace, but we need and availability of places to get our energy. alaska, offshore, deep water, building pipelines. i get a kick out of this

keystone pipeline debate. has anyone looked at the number of pipelines that go through their now? it cannot even see the aquafer if you look at a schematic. this is pandering to environmentalists who do not want energy production. it has to do to an ideology -- do with an ideology, a religion of its own. we cut energy, we cut taxes, we cut regulation. we allow repatriate money to come back -- repatriated money to come back and you will see a boom in this country. everybody, small-town america, blue-collar america, which has an unemployment rate of two times educated america has, you

will see employment come back. that is a good and winning plan, particularly given the states that the ones the republicans have to win to win the presidency. that is pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, ohio, and missouri. it is good policy and it is good politics. [applause] you? did you have a question? >> it is short. i have a couple of things. am i the last person? i have a question -- there are quite a few experts in certain fields who want to go into teaching. they do not want to go $30,000 into the hole. how do you think people should transfer into those fields without going into debt?

should they prove expertise in the field? >> people who should be able to teach. is that what you are saying. ? that is a state issue, not a federal issue. i think the states should be a lot more flexible. >> here is the second part. it innovation is in conflict with prospects -- say a researcher discovered we do not need all of these pharmaceutical companies jumping down our throats and that going to interfere with profits, where would you stand? >> i believe all different types of medicine can work. i believe alternative medicine is a promising and hopeful field and has a lot to it. wellness care and how your body

functions -- i absolutely believe in it. when they are in conflict, you have to prove the conflict. if you have a homeopathic remedy that does things less expensively than something else, there are certainly lots of ways given the economy today -- i certainly get enough misinformation about what things work. you can get good information about what things work. probably today more than ever, because of bad information, -- because of that information, those remedies will have a chance. yes, sir? last question. >> the first question i was going to ask you was asked by the lady over there regarding the financial situation. i thank you for covering that. that is something that is concerning and scary to americans when we hear about the

economic situation in europe and our dead here -- our debt here. please continue to explain that and place emphasis on the importance of that. it that all falls out -- wow. thank you for continuing to do that. i thought i would give you the opportunity to talk about manufacturing jobs. >> i already answered that question. you have one left. >> you covered values. i do not have a question left. thank you for being a champion for life during your time in the senate. thank you for that. [applause] and i have every confidence that you will continue to take that championness of life cause

as the president of the united states of america. thank you very much. i just want to say thank you, ottumwa. this is a great turnout for a new year's eve night. i saw a lot of young people here. are you from a local high school or did you randomly show up your together? [unintelligible] wow. i guess from all over. really great to see a lot of young people coming here tonight. hopefully, i will pique your interest. hopefully, iowa will shine and iowa is worldwide iow why

first. i would encourage you to sign up. we have members of our staff here. we have signed up sheets out there. we are looking for caucus captains. i know we have some here. people are willing to sign up and go to the caucus to speak on our behalf. talk to people and encourage them. that is a big help to us. i would greatly appreciate that. if you want to, you can contribute to our campaign. this is the season of giving. [laughter] i can think of no greater gift that you can give your children and grandchildren than the gift of freedom. right? that is the most important thing you can give. if you still have a little bit

left, i would appreciate a boost in a holiday and a boost to be able to run some of those radio and television ads that we are starting on monday. thank you all very much for being here. happy new year and got god bless you all. [applause] >> thank you for coming. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> hello, ladies. how are you?

good to see you. hello, young lady. [unintelligible] >> thank you. thank you. >> thanks for coming to ottumwa, iowa. >> great job. [unintelligible] [unintelligible] [unintelligible] >> half hour plus ride. this is the first place we can, to you. [unintelligible]

voting in november. >> thank you and good luck to you. >> thanks a lot. [unintelligible] >> oh, wow. >> would you have a few minutes? we are here to learn. >> i need some help down in louisiana when we go down there. can you get any help purse? -- helpers?

rooting for the bengals this week. cheering for the bengals like i never have to beat the rangers. [unintelligible] >> i'm doing just great.

we are from lsu. we really enjoyed it. good to see you. >> sign up online. >> that's great. >> do you want to be in the shot? lsu shot. >> oh, my god. >> thank you. [unintelligible] >> get them together really

fast. >> as we continue to watch this scene in ottumwa, iowa, in a gallery hall just like this on tuesday evening, iowans will come here to congress -- to caucus. you are both veterans of the caucus process. you are formed where -- from

where? >> we moved here 2 1/2 years ago. we have not been here that long. >> one of the question senator senator asked was how many bids have you been to -- senator stand tall rum -- senator santorum asked was, how many events have you been to? >> he talked about bold, bright colors and making sure there is a difference between a republican candidate and a democratic candidate. >> how does this caucus feel compared to what you experienced that years ago tonight? >> i was here 2 1/2 years ago. i was not involved in the process. this is my first time doing this. i have been two months of the

other candidates around town and have visited them. i like santorum. he stands head and shoulders above the others. >> the other candidates you have seen, who have you met along the way and what have you taken from those experiences? >> i have met the bachmann people. i have met perry. i just like his consistency and his standing and where he stands on issues. >> what about this process. this morning on "washington journal," we had someone asking why does iowa have the first status and are they representative? where you stand on that? >> it is a valid question.

i can understand why people have concerns about iowa being a liberal state making decisions about conservative candidates for the rest of the country. i think that is valid. >> it is a good question, like she said. we have lived all over. the people that i have come to know and appreciate in iowa, i think they are going to make right decisions. >> i would not ask you who is going to win on tuesday night. i will ask you about the turnout. what do you think iowans will do on tuesday night? >> i think it will be exceptional. in the circles that i moved in, there is a lot of talk about the caucus and what is going on and participation. i am expecting a super turnout. rick and janet.

and rick is your real name. thank you. we want to bring in the flint family. they are not from ottumwa, iowa. i want to ask you about supporting mike huckabee. i asked you the question. that me ask you how this deal tonight versus the experience you had in 2008. >> this year, we are doing a lot more research and be more thoughtful early on. we struggled for quite a while to land on a candidate that we felt conviction about. we felt there was a lot of talk. the good things we were hearing from different candidates, but not sensing or knowing where to land with our vote on tuesday. it has been in the last few days that we have felt strongly.

we think rick santorum has the right values, the right track record. he has done what he says he is going to do. we are more prepared and more excited about the caucus. we have some idea about what is going to happen on tuesday. four years ago, we were brand new and had no idea what to expect. >> four years ago, mike huckabee won the iowa caucus, but john mccain was the nominee. is this a different kind of state, a different kind of process early in this campaign cycle? >> it is definitely a representative of what can happen. other states have their opinion as well. i think iowans have done their

research. it is very representative. >> you brought along your nieces and nephews. >> this is ann and abagail and this is our nephew. we are visiting our parents for the holidays and we thought we would bring the kids along. >> first political events for you? >> yes. >> what did you think? >> i thought it was pretty cool. >> is there one line that you remember from rick santorum? >> it was is genuineness. he had to compromise on some things.

he defines the parameters of what you are willing to compromise on. you do not compromise on the major principles of why you were elected. compromise is going to be required. it would be disingenuous to say you are not going to compromise. that is not reality. just his transparency and acknowledging no child left behind, in hindsight, it has not accomplished what president bush and other republicans felt that it would. my wife's parents are both

teachers and we get to experience firsthand what no child left behind has done and cost. i heard that echoed verbatim. that gave us confidence that he is hearing what is going on. >> i want to ask you a process question. what is your role compared to others who participate in this caucus? explain to those who have not participated what to expect. >> it was just a matter of showing up. there were a lot of people to direct you where to go. people will be directed to their ward and precinct so they can find out where to go. he will line up for the candidate that you support. when we participated, it was

clear where you would go. there were signs. you went to which candidate is supported. there were people to direct you and to speak to you and talk to you about what the candidates did. people come undecided and that is an opportunity to ask questions of other people and line up with the candidate that most it's your values that evening. >> it is a little work. thank you for stopping by. enjoy your holiday. one of the people we want to introduce you to is mr. clark. i want to ask you your impression of the remarks of rick santorum. >> i haven't heard much. what i heard from him, i liked. he is a good christian men seem to be for the people of the

united states, which i like. that is the type of leader we need. >> these events are typical the week before the iowa caucus. all of the candidates are crisscrossing the state. what it like for residents who live here and experience this every four years? >> they'd like to get out and voice their opinions. >> how many candidates have been seen over the last few weeks? >> not to many. my wife is the one calling after all the candidates. she is a strong believer for rick santorum. what can we expect from the hawkeye state? >> they might go with rick

santorum. he is speaking from his heart. that is what i like about him. i think the people of i would think the same thing. >> thanks for spending a few minutes with us. you can watch our coverage online at c-span.org. the caucuses start at 8:00 eastern time here on c-span, c- span 2 and c-span radio. we will be crisscrossing the state tomorrow and again on monday. we hope you tune in as campaign 2012 continue. it looked at some of the assets on the air here in iowa. >> i spent my life in the private sector. i have competed with companies around the world. i have learned something about

how the economy's growth. we are going to have to cut spending. i am in favor of cutting spending, capping federal spending as a percentage of gdp at 20% or less and having a balanced budget amendment. start the growth in the private sector. i am mitt romney and i approved this message. >> you want big cuts, ron paul has been doing it for years. that is trillion with a t. interior, energy, hud, commerce, gone. want to drain the swamp, ron paul. do it. i am ron paul and i approved this message. >> some people say the america

we know and love is a thing of the past. i do not believe it. working together, i know we can build america. we can revive our economy and create jobs, shrink government and regulations that strangle our businesses, rewrite the tax code and replace it with one that is simple and fair. we can regain the world's respect by standing strong again by proving our faith and standing with one another. we can return power to the people and the states we live in so that we have more freedom, opportunity, and control of our lives. working together, we can and will rebuild the america we love. i am newt gingrich and i approved this message. >> who has the best chance to beat obama, rick santorum. a full spectrum conservative.

he is rock-solid on values issues. a favorite of the tea party. more foreign policy credentials that any candidate. his name in the u.s. jobs plan will make america an economic super -- his day in america doubts plan will make america an economic superpower -- his mad e int he u.s. jobs plan will make america an economic superpower again. >> mitt romney is meeting with voters to discuss jobs and the economy. what live coverage at 3:15 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> mike huckabee won day iowa

caucuses and dropped out the two months later. now through tuesday, our c-span cameras are calling the 2012 republican candidates at events throughout the state. later on, the results of the 1800 caucuses and candidates' speeches. for more resources in the presidential race, use the c- span 2012 campaign website. see what the candidates have said on issues important to you and read the latest from candidates, political reporters, and people like you from social media sites at c-span.org. >> this week on "the communicators," senator ron wyden talks about his proposal

to discourage counterfeiters from distributing fake products. >> the all up an alternative to that legislation is senator ron wyden, a democrat of florida, who joins us on "the communicators." what are your issues with the anti piracy legislate the pieces? >> both of them are using a bumper buster bomb when you need a laser beam. there is no question that there are some actors out there. there are people who sell tainted by agra or take relaxes. -- tainted viagra and fake

movies. they do a tremendous amount of damage to the architecture of the internet. they turn website into web cops. you would have websites trying to monitor the enormous amounts of data. >> say that they go too far for you, what is your alternative proposal that you and darrell issa, republican of california, have proposed? >> we offer an approach built around the proposition that we are dealing with international commerce. we have an agency that deals with physical goods, the international trade commission. we use the same kind of

principles when dealing with digital goods. those principles are transparency, consistency, and due process. there are hundreds of federal judges who are issuing opinions with respect to these issues you do not see that sort of thing at the international trade commission. >> your act, the open act, cuts access to foreign websites when they engage in counterfeiting. >> when we find someone will fully engaging in these infringements, we cut off visa and paypal and the like. >> you also use the trade

protect act. how is this different from your act? >> not only is it bad in terms of social media and business opportunities, it would do a lot of damage to our effort to deal with security. everything our country is trying to do with cyber security is built around the current internet architecture. you are going to see substantial opposition, probably soon, from the national security community. we are hearing growing concern. >> we have a guest reporter on the communicators. >> you discuss your objections based on some of the concerns based on what companies. we have heard brought concerns from civil libertarians and

free-speech advocates, people concerned that this bill would lead to the censorship. you have some concerns. can you explain them? >> beyond damaging the domain name system, they estimate a censure set -- censorship regime. there is language used to trigger the various efforts to deal with the content owners. it talks about facilitating copyright infringement. that could be anything. i have to tell you, i am kind of sympathetic from the -- with the content folks. my late father was a writer and an author. i go to the internet and i see people citing him. that does not mean i will rush out and pursue a lot of our

approaches that would start chipping away at the domain name system, which is the fundamental architecture of the net. linking will damage a lot of the openness and what i think is the appeal. we have great concerns about income inequality in this country. the internet is the place where you can do something about it. if you have a good idea, you can get it out around the world. >> opponents argue they are not asking for any type of censorship. they are asking that laws applying monday -- in the physical world apply online. can you explain why asking google or another certification provider to delete a link to copyrighted content would constitute censorship in your view? >> we should go after the will for and french -- willful

infringers. if you tried to get internet search providers in the censorship business, there is no way it could possibly work. it would retard a lot of the innovation we need in our country. going back to the fight against snuff. it was clear, we were all horrified at some of the ugly material that was getting into the hands of our kids. congress was just starting a debate in the internet policy. there were two approaches offered. it was largely to try to set up a censorship regime that you are describing. the other is the approach that i and a former congressman offered on a bipartisan basis. it says, let's do everything we can to empower parents in the private sector to weed out some

of this horrible material that gets to young children. let's not hold the intermediaries liable for content that they would not have known much about most of the time. it is often said that because we were not holding intermediaries liable as calls -- cost the growth. to go.is a better way to a-- >> as you said, google has come under fire during this debate. they are a gatekeeper to the internet. at the hearing, they were the only witness that testified against the act. they were the target of criticism from lawmakers.

google.you think has become the target of this criticism? >> the senate and the house is just getting familiar with these issues. the digital copyright -- copyright act is just on the lips of everybody. this debate is not about these big, powerful companies. this has been a debate between silicon valley and hollywood. this is not about to go -- about google and facebook. it is about how we can have future googles and future

facebooks. you pass these bills and you are going to have two people in a garage. but youquarks this is "the communicators." we are talking about -- we are talking with ron wyden. it is a different version of what we have been talking about, in the protect act which are senate and house bills. there are very similar. the stock of my privacy act sponsored by mark smith and the house, it cuts access to foreign road websites engaging in counterfeiting. the uses the justice department and federal courts to restrict a

robust sites. advertisers and credit card companies must stop doing business with rogue sites. the difference there is that you are using the itc. senator -- representative smith will use the courts. what is the problem with using the court? >> the single biggest difference between the two bills -- both of them acknowledge that bad actors were engaging in a copyright infringement. our approach does not involve a center set and it does not involve dismantling the domain name system. we believe that so much of the growth in this country and our ability to innovate with social media sites and the ability for folks to communicate depends on the architecture of the internet being preserved and

strengthened. that is what it will take to deal with the cyber threats. that is why the national security committee is so concerned about these bills. that is the single biggest difference. yes, we do think there is fundamentally a question of international commerce rather than narrow legalistic issues that ought to be brought up in the judicial system. the single biggest difference is we do not dismantle, do not undo the fundamental the an f system, that sort of thing. i also want yours to know, i put a hold on the senate bill in december of 2010. had i not done that they would have passed at that time because people were not aware. i also have put a public called on the senate bill that was passed late in the spring of this year. i have made it clear that i will

filibuster with every ounce of my strength against this bill. i have not done that before. i think this is very ill advised legislation both from the standpoint of what it will do to innovation, what it would do to entrepreneur is, and what it would do to small businesses. i think he was the growing concerns. >> of their been companies that have endorsed legislation? >> a number. a number of the technology firms have been interested. our bill is new work. that is one of the reasons i hope the senate scuttled will not immediately go -- the senate schedule will not immediately go to the other bill. there is a great deal of interest and our approach as well.

they have not had enough time to really walk the house through it. i hope given the concern that has emerged over the last week for 10 days, we will get that time. >> have the tools of the world endorsed the? >> --have the googles of the world endorsed do? >> they say they favor the approach. for viewers and listeners, there is no debate here that copyright infringement is eight serious question. we have a system for dealing with it now. it is not perfect. there are ways in which bipartisan basis we can i improve on it. that is what the open legislation lies lollipop. the big fundamental difference between our bill and the other is that we would not do all the damage to the architecture of

the internet. we would not tamper with the domain name system. we would not start a blacklisting program. we would not turn website into web pops. >> just to make it clear, lamar smith, the author of the sopa legislation has been invited on this program as well. >> you refer to some of the political support for legislation. protect id has a considerable support as well. aside passed the senate commerce committee with bipartisan support and he threatened to filibuster. you believe that the bill has a strong chance of passing the senate? secondly, can you speak to the support of the bill, very strong from the entertainment and retail industry. d think they can be convinced that the open act is the correct? >> we doubt that we are against one of the most sedate --

significant and powerful lobbies in the united states. they have poured millions of dollars into their lobbying and campaign efforts. we know that our side is going to have to fight above our weight. this is going to be a tough battle. if you look at what has happened in the last couple of weeks, certainly well over 1 million americans have signed petitions against these bills. people are coming to understand what some of these issues are all about. some of our opponents have a long track record of descending -- defending outdated business models. it was not very long ago with the head of the motion picture association was the vcr to the movie industry from what the

boston strangler was to women home alone. that was just preposterous. >> we have seen a lot of heated room -- rhetoric from both sides. we have also seen an unprecedented level of public engagement. how we are seeing what companies really mobilize their users to voice opposition. why do you think the public is so intent on this? >> i think is fair to say that copyright and trademark issues which historically what not exactly be household word to -- you would not have people talking about copyright law and around the kitchen table -- people have really follow this. they have followed it with growing concern. there is an awareness of the stakes. we had a big debate about

network neutrality for example. this goes way beyond network mentality. this goes to the architecture of the internet. when she signed up for your internet service, and when you want. this is a question of whether the way of dealing with serious problems, just like the challenge was with smut 15 years ago, are you going to do something smart that really attacks the problem with a laswer beam or do something with a lot of collateral damage. i think that these two bills -- the alternative bills were passed and they would do a great deal of damage to the internet. >> your former colleague is now head of the motion picture association of america. he is strongly in favor of sopa and hipa.

>> under the ethics laws, he is not allowed to communicate with legislatures. i see him from time to time. it is too bad in a sense. he has been a coalition builder. i think there is a real opportunity to try to bring those who have -- to our tech savvy and content creators and say, let's try to come up with something that makes sense. there are problems -- there are products that do that. if you look at netflix and itunes and services and the like, these are ones that show you can be successful and have innovation and content. that is the kind of thing i would like to promote. >> what is it about oregon? several were again --

oregoneons. >> we are freedom box. we'd like the first amendment. we like to debate. we like everyone to have a shot. that is what the internet represents. a congressman waldren has had a radio station in the family for some time. i can tell you what happened in my case is that when i became oregon's senator in 1996, i said i will do everything i can for our traditional industries. i said in addition to that, i will try to find some new opportunities for us to really lead and innovate. it always kept coming back to technology. eye in now the chairman of the senate finance committee. i think the internet is the shipping line of the 21st century. i am very interested and

anxious to promote the export of art digital grunts. we have introduced a bipartisan bill to do that as well. if you look at the areas i have focused on offering the communications decency acts that we would hold them liable and the damage innovation. the digital signature law which people who are viewing and listening when in effect selling real-estate documents. a group of us were involved in -- y2kkee's legislation legislation. we try to lay out a strategy for tapping some of the opportunities like digital trade. >> center ron wyden of oregon who is the author of the open act.

thank you for being on the communicators. up next, i guessed that is in support of the sopa and hipa acts. >> and now joining us is sandra aistars. she is the consecutive director of the copyright alliance. what is the copyright alliance and which anti piracy bill are you supporting? >> thank you for having me. the copyright alliance is a nonprofit educational public interest organization that represents about 40 institutional members who represent individual artists and creators and the folks who support and the best in them. we also represent about 8000 individual artists and creators who are part of our one voice artist activist network. we like to say we speak for the copyright holder next door. >> what anti piracy legislation are you supporting? marks we are very much

supporting the broad stock, piracy acts and the protect ip act. >> why? >> the internet is critical for all of our members whether they are small businesses or entrepreneur is across america. we are finding that there is an entire underworld of sites that exists to market the regulated and unsafe products to consumers and they are threatening a only artist and creators but businesses online who are distributing these works. it really renders the work of many of our members economically meaningless. we are very much in support of the sopa and pipa act because we

think they will help stem some of the piracy that we see on the internet today. >> gautham nagesh. >> there are two concerns that appeal most broadly. what is a concern about undermining the security of the internet. the second has to do with free speech and concerns that giving the government the authority to shut down sites will lead to censorship. were those concerns considered by the alliance? >> sure. there are definitely concerned that we considered. you cannot imagine artists and creators rely very heavily on that freedom of speech and first amendment rights. it is very important to have a direct communication with fans. we would not back any bills that would infringe on that ability to have that communication. in terms of the security

arguments, there were some arguments that were raised with regard to the regional version of the stock online piracy act that went to the issue of redirecting. the manager's amendment that was introduced by chairman smith really takes that off the table entirely. i think it also goes a far way to limit other concerns that people might have about the adverse impact on domain name systems. there is a roll of construction that this allows the court from issuing an order that would harm the domain name system. it directs courts to modify orders before carried out by service providers is shown that carrying out the original order would have a detrimental impact. it also commissions and inner agency study to make sure going forward that we expect to be the

case will in fact be the case and there will be no impact of the bills remedies on the dnf system. >> there has been a lot of talk about the coalition of support. you refer to your organization as representing the copyright holder next door. there are some very influential organization supporting this bill. to what do you credit is a broad coalition of support and why is the content community so much more effective at raising money and investing in this sort of a rich than a technology community? >> i in not sure the content community is more effective in raising money. we are -- we are a very small nonprofit organization with only a handful of folks and the office. i cannot really speak to those fund-raising abilities. as for the coalition of support,

i think it is important to note that the coalition includes big labor as well as big business interests. it includes a very broad set of folks who are interested in consumer and safety including various fraternal orders of police and the better business bureau and various consumer organizations. i think the real reason is that all of us to rely on the internet's are very concerned that the internet remains a safe place to do business and a good place to do business. the consumer interest in terms of ensuring health and safety when folks are getting poorly manufactured drugs, drugs that do not include all of the required ingredients or ingredients you would not want to have any drug, i think that plays into the coalition as well

as the fact that there is truly a diverse group of businesses and rights holders of that are impacted by online test. >> what do you say when the head of google calls this an "internet kill switch" and it wikipedia threatens to take down all its content. >> i think it is that people are resorting to this kind of hyperbole. i think the managers, and it reflects that. i think there are other organizations that will equally have to implement the bill's requirements that really caring about the way their customers interact online and that want to make sure that their customers are not being misled by road websites. you see in city areas like visa,

mastercard, and the american bankers association coming together to support the bill as well. it is a question of money sometimes as well. these sites being targeted by the bill are incredibly popular. it is very profitable for some companies to offer advertising against them. i suspect that plays into those sorts of you. as well. >> sandra aistars is the director of the copyright alliance. thank you for being on "the communicators." what are the legislative chances of this legislation going through the second session of the 112th congress? >> it is in doubt what will happen with this bill. obviously the senate bill had very broad bipartisan support. senator ron wyden said he will

filibuster the bill. on the house side of the judiciary committee has strong support for the bill. we have seen signs there is wavering of the support. it is hard to determine to what will happen on the house depending on the changes. >> thank you for being on "the communicators." >> thank you for having me. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> see what a caucus looks like with video from previous years online at the c-span video library. through tuesday are c-span cameras are following the 2012 election. political guests are taking your calls on "washington journal."

later on, the results of all of the nearly 1800 caucuses. plus, candidates speeches. for more resources used c-span campaign 2012 website to watch videos. see what the candidates have said on issues important to you. that's at c-span.org/campaign 2012. >> in the final de more than i will pull ahead of tuesday's caucasus has just been released this evening. it shows mitt romney has a lead at 24%, 22% for ron paul, and rounding out the field is a former house speaker newt gingrich with 12%, rick carey at 11%, %michele bachmann 7%. the des moines will have these

results in tomorrow's edition. c-span will continue to show you the latest gop presidential candidate event leading up to the january 3 caucuses. now i look at rick perry and his wife anita. current polls have governor. virtually tied it for third place with rick santorum and newt gingrich. this runs about 45 minutes. >> let me sign that. >> thank you. i think we can support rick perry to not have any california

bailouts in the future. >> i appreciate you being out here. [unintelligible] [applause]

[indistinct conversations]

[indistinct conversations] >> well, everybody. i appreciate you taking the time to come out. we really want you to come and the caucus for governor rick perry on the third. i also want to give a shout out

to ann over there. right now it is my distinct pleasure to introduce a very special woman. i met her in a couple of months ago. i can tell you that you can judge a man by the company he keeps. there is no final example than the first lady of texas -- anita perry. she is a professional nurse and has been so for 17 years. she is just about the best asset that the governor has. i handed over to the first lady of texas, i need that. . >> thank you. --anita perry. >> thank you. it is great to be in fort dodge, iowa. thank you for joining us today. we are so excited to be here today. we will finish strong today. i want to tell you a little

about a man i have known since i was 18 -- eight years old. we have been married for 29 years. i have our children with us today. i will say there is not a lot about rick perry that i do not know. it is new year's eve. my resolution as i will do everything i can to help get a true leader, a conservative leader is elected to the presidency of the united states. [applause] he volunteered for the air force after he graduated from texas and them. i am so proud of that. i am concerned about our country. i am concerned about our children. we need to get america back working again. i think he is the band can do that. ladies and gentlemen, my husband, rick perry. [applause] >> thank you very much.

ruth, thank you. you. bob have been awesome. they have been absolutely wonderful to work with. these last few days we have been crisscrossing iowa and going to some absolutely fabulous towns. little restaurants and some of the coolest names. i told somebody that we were at the "fainting goat" yesterday and we were at "doughy joe's" and i thinkw e will hit the "giggling goat" next time. it made a lot of sense. there is a connection there. anyway, i want to say thank you to my children for being here sydney, the baby and a griffin, the senior and his beautiful

wife, meredith. griffin has been a great hand out on the trail for us and giving lots of speeches and talking about his dad and somebody he has known for a long time. the beliefs and values that we have. i want to ask all of you to join us on tuesday at the caucus and the caucus for us. at what is a particularly thank you for coming out today on new year's eve as we get 2011 finished up and go into 2012. i want to share something with you that i have always believed. campaigns for president are not just about the candidates. is really about the people of this country. it is about the values that we have and we share that we have been taught. the fact of the matter is, the vote is not really about me. this is about our children and the future of this country. it is about a statement of your

values. who you are going to choose is a reflection of your values. i have always would be honored to have your vote as a statement of that and of your values. you see them reflected in me the values that are important for you, your family, and this country and together we are going to build a movement to take this country back to get washington out of our hair as much as we can because washington is taxing too much, they are regulating too much, that is spending too much. this campaign is about restoring help for the next generation by changing that spending culture in washington, d.c. and ending the stifling debt, 16 + trillion dollars that is on the backs of the next generation. it is making washington realize that it is weak, the people, who are in charge in this country people --we, the people, who are

in charge in this country. we do not want to import any more european values into this country. it is america, the people. we are not the subjects of the government. the government is subject to the people. [applause] this question. why should you settle for anything less than an authentic conservative who will share your values and your vision and do it without apology and washington, d.c.? i hope that is the question that you asked. i have the greatest respect in the world for my opponents, the men and women who are on the stage with me. those who are asking for your support. i respect greatly. you have to ask yourself, if we

replace it democratic insider with a republican insider, to use in washington, d.c. will change any taxable not. i am here to say you have a choice. i in the limited government conservative that will give washington a complete overhaul. walk into washington, d.c. and truly get it an overhaul. there are other campaigns for the campaigns are conservative, but the records do not always square with the rhetoric. senator rick santorum is a good man. he has a good family. i respect him, but we do have differences. i think it is appropriate that we talk about those differences. one difference is spending. i think the spending going on in washington, d.c. is probably at the top of a lot of people's lives of important issues.

we cannot do that with a senator who has voted to raise the debt ceiling eight different times allowing our debt to grow from 4.1 trillion dollars to nine trillion dollars on his watch. that is so much debt that it even exceed what president obama has done in the white house. what is so important -- i have to ask rick perry what is so important that compelled you to add more debt to our children's charge card. was it the bridge to know where you voted for? was it the iowa reinforced the voted for? was as support for the greatest entitlement programs since lyndon johnson's great society? now wreckage is defending those earmarks on the principle of federalism. -- now rick is defending those your marks on the principle of federalism.

it is about fleecing the american public. i raise these issues because in the end, elections cannot to differences. you do not have to settle for somebody who is going to change -- somebody who is not going to change washington's culture. you do not have to tie your hopes to washington insiders. you can choose among the various folks who are on the ticket with me. i have 63 years of congressional time and the totality. they are the ones that have been driving this debt and your marks. you have a choice. you can pick a governor who signed a six balanced budgets over the course of my time who has worked with the private sector to create over 1 million jobs in my home state. i happen to believe the federal government should do a few things and do those few things. well and get out of the way and

leave you alone. we have to end the year marks, pass a budget balanced amendment. this massive debt cannot continue to go on. those who got us into this massive debt are not going to be individuals who get us out of it. i am asking for your vote because of your conservative values. i am asking for your vote because it reflects my values that i learned growing up on a small farm in the middle of nowhere. on that farm i learned the value of hard work, family, faith. it that government does not exist to provide benefits but is there to protect the freedoms and safeguard our rights. it was an honor to follow in my father's footprints to be in the united states air force. my conservatism spans the spectrum from a fiscal issues to national security to social responsibility. some talk a good game.

i have an adult -- i have protected unborn children by signing a budget that defunded it planned parenthood and shut down 12 of their clinics in the state of texas spirit i passed a defense of marriage act in the state of texas. [applause] some candidates campaigned on bills that never even made it to the president's desk. i am campaigning on ideas that i have signed into law. i will be the outside establishment outsider that goes to washington, d.c. with a sense of purpose. that is to make washington inconsequential in your life as i can make it. the key is to create a part-time congress that stop spending our children's inheritance, cut their pay, cut the time they spend in washington, d.c., send them home to get a regular job like everyone else has and allow them to live under the laws that they passed in washington, d.c..

that is our mission. i hope you will join us in that mission. your country is calling in your children are waiting for you to answer that call. when the lord said the profit isiah said, who should i send it? who will go for us? isaiah said, here am i. send me. this is your country. taking her back as your calling. i will ask you to join me in echoing the words of the profit isiah. i asked you to brave the weather this tuesday whether it is blue skies and sunny or whether there is a snowstorm going on. braved the weather. go to the caucus. caucus for us. i will make is packed with you. if you will go to the caucuses on tuesday and have my back, i will have your back for the next four years and washington, d.c.

god bless you and thank you for being with us. we will answer a few questions. you sit there. what's you alluded to your defense of the unborn by defunding planned parenthood. wordy you stand on rape and --? "i signed a parent cut pledge in december. --parenthood pledge in december. i actually met a woman who gave me a real new sense. i had exceptions for rape and and the life of the mother. this was a lady who had -- she was conceived because of rape through that act.

the perception she shared with me was a wonderful thing. she asked me as she looked me in the eye and said, is my life not worth saving? at that particular point in time, she really had an impact on me. those two exceptions, if you are truly going to be standing up for life, having only the exception for the life of the mother is appropriate. i have not only signed that pledge, but i m very comfortable that i made the right decision from the standpoint of modifying and strengthening my pro-life position. i am one of the most pro-life governors in the country. we signed parental notification and a consent.

we passed a lot this last session of the legislature that requires an individual who is getting an abortion to see a sonogram first so that they can see that young to human being inside of them. i am very proud to stand up with our founding fathers as i look at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as things that americans and a america is supposed to be about. when we talk about life, we are talking about all innocent life. [applause] >> while still sitting governor of texas, will you push for -- >> i don't plan on being the sitting governor for much longer. but we will speak up on the issue regardless of where we

are. let me share that with you. >> i do not need to put you on the spot. >> that sounds like a set up. >> are you familiar with a man named jacob howard? >> i do not believe i am. you want to familiarize me with him. but he wrote the 14th amendment. i was wondering if you could tell me a little something about the 14th amendment. i'd like to read the first clause if i may. all persons born or naturalized in the united states are subject to the jurisdictions there of. our citizens of the united states. >> the 14th amendment was my understanding of what it was written and why it was written

was dealing with the issue of citizenship for individuals who had been slaves. writing a wrong in our country's history is really what the 14th amendment is about. this issue of should we be educating individuals who come into this country illegally is a symptom of a bigger problem that we have got. it that happens to be that the federal government has been an abject failure at securing our borders for years and years. as the governor of the state of texas for 11 years, i had to deal with this directly. there is not anybody on that stage with me that has had to deal with this issue. they talk about how they would do x or they would do why, i have had to deal with it.

i have had to ask our legislature for $400 million to send to the border of texas and mexico. have teams sent to the border to fight the crime whether it is drug traffic or trafficking and weapons or whether the end -- illegal individuals trying to come into the country. securing our border is the issue that will address all of these whether it is the education of individuals who are here legally or whether it is health care that is here illegally. >> [unintelligible] it is my understanding that the constitution of the united states was designed and written

for its citizens. it does not seem to me that it is working out like that. >> you're absolutely correct. we have been put in a situation whether it is arizona having to pass a law to deal with immigration or whether it is what we have had to do in the state of texas dealing with individuals who are not citizens but the federal government requires us. here is one thing i will tell you, as the president of the united states you will never see me directing my justice department to go to another state and see them on an issue that is their sovereign right. [applause] >> i have an economic question. the last kennedy was here, i ask the same question. i did not like his answer. if you answer it right, i will vote for you.

>> that is why we show up. that is what this is all about. >> would you be in favor of what obama did with the quantitative easing one and two. it was said obama next year will put out another two trillion dollars into the economy. are you in favor of that? >> know. let me tell you why. all you are doing with this quantitative easing which actually is my understanding that was put into place as an experiment in japan initially. i will suggest to you it has been a monumental failure. it is a monumental failure because quantitative easing is just the printing of more money. supply and demand is pretty simple. i am an animal science major. i know if you print more money, that makes the dollar in your pocket or flats. let me just ask the crowd, are

you better off today than you were 4 trillion dollars ago? >> the first to end 1/2 years old, has been in office, when he has been there, we have lost 48% of the valley of the dollar. that is hurting retired people. right now i can tell you one year ago they said 70% of the people are living paycheck to paycheck, i can tell you for sure it was 80% here. people are hurting. every time they do that, it really hurts us. >> yes, sir. frankly, we need to get the federal reserve back to a single purpose and that is to control the prices and inflation. >> you do address art second amendment rights. the fact it is not just for hunters.

>> the second amendment -- her question was twofold. what i addressed the second amendment and then how this fast and furious effort -- there has been some individuals who have questioned whether or not this entire operation was more about painting a bad picture of those of us who have owned guns and particularly gun store operators that it was about tracking these weapons. either way, i would consider it to be very bad public policy for the administration to be involved with it. for the attorney general to not have known about this. if he did know about it, then he has misrepresented himself to the united states congress.

either way, he ought to be fired. the attorney general knowing and not movement of those types of weapons into mexico is an absolute failure of leadership in my opinion. the second amendment is about gun ownership. it is not about having the a militia. it is about the private citizens having the right to protect themselves and their property in this country. may it always be that way. [applause] >> during the first two years of the obama administration, most of the current candidates were on the sidelines instead of providing leadership waiting for the starting gun to go off so

they can tell us what great leaders they are. there are a few exceptions to that including sarah palin and you governor rick perry. i appreciate that. if you are elected, will you commit to being a leader full time, 24/7, instead of just what is convenient and low risk? >> yes, sir. i cannot wait to get into the fray. i cannot wait to get there to ask men and women who share my philosophy that are truly patriots who will come in and head up agencies headthe epa he will go back and pull every regulation that has come in in the last five years since 2008 and audit them so whether or not they create jobs or kill jobs. have men and women in the health

and human services agency that are committed to the 10th amendment. we talk about block granting back to the states and letting the states make the decisions on programs like medicaid, i intended to have an individual as the secretary of education whose sole responsibility will be to dismantle the department of education and what about parents and those functions back to the state so that the members of the legislature and iowa can decide best how to educate your children there are a number of those types of agencies that need to be dismantled. indeed to allow the states to get back to it. >> i am interested in what it was like when you were born and raised in small-town texas.

what did you do? >> not a lot. actually, there was a lot. i am pulling your leg. people think just because you live 16 miles from the closest place that had a post office, it was a dreary and not exciting existence. if i were given the opportunity to live anywhere in the world, i would still a pig that little community where i grew up. the world revolved round school, there were 110 kids' grades k through 12. a 4h member. every day was busy. every day was myself and lots of acres of dry land cotton farm to explore and what have you.

i would suggest it was not a lot different than growing up in the mid 1950's and iowa. -- mid 1950's in iowa. the president of the school board was also super trip -- superintendent of -- he was the basketball and football coach and it drove the school bus. people would say, the house i grew up and did not have running water until 1955 or 1956. -- indoor plumbing, let me put it that way. there maybe some people who say we grew up poor and without -- we did not have a lot of material things.

we were rich in family, we were rich and face. we were rich in experience is. we were rich in community. i will forever be grateful that i had the opportunity to grow up in that community. my mom and dad still live there. they live in the same house that we have been in since 1967. you are the last question for sure. that one was too easy. >> we would have a government that would crafted this behind closed doors, health care. when you are president, -- my desire is to see you or others like you go in and review all this and actually have

meaningful input from all of the various groups, health care providers like myself and people who are consumers so that we can get something that will actually work for both government and for the consumers themselves. >> i agree with you, but you have to take obamacare off of the book's first. [applause] i am let my wife expand on that a little bit because she is a nurse. >> i would like to know what your addition as first lady would be? >> we have so much work to get their that i am not measuring the drapes. it would truly be an honor and pleasure for me to be in that role. my background is health care.

i have a master's degree in nursing. in texas i have done topics and issues that are related to health care. i am also very concerned about our veterans and returning veterans when one out of every four veterans cannot get a job when they return from defending our freedom. when one out of every six veterans is homeless, i am most concerned about that as well. i have a variety of issues i am interested in. i would relish the opportunity to do that. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for coming out. you have our backs next tuesday and we will have your backs the next four years in washington, d.c. god bless you.

[indistinct conversations] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [indistinct conversations]>> thd

get. thank you for coming. >> thank you for sharing a part of that. >> there we go.

>> ok. >> thanks for being here. >> welcome to iowa. hope to see you again. >> good to be here.

hi, sweetie. how are you? >> hi. >> i am having a little chicken salad with a croissant. you all have fun. >> they did. >> you get in here. >> hi. how are you? >> thank you for coming. >> we look forward to it. >> of this is third generation. >> i love your hair. >> family now. >> get behind him. >> steven? >> what? >> the whole family. come on.

get in here. this is our family. [laughter] >> family? >> ok, guys. >> all right. >> right here. >> that is awesome. >> yes, we do. they are the best. >> god bless you. >> that is a young iowan. his name is john. great kid.

yes, sir. honor to be here. >> you want me to get on my knees? >> you know, i could go either way. i could go either way. probably -- we pay more attention to the cowboys now. >> thank you for coming. >> hi.

>> bless your heart. thank you. you have lost weight, too. >> i have. >> i have to stand on a chair so us short people can see. >> push that button. >> here we go. >> thanks. thanks very much. >> right here. i got you. >> one more for good measure here. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> thank you.

>> thank you. i'm going to go. you wait. i'm goingn to go out -- going to go out. >> i am not sure you can get through. >> thank you very much. >> we have got to change. >> all right. >> back up. back up. we're headed out. god bless you, sir. in 2002 i took the kids out and

we hiked it. >> did you hide it? >> the silver american airlines at the top. >> come back. >> thank you for your prayers. >> thank you. >> i am going to go. >> you go ahead. same direction. >> thank you very much.

>> i got to change. all right. >> back up against that way. back up. >> ok. come on, guys. >> keep your position with that. >> step over here. >> careful. >> come back. >> got to get there in the winter. >> yes, sir. thank you.

>> bless you. >> thank you. >> come on. get in here. get in here. >> canada. >> you broke it.

>> here you go. >> okay, big boy. that come out all right? yes, sir. take care of yourself. >> oh. it's ok. >> all right. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> our road to the white house coverage continues tomorrow with republican mitt romney in atlanta, iowa. he is meeting with voters to discuss the economy. the family table restaurant hosts the event at 3:15 p.m. eastern here on c-span.

our coverage leading up to the iowa caucus's continues tomorrow on "washington journal." first, we take a look of the role of christian conservatives with steve scheffler. after that, the breakdown of the gop field with simon conway. later, a look at the final des moines register i will pull ahead of the caucuses with ann selzer. that is 7:00 a.m. eastern live on c-span. tomorrow on "newsmakers," holly petraeus talks about her role as the assistant director for the office of servicemember affairs for the consumer financial protection bureau. also, and look at the financial issues facing u.s. military service members. that is at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span.

in the last iowa caucuses in 2008, barack obama won the democratic caucuses and went on to win the presidency. mike huckabee won the republican iowa caucuses, but dropped out of the race two months later. see what a caucus looks like with video of previous years online with the c-span video library, and for tuesday, our cameras are following the 2012 republican candidates at events throughout the state. every morning, live from iowa, political guests are taking your calls a "washington journal." tuesday night, we will show live coverage from two of the caucuses on c-span and c-span2. and, later, the results of nearly 1800 caucuses, plus speeches. for more resources in the presidential race, use the c- span 2012 campaign website for videos of the candidates on the campaign trail. see what they have said on issues important to you. read the latest from candidates,

reporters, and people like you at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> our road to the white house cover continues now with an event from earlier today with mitt romney's wife ann romney. she appeared in ottumwa, iowa. [door opening] ♪

>> thank you. >> what are you doing here? >> everybody is excited. >> i don't want a candidate with an awful lot of baggage. >> i happen to believe mitt has some pretty wonderful ideas. good. thank you. wonderful. >> can i take your picture while

i have you here? >> 1, 2, 3. >> thank you. >> that was a good one. >> i appreciate that. >> all right. hi, sweetie. on christmas vacation? how are you?

>> thank you. >> nice to have you here. thanks for coming. >> you are a really brave woman. >> thank you so much. >> thanks for coming. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. >> thank you. how are you? >> that is great. >> we are working on one today. >> that is fine. sorry about that. thank you. >> thank you, all. i am surprised -- you should all be out getting ready for new year's. i will tell you one of my

resolutions. it is to be more grateful and to express more of my gratitude. i will express that gratitude right now. i am grateful to this country we live in. i'm grateful for the freedoms we enjoy. i am grateful for my ancestors that made sacrifices so i could live in this great country. we talked about this amazing country. sometimes we forget the people who made sacrifices so we could be here. i am grateful for my grandfather. at age 8, he started working in the coal mines. he would go to work in the yard and he would come home at night at dark. his job when he was a little boy was to open the door for the

mules. he recognized he did not want that kind of a future with his children. the maxim i grew up with all the time, because my father heard this frequently from his own father, was, study hard, or it is the pick and shovel for you. i heard that when i was growing up. i did not believe those are my choices. those were my father's choices. i am grateful for my grandfather. he came here and gave his children and grandchildren a .etter opportunity in life, bi i think about that and i think about how amazing this country has been that a coal miner's granddaughter is standing here today, and who is married to

someone who might be the next president of the united states. this is an amazing country. i would also like to remind people that there are lots of different lenses you can see through. the lens that so many people see this through is on his professional accomplishments. we are all familiar with that. he has been successful in business. he was a wonderful guy at the olympics. also, he was a great governor. so, i say there is another win. -- another lens you can see the man through. that is from his family and his wife. we have been married for 42 years. we were high-school sweetheart. we have five sons. i am the grandmother of 16 grandchildren. we have been blessed in life.

in my early years of marriage, when i had those five, and i like to remind people, very naughty boys, i felt sorry for myself all the time when i would go to a house where there were girls in the home, young girls. they would be baking cookies, helping their mother, cleaning, washing dishes. i thought, this does not happen in my house. the boys were rambunctious. mitt would call home on occasion. he was in consultation and was traveling. he did not like it, by the way. i did not come either. he heard a very exasperated wife. i said, these boys are just killing me. he would remind me that what i was doing was more important that -- and what he was doing. my job was more important than his job. i really appreciate that. he really meant it.

he said, a job is temporary. the things you're doing and the things your building on will bring us forever happiness. the kids knew that. they knew how much mitt saw in me an equal partner with my husband. i will tell you that i had a great joy in knowing that my sons are behaving like their father. i see them being wonderful husbands and fantastic parents. i am so grateful for my sons and how wonderful they are with their own children. mitt and i comment frequently that they are doing a better job than we did as parents. they are just fantastic. i am impressed with that. the other thing that i would like to have people see, a different lens, how he behaved in my darkest hour. i think some of you are familiar with the fact that i was diagnosed with multiple

sclerosis in 1998. it was a very difficult time in my life. i had been fairly athletic, by the way. i loved to play tennis. i love to be active and to do things. i woke up -- over a number of weeks, i started thinking, what is wrong with me? something is really wrong with me. i took a nosedive. i could hardly walk. i was the teeth. i had this horrible ms fatigue. i was not aware of what it was when i was going through it. it nearly crippled me. i could not get out of bed. i did not have energy to do anything. it was a frightening time in my life. when i finally got the diagnosis that i had multiple sclerosis, it was pretty devastating. i was, as you might imagine, a bit overwhelmed. overwhelmed come in way, with

thinking that my life was over, that this was the way i was going to always be, and that i was feeling pretty sorry for myself. at that point, i really appreciated mitt. what he did was say, look, this is not fatal. we are going to be ok. i don't care that you can make dinner every night -- cannot make dinner every night. i can eat peanut butter sandwiches and cold cereal for the rest of my life. as long as we are together, we can handle anything. that gave me the permission just to be sick for a while and to except the fact i had to learn how to deal with this. it was a great time in my life where i had a lot of self reflection, starting to think about what was most important in life. it was also a time when mitt started running the winter olympics. we moved to salt lake city.

i was convinced we should do this. i left my family, i left my doctor, i left my youngest son, who was in his senior year in high school. off we went on a completely different path in life. when i left -- when we left to do the olympics, i was barely able to walk. i was very weak. mitt took the job of running the olympics. over the three years that we lived there and working to try and turn around these things, my health started to get restored. they started to figure out medications to help me. i figured out exercise programs that could bring my strength back. it was very important. they brought me great joy and balance in my life. when it came time for the olympic torch to make its way across the country, mitt decided it would be about heroes. he wanted people to nominate

heroes in their own lives. the torch had ran all across the country, thousands of miles. people were taking turns running the torch. they were all heroes in someone else's life. they were wonderful stories that came from this run. unbeknownst to me, mitt had nominated me as his hero to run the torch to salt lake city. it was an amazing thing for me to recognize where i had started three years prior, how we guy was, how sick i was, to having strength and a little more resilience three years later. it was with great emotion that my children surrounded me, and my husband, with tears in his eyes, handed me the torch. i was able to have enough strength to run that fortune to salt lake city before the start of the winter games. that is the side of the man that

i like to tell people. he has got such an ability to figure out what is important, what matters, and to really be there, and stick with you when you are in your worst moment. that has been with our marriage has been like. he has been a guy that has been wonderful, and loving, and i love the fact that he values his children and his grandchildren as his most proud -- the things he can be most proud of our his children and grandchildren. he does not look at the things he has accomplished in his life. he looks at his most voluble treasure, his children. i appreciate that and love him very much. i look forward to him being the kind of guy that will have the strength to sit in that office,

where difficult decisions will be made, and i will trust that you will have the kind of character and kind of strength to do the right thing, and to make the right decisions, and make the tough choices. because we never know what decisions are going to come across the president's desk. we trust a man and know that he as good judgment and good values. that is an important characteristic. i am looking forward to this election. you guys all have an important job to do next tuesday. it is coming up very soon. we are energized. we are feeling the momentum. it is building here in iowa and in new hampshire and south carolina and florida. those are the next four states for us. we are excited to get going and to do what we really need to do, which is electing a president and make barack obama a one-term president. so, with your help --

[applause] thank you so much. [applause] i will make sure mitt hears that. i will tell him that. thank you. thanks so much. ok. thanks. >> he was right. >> which one is your wife? thank you. theet's hope you get to caucuses on tuesday. ♪

thanks so much. hi, there. >> we drove out a long way. [inaudible] [laughter] >> fantastic. thanks so much. good. thank you. sure. come on in. >> sure. >> thank you.

>> good luck in the caucasus. >> thanks so much. -- caucuses. >> thanks so much. >> you're welcome. >> hi, there. nice to meet you. >> wonderful to see you. >> good. >> we were across the street. good timing. >> this is such a great place. >> exactly. great day.

>> where do you go from here? >> i meet up with mitt. he is such a great guy. >> he is. >> we actually made a little secret surprise visit. >> i saw that interview. it was fantastic. >> we had a very lovely day. i met his children. we spent a few hours at their home. >> it was nice that you could be there.

>> wonderful. >> he is a wonderful guy -- he is a dynamic guy. >> thanks so much. thank you very much. >> it will be wonderful. >> thank you. >> thank you.

[no audio] >> in the last iowa caucuses, barack obama won the democratic caucuses and went on to win the presidency. mike huckabee won the republican caucuses, but dropped out. see what caucuses look like online with the c-span video library. through tuesday, our cameras are following the 2012 republican candidates at events throughout the state. every morning live from iowa, guests are taking your calls on "washington journal." tuesday night, we shall live coverage of two caucuses from

the central and western parts of the state on c-span and c-span2. later, the results of all the nearly 89 caucuses, plus speeches. for more resources in the presidential race, use the campaign 2012 website to watch videos of the candidates and campaign trail, see what they have set on issues important to you, and read the latest from candidates, political reporters, and people like you from social media sites at c- span.org/campaign2012. >> republican presidential candidate rick santorum appeared in ottumwa, iowa, campaigning ahead of tuesday's caucuses. here is a 50-minute portion of his opening remarks to supporters. -- 15-minute portion of his opening remarks to supporters. this.t isn't why i did i had a chance to meet rick back in march of this year. it was a very cold evening in

sioux city. i was there with another candidate at the time, and i challenge the group, i challenge those candidates to describe to me and the audience why we should vote for them and why they have the credentials, and what i thought was most important for the president of -- for the next president of united states, the courage to be president. i think we're faced with circumstances today, in my lifetime, i have been following politics for 50 years, i cannot imagine any time in my life when i have seen things as desperate as they are today for us. i am talking about the nation. i am talking about the very culture of this nation, our fundamental political system is at stake. all of these things, i think, are going to require someone to go out and lead. this is one of the reasons that i chose to back rick santorum.

i think one of the things you have to focus on in this race is a person who has been the most consistent in message, the most pointed in message, sharpening that message every day, and who has been come up front to back, top to bottom, the most consistent conservative but we have had a chance to observe here in iowa. everybody wonders why we still have such a large undecided body. the crowds we've seen today, they're not too many left. i said to the reporters, you drew the short straw following rick santorum. you might be hearing from your editors and publishers because you have a long strong now. this is the guy that i think will carry the day for us. we came here to see the next president of united states, rick santorum. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you very much. i am fired up, sam. thank you very much. appreciated very much. it is great to be back in ottumwa. i have been released three times. we've been traveling around the state, over 370 town hall meetings right now that we have done we are not done yet. today, we did indianola, knox bill, the other side of marion county, and now down here to ottumwa. we of the running south and east and we will run north and west tomorrow. then we will work hard are on

the center of the state to drive home those votes on caucus night tomorrow on tuesday night. we have been working hard, our whole family has. my son is in the back. he is famous because he has his youtube video. we were outside of adele. i took john on monday on a hunt and we were out and had a man with a camera who is taking video. within a few minutes, a bird popped up. it was the first time he ever hunted pheasant. he knocked him right out of the year. he made his dad very proud. we had a great time. it was the second time i have been hunting here in iowa. i am a lover of hunting and a great lover of the second

amendment. the second amendment is there to protect the first. [applause] . of my and our membership. we have been working on a lot of issues -- very proud of my nra membership. we have been working on a lot of issues important to this country. ladies and gentlemen, it is coming down to crunch time, and i am proud to be traveling with matt and sam today, to folks who did something that you will have to do, which you have not done already, which is, make a decision by tuesday night to go to caucus and start this process. start this process. everything else has been spring training. you start the process. all these polls, all these pundits, all these people telling you who is the race between, i mean, i guess you can

go back to june. this race has been about two candidates. the problem is, they have not been the same two candidates. yet, the pundits will say, now it is these two candidates. i will tell you the candidates it is between. who you say. who you say. don't defer your judgment to everybody else. everybody else is not doing what you're doing. everybody else -- how many people have been to see another candidate other than me in this process? the vast majority of the folks here in this room. bottom-line is that you know more about these candidates than any of the pundits and any of the folks or answering these national polls. my first charge to all of you is to lead. don't defer. lead. fight for the responsibility to

be first. you now have done your homework. you're not quite finished. you still have another day or so. there may still be another candidate flying through this area. lead. second. this is important. don't settle for less than what america needs at this critical time in our country's history. [applause] again, you are being told by so many that we have to find someone that can win. this person can win. we have to make sure that we vote for this person because they can win. we have heard this many times, and every time the republican party has done so, guess what we have done? we have lost. we win when we established stark contrast. bold, bright colors point to the problems that this administration and his leftist policies have brought this

country. the weaknesses he has portrayed on the international scene. we need someone who has a record that in contrast well with president obama. someone who has been a warrior on all of the issues, not just one, but has been a conservative, gone out and fought for limited government, fought for freedom, fought for the family and faith, and fought for a strong america. that is the kind of contrast we need with president obama. it is important to understand it is not just winning. it is winning and putting someone in place who can take on the very difficult issues, and do so with a vision, having painted the vision, for america, a bold, strong, conservative vision, with our values. ladies and gentlemen, sam, and matt, step forward. after all of these meetings,

after working in 99 counties, he wanted to see whether i finished what i started, and he stepped forward and got the ball rolling. he's the only elected official to endorse me in this race. i want to say, i am very grateful for it you have done and the support given us. i appreciate you giving him a big round of applause. [applause] that was important for us because we had all of these polls that said, you know, these national polls, polls here, saying we were not doing well. yet, we knew it. i was traveling in doing events here. people would leave and they would sign up, take signs. the response i was getting from people who had a chance to see were very positive.

numbers were not moving. we were running a grass-roots campaign. how will your campaign take off? it is going nowhere. seven days ago, i was being asked, are you thinking about quitting? [laughter] are you thinking about maybe joining another campaign? are you thinking about what you're going to do after this is over? i said, you have not gotten -- everybody else has gotten it since you. how you get your bomb? only two weeks left. i said, i'm going to get my bump, not from debate performance, or raising money, not from having the media have a frenzy about me. i'm going to get our bump from the people of iowa. i will get our bump when the people go out and make the decision.

i think we see signs that that has happened. i just want to say to the people of iowa, i am very grateful for many things. i am grateful for the terrific attendance that we have here tonight and that we have had every time i have come here. we have great crowds. i'm grateful for that. that is not the case everywhere. i will not point the finger any place. we had people come out to really want to know and really want to make the right decisions. yet, we have leaders like sam, who joined on afterwards, and religious leaders who joined afterwards, and that gave us a lot of incentive to continue on. i think it helped draw attention to our race. people started to look closely. give a second look at us. things began to change. this week, i doubt you would see

all of the press corps that is here if it was not for the fact that our numbers are beginning to change. why? iowans are beginning to lead. they're taking their positions. they are not paying attention to those pundits. they are doing what iowans do. they lead this country. they make a recommendation. they start this process. i want to say to each and every one of you, i appreciate your support. i need your vote at the caucus. a lot of candidates say that they need your help. they are lying. i need your help. [laughter] [applause] i need your help because we are running the campaign for you. other candidates are spending millions of dollars on television. traveling in big caravans with bosses. i was asked the other day in davenport. a guy looks out the window and

says, where is your bus? i said, the only bus i afford -- i can afford is the breakout. i have the -- is the greyhound. i have the chuck truck. he has been helping me, traveling me around all over the state of iowa, giving me the wise counsel of a good, solid iowan. i can tell you, we have worked hard to earn your trust. i always believed in the and that the people of iowa would vote for the consistent conservative who was authentic, who they could trust. [applause] so, i will ask you again, as i

did previously, please help us out. sign up. grab your yard signs. get or bumper stickers. get your stickers on your -- your lapel stickers. put them undercoat. when you go to church tomorrow, people see who you are for. when you go to the grocery store, when you're going to work, where you're going after this event to celebrate new year's, where it. make sure you do what folks will be doing in iowa the next few days. other than celebrating new year's, they will talk about the caucus. you get a chance to talk about who you are for. go to the caucus on tuesday night. you can go and help and talk to people about -- many people who will be there on caucus night are folks who have not made their decision yet. you can help them. you can be the light for them to show them who is the right person. shake this country up. shake washington up.

[applause] i am going to stop right there. i am happy to take some questions. c-span is here. i know you have a mic you'll be running around with, or not? you do? if you have questions, raise your hand. we will get you on the mic. keep it clean. you are on tv. [laughter] yes, sir. >> are you planning on taking new hampshire to and north carolina? >> we have not clear that with chuck's wife yet. we have not broken that to her yet. yes. >> everybody has said they're going to clean house and make right what is wrong with washington. what would you do to clean house and make right? what do you feel are your

strongest attributes that will make you the best president that our country and our god needs for the people? >> thank you for that question. i think i said before, the most important thing is to paint a vision for america. this country is a great country because we have been able to have people of very different views and opinions be able to come into the public square and voice their opinions. they come out and move this country forward. we did that because we share basic common values. our country was founded on this basic principle of, we are endowed with certain unalienable rights. all men are created equal. that phrase with then the declaration of independence, which i twisted around, is really the heart of america, what made us the successful and great country that we are.

i think we need a president who believes in that. and, who sees us as a country where all of us have rights given to us by god. and, our obligation is to go and live consistent with god's laws. right? god gives us rights. what comes with rights? responsibility. that is right. i think it is important to listen to great leaders of the past in america. what was reagan able to do? he was able to paint a picture of who we are. he left office, and the last thing he said to the american people as president, he laid out his concern about americans learning who we are, about what america is, what it stands for, and why we are exceptional.

he has every right to be concerned about that, and even more so now. our popular culture -- we are all doing what this president is doing, dividing us up instead of uniting us among these basic principles. i said -- reminded everybody of e pluribus unum, out of many, one. had a debate with howard dean within the last year two. we were asked what we thought was the most important quality of america, or characteristic of america, and he said, diversity. diversity? did you ever hear of e pluribus unum? people who are diverse can come

together to be one. the problem with most countries in the world is that diversity creates conflict. if we celebrate diversity, then we lay the groundwork for that conflict. we need to celebrate common values and have a president that lays out those common values, not what this president has done, lay out how we have one group of people be pitted against another group of people. class warfare. ethnic warfare. whatever you want to call it. this president, whether it is trying to pit the hispanics against certain other groups of people, or whether it is against -- working people, people would done well, all of those things. this is a president that divides into groups. maybe that is why howard dean

was so interested in diversity. divide and conquer. that has never been america. america is not about dividing caulker. america is about bringing everyone together. in the public square, people of faith and no faith, people who can lay out their claims, and then try to work together to come up with a solution together. that is what i hope to do. that is what our country needs. it needs to be reminded first, who we are. once we can grab on to that consensus, then i think a lot of things are possible in this country again. yes, sir? >> what will you do with obama care if you are elected president? >> i will repeal a bomb oncare. i will have the ability to do it. -- repeal obamacare.

i will have the ability to do it. there are 33 senators -- usually there are 33 or 34 senators up for election, of which 23 are democrats. i think it is 23-10. now, i know that because i ran in that election year with 23 republicans lost and only 10 republicans won. it was a very bad election year. as you know, they run every two years, six-year term. what we need to do is flip that to 23 republicans and 10 democrats. given the large number of freshmen and open democratic seats, i think we have the possibility.

i think we can outright repeal obamacare in the house and then get it done in the senate. what we cannot do is repeal it by waiver. governor romney said he would institute a waiver. that is a pretty bad idea, in my opinion. states like iowa will probably pass a waiver. see if you can take control of the state senator. they would probably pass a waiver here. california, they won't. new york, they won't. conn, they won't. you'll continue to pay the taxes. california and connecticut continue to take the money. that is not a good idea for a conservative state. some suggested we could do it by executive order, governor kerrey. you cannot repeal a law by executive order. you have to repeal a law with another law. we can do that either having the majority, or we can do it if we

get at least three more. we can do it through a process of reconciliation. we can pass a budget with an instruction to save money. that instruction come under budget, only requires 50 votes to pass. you save money. we repeal the taxes come all the spending, all the fines come all the fees. what will be left of obamacare is not worth the paper it is printed on. that is what we need to do. >> rick santorum working -- talking earlier today in ottumwa, iowa. watch more of these events hear on c-span beginning at 2:00 a.m. eastern. now, a look at the latest ads by the presidential candidates. >> i spent my life in the private sector. i have competed with companies

around the world. i learned something about how economies grow. we will not balance the budget by pretending all we have to do is take out the waste. we have to cut spending. i'm in favor of cutting spending and having a balanced budget amendment. the right answer for america is to start growth for the private sector. i am mitt romney and i approve this message. >> you want to get cut? ron paul has been claiming it for years. department of education? gone. interior, energy, commerce? gone. want to drain the swamp? ron paul. do it. >> i am ron paul, and i approve this message. >> some people say the america

we know and love is a thing of the past. i don't believe that. because working together, i know we can rebuild america. we can revive our economy and create jobs, shrink government and the regulation the strangles our businesses, replace the tax code with one that is simple and fair. we can regain the world's respect by standing strong again, being true to our faith, and respecting one another. we can return power to the people and the state we live in so we will all have more freedom, opportunity, and control of our lives. yes, working together, we will rebuild the america we love. i am newt gingrich, and i approve this message. >> who has the best chance to beat obama, rick santorum?

he is rock solid on values issues and fighting corruption and taxpayer abuse. more foreign policy credentials and rick's jobs plan will make america an economic superpower again. rick santorum, a trusted conservative who gives us the best chance to take back america. >> i'm rick santorum, and i approve this message. >> a look at the life and career of george mcgovern in "the contenders." >> in 1968, many americans thought they were voting to bring our sons home from vietnam in peace. and since then, 20,000 of our sons have come home in coffins. i have no secret plan for peace. i have a public plan.

and as one whose heart as ached for the past 10 years over the agony of vietnam, i will halt the response of indochina. >> 2:30 in the morning when nominee george mcgovern delivered his acceptance speech and in a couple of months he would lose badly to richard nixon. the candidacy and legacy of george mcgovern. we are live in south dakota and joining us is a presidential author. it's 2:30 in the morning when mcgovern delivers this acceptance speech in miami. why? >> the reason i think it was emblem attic of the mcgovern campaign, and it was a campaign run against the establishment. and what had happened and as you heard senator mcgovern, he was

very strong on the issue of vietnam. he is one of the most influential who ran for the presidency and was not successful. he did two things. he spoke about that war in ways that no presidential candidate had ever spoken about war before and in language as you heard and that was mild what he said during the campaign and it unsettled a lot of americans and caused them to worry about how he would end the war. it pitted the campaign to end the war against the established democrats and it was a lot of conflict there that eventually led to the convention and there were floor fights and issues, the issue of how he was going to select for his vice presidential running mate and the convention got out of hand. when it was time to accept, it was 2:30 in the morning.

instead of speaking before 75 million americans in prime time, he spoke to 15 million americans and the jock was there were people who fell asleep in front of the tv set. >> we will do a deep dive into the 1972 campaign and convention as well. first joining us here from our studios in washington is a veteran political reporter, columnist and author who covered the mcgovern campaign in 1972 for "the los angeles times" and featured on "the boys on the bus" and the media coverage of that campaign. tell us what is the atmosphere at the convention in 1972. >> ex hawks -- exhaustion. >> one of the reasons he gave the speech so late was that fights continued to go over various issues, the plaintiff

platform, including the war in vietnam and the platform had been adopted. and actually point out also the next morning when the staff met to choose a vice president or to decide who should be asked to be vice president and it was done in a very hurried and unsettling way to the point that the confusion that i'm sure we'll get to in this discussion led to what was probably the most disastrous part of the mcgovern campaign which was the selection of a vice presidential nominee who didn't stand up. >> in the convention hall that night, are the people with him? are they still there? it's 2:30 in the morning? >> the mcgovern followers at the convention, many of them had

never been to a convention before. as a result of new rules in selection of delegates, importantly initiated and developed by mcgovern himself, there were a lot of people who had never been to any commission or hadn't been involved much in politics so it was a great experience for them and staying up until 2:00 in the morning is not unusual, but what was unusual is that he was forced to give that very important speech so early in the morning. >> we will talk to the reforms. but let me go back to you in south at the mcgovern museum there and what is happening in our country at this time in 1972 that leads to the triumph of an anti-war candidate to win the nomination for the democratic party. >> well, the great political

legacy is that he changesed the complexon of the former democratic party. they built their base around the new deal coalition, catholics and jews, south white pop lift and organized labor. by 1968-1972 because of divisions that were exposed by the division over vietnam, senator mcgovern was one of those who thought the party needed to reform or else it was going to die. he saw they were using southern white pop you lift and organized labor was shrinking in influence and size and looked out at the political landscape and saw there were opportunities for growth, reaching out to minority groups that had been ignored to both parties, hispanic americans and reaching out to women, youth

movement. the first year that 18-year-olds would get to vote. he was trying to put together a new coalition to meld with the new deal coalition and create this ruling democratic majority. and so coming out of the 1968 convention, he had chaired a commission on reform, chaired the delegate process, was proactive in trying to bring women and minorities and young into the party. there are winners and losers. there are other elements of the party, organized labor resented that their influence was going to diminish. there was a very wild ride but because reforms senator mcgovern put through the party with his commission, he had an advantage in upsetting the preferred established candidate, ed must ki. caught the establishment off guard and as his success built

up, it caused contention in what was called the democratic regulars and it was a tumulltuous year and nixon presidency was 1972. that was the year he went to china, among other things. >> we will talk about that later on in the program. but part of his acceptance speech was about reforming the democratic party and takes aim at the republican party and what they are doing at their convention, which is being held shortly after the democrats also in miami. take a look.

we chose this struggle and we reformed our party and we let the people in. and so we stand today, not as a collection of back-room strategist, not as a tool of itt or any other special interests. >> scott, george mcgovern, 1972 saying we let the people in. take us back to the 1968 convention when humphrey gets the nomination and draw a clear connection for our viewers between the 1968 connection and mcgovern winning in 1972. >> let's go back to 1967 this is when the anti-war movement is starting to pick up steam. and very frustrated president is

maintaining the course in vietnam and believes u.s. can achieve a military victory in vietnam. and the anti-war activists look for someone who can challenge johnson in the primaries. you think back in american history. prior to 1968 when a party tried to challenge a sitting president was 1912, when you had roosevelt challenging a a sitting president. but they wanted to pressure johnson to try to quickly end the war in vietnam. they searched for a number of people. they approached senator mcgomp and declined. but senator mccarthy of minnesota. when he entered the primary in 1968, he had a very strong showing against president johnson. he didn't win, but made johnson aware he was going to have a tough time.

johnson decided to withdraw from the race. senator robert kennedy, entered the presidential contest and they were both going after it. and vice president humphrey decided to enter and carry the standard for the johnson administration. humphrey supported the policies of johnson. and what senator kennedy was assassinated in june and that left senator mccarthy to be the insurgent candidate. senator kennedy's followers urged mcgovern -- there was bad blood between kennedy and mccarthy forces. but the nomination went to humphrey, which infuriated the reformers because not only had he not won a primary, he had not

entered a single primary. it was evident that the democratic party was being run by the political bosses and machines and they wanted to have the process more open and have underrepresented constituencies brought into the process. and it wasn't in caucuses that were held secretly in people's homes. so it was how humphrey was selected in 1968 that put pressure on the democratic party to reform. vice president humphrey in trying to form this commission and we'll talk more to suggest reforms. but that was the background. it was the humphrey nomination that demanded and caused them to demand fundamental change. >> we will stick to the 1968 convention. you are covering it. what's the mood at the 1968 convention, what is happening in

the hall and outside? >> it was chaos. the party itself was so divided over the war and personals. that's the year there were riots in the streets of chicago. the police department repressed to the point where it was called a police riot. there was a big fight over vietnam plank that the anti-war forces lost, but generated tremendous heat. and it continued through the convention. and even after the nomination of humphrey, i remember i was there, i remember humphrey was a sad figure in his own moment because he knew what was going on out in the street and on the

floor of the convention, there was such criticism of him and of the continuing of the war. so that was -- in my experience the most disruptive, but also the most exciting convention in my time. >> and compare how humphrey was chosen as the nominee in 1968 to four years later the way mcgovern is chosen. >> a lot had to do with the mcgovern reform rules, because in 1968, delegates were selected as they had been for years by appointment of party bosses, governors. and if you were a party official, you got a free ticket to the 1968 convention by nature of your influence or your official position as an office holder or as a party office

holder. and in 1972, those people in order to get to the convention, they had to run as delegates supporting one of the primary candidates. a lot of them picked the wrong horse in 1972 because they supported muskie who was the establishment candidate and he had all the office holders pulling for him. but when his campaign fell apart, they were left out of the convention hall. as i said before, there are so many new people who had never been to a convention before, they filled the seats of the high and mighty who went to the convention in 1968. >> you covered it for "the los angeles times." here as part of our series this evening and to help us uncover george mcgovern our 13th contender in our 14-week series. back at the museum is scott,

presidential author who wrote about mcgovern's campaign in 1972 and will be taking your questions and comments. we will get to your phone calls in a little bit. eastern central time, 202-3770001. scott, let me go back to the reforms that were headed outside george mcgovern. how did he get involved in the mcgovern-frazier commission? >> it was chaos after 1968 and humphrey despite that chaos, closed the gap on nixon. it was a close campaign. you had the regulars thinking, we came close in 1968 if we hadn't all this agitation we would have been fine. and they were saying this was the last gasp of a dying political machine. humphrey was trying to ignite the political party and he threw

a bone by appointing this commission on delegate commission reform. and as they looked to the godfather of the chair, they looked for several qualifications, one, did they have credibility of the insurgents. and they wanted somebody who was loyal to the party and could work with the regulars and mcgovern, unlike mccarthy and senator hughes, mcgovern actively campaigned for humphrey and was a loyal democrat. and the third thing they were looking for is people would view this as a way to manipulate the process to ensure the nomination. but everyone was so sure that mcgovern wouldn't be a viable candidate in 1972, he seemed like the obvious choice, because he couldn't manipulate the system because his candidacy was a long shot that it wasn't worth discussing. he was appointed to the commission to be the chair.

people were saying how they were able to push the reforms through . the people who were likely opposed to the reform boycotted the entire process. so the reform commission was dominated by those intent on opening up the process while the old regulars didn't think it was worth bothering with because they didn't think anything would come of it. >> what were the actual reforms? >> the most significant thing -- several things. they began the process to encourage most states to use primaries as opposed to caucuses and conventions to choose their convention delegates. if you had a caucus, you were required to make it open, well publicized and make it available. if you were a party official, just automatically got a chance to be a delegate and sometimes the party officials could name others and sorts of practices where they would get proxy votes and sometimes the decision was

made the year before the convention. they tried to open up the process generally to make it more responsive and more voter responsive and tried to do away with the winner take all and make it proportional and give insurgent candidates to build steam and maybe overtake an establishment candidate in the long run and most controversial is they decided instead of a passive approach of no discrimination against anybody who would like to be a delegate, they adopted a pro-active that delegations had to reflect the makeup of a state's party by gender, by ethnicity, by race, by age and they were trying to get more women, more minorities and youth in the process. when mcgovern left the commission, what they said the party should strive for reasonable representation of those groups. after he left and a different chair took over, the commission

adopted specific quotas that each delegation should be 50% female and representation of minority groups to whatever it is the state's population. that was the reforms by the commission. >> and do those reforms stick today? >> they very much do. what is interesting, they were derived by skiffs and republicans as a quota system. it was an affirmative action program and both parties have adopted these reforms, most primaries are preferred over caucuses. if there are caucuses, they are widely publicized. if you go to a republican convention, 50% of the delegates are going to be female. that was a radical idea back in 1968 but it's the norm today. how much have things change snd 1968 convention, 13% of the

democratic delegates were women. 1972, 40%. in 1972 convention, 12 to 13% were. there was a change in terms of what the party looked like and it was very dramatic. >> the impact today, is there a long-term impact? we are heading into 2012 presidential elections with the iowa caucus coming up here very soon. >> it is ironic. what the reforms do, they help nonestablishment candidates get a foothold. if you have good ground games and volunteers that will show up, you can overcome your disadvantages in terms of endorsements and money. president obama doesn't look like he will get a challenger in the 2012 democratic process, but this year is the first year that

the republicans will have no winner takes all. if an insurgent candidate is able to get a leg up over the establishment candidates, i think romney is fulfilling that role, gingrich is benefiting from those reforms. broadening participation has stayed with us and involve both parties. >> former colorado senator and presidential candidate gary hart was mcgovern's campaign notwithstanding manager. here's what he had to say. >> i think the history of his life is he helped save the democratic party in the period between 1968 and 1972 simply by chairing the mcgovern reform commission. but by his insistence on the democratic party truly becoming

a democratic party. because of his efforts and the efforts of many of you, the convention in 1972 as interesting, as we say, it was, helped save the democratic party and helped open the doors for young people, for women, for minorities, for people up to that time had been shut out. it's fashionable for people to say there is not much difference between the two parties but there really is and there is the necessity for a democratic party and the kind of party that joverage mcgovern helped create. >> what's your reaction to hear about gary hart talk about the reforms? >> mcgovern's role was a critical role. i go well back before 1968 and i can remember in 1960 when john

kennedy was running. he and his aide and speech writer, ted sorrenson, just the two of them would get on an airplane, fly around and visit governors and mayors who were so empowered that you could pick up the nomination that way. retail not with the people but with the officials and the politicians. >> with you covering these conventions, what was it like to see these new faces in 1972 and going forward? >> it was very exciting because these people were into it more than some of the old pals that had been to 20 or 30 conventions over their lifetime and they had the hands on the levers and knew what was going to happen. there was an element of uncertainty injected by these

new people, not only in the voting for the nominee, but in the platform committee hearings, credential hearings, and so on that preceded the selection of a presidential nominee. >> let me ask you about the short-term impact of these reforms. let's go to the general election, just real briefly if we could in 1972, the reforms that he puts in place, do they actually benefit him when it comes to voter turnout to beat richard nixon? >> it helped him get the nomination. he chaired the reform commission and because he had several of the staffers working on his campaign. he understood the new process and i don't think he tried to manipulate it. he understood it and realized something had changed and able to take advantage of it in terms of winning the nomination where others were playing by the old

rules and caught off guard. in the general election, it didn't help him because the constituencies still weren't matured. mcgovern got 37 1/2% of the population vote. it hadn't won overwhelm or gotten the youth votes. if you look atlanta today's democratic party, you asked about the lasting impact, if you look at the coalition in 1972, minorities, women, young, highly educated activist voters, that gave barack obama the presidency. this is the barry gold water that led to the ronald reagan presidency in 1980. it took longer for the constituency to meld and become a governing majority that wasn't ready in 1972. >> george mcgovern the democratic congressman and

nominee for the president. let me get our viewers involved. first phone call is from mike in new york. good evening. >> mcgovern, he became the head of the middle east policy council after deciding not to run and he said the proposals for president clinton calling for the protect oil. did president clinton accept the proposal and if so, what happened as an effect of that. >> he doesn't know how to answer that. scott, his legacy. >> he was interested in middle east affairs and met with arafat and was interested in trying to broker a peace agreement. president clinton did not accept

that early on, but president clinton at the end made an effort to make that palestinian-israeli peace. but mcgovern got grief for using phrases. he was a very strong supporter of israel but also was very outspoken in american politics in palestinian rights as well. >> we will be talking more about mcgovern's post-1972 convention life, his legacy and efforts across the world specifically on hunger. let's hear from gordon in illinois. >> i was a college student who voted for mcgovern as a 20-year-old. later on, hearing the things on the nixon groups and their dirty tricks, i saw a program where there was a claim that they chose mcgovern as the weakest link and through their dirty tricks spread it to the other democratic candidates making it easier for mcgovern to get the

nomination and have you ever studied that? >> you want to weigh in on that? >> in 1972 campaign, there was involvement in a number of dirty tricks that were aimed at muskie because he was the front uner. i don't know if it was as far as setting up mcgovern. mcgovern at the beginning of that year was such a long shot, would have been really requiring claire voyance on the part of the nixon people to make him the nominee. they wanted to get rid of muskie and thought he was the toughest candidate and did a number of things, including spreading word in new hampshire, which had a

very, very heavy french-canadian population and used certain slurring words and they had another scheme where the nixon campaign had a number of black voters call in new york urging people to vote for muskie feeling that would be backlash against him. these things all came out but they weren't the reason he didn't get the nomination. he had problems just as troublesome for him as was mcgovern. >> we'll talk about the primary of 1971 and general election of 1972. first, we need to go back and talk first about why george mcgovern would run in the first

place. what makes him decide to run for the presidency in 1972? >> it goes back to 1968 when he filled in for robert kennedy and standard bearer for his delegates because they wanted him to be the stand-in for kennedy. he participated in a debate before the california delegation between humphrey and mccarthy and himself and everyone thought mcgovern thought he had won that debate. he said he realized he had presidential aspirations because he had gone on the national stage and held his own. he began considering a run at that point and decided fairly early in 1969 that he would be a candidate and felt he was the right person to bring together these old regulars with the new insurgents and create a democratic majority and he despised richard nixon. he rejected construct of the

cold war and did he tested red debaters. he ran against a well known anti-communist and despised nixon for how he had won against stevenson and he relished the fight as well and it was a great incentive for him to run. >> in 1968 to 1972, what is happening in vietnam. >> nixon said he had a secret plan to end the war. and he escalated the war in 1970 by having u.s. troops invading cambodia. so early in the nexton presidency, the war was escalating and expanding and not winding down and this outraged the anticipate war movement and that gave mcgovern i am pest tuesday to run.

nixon ran through the process, so by 1972 only couple 100,000 combat troops left in vietnam. but as was mcgovern was making the decision to run, he thought nixon was escalating the war. >> the pentagon papers are first published, what's the impact of this? >> actually, the pentagon papers were not as revealing as was said to be because a lot of what were in the pentagon papers were known but it gave more credibility to what was at the time very mixed public feeling about the protest against the vietnam war. i think the pressure now is that the country was in an uproar against the war in vietnam in the late 1960's.

it wasn't. it was very much split. >> you have the 1970 anti-war protest, kent state university shooting. >> you had strong protests that nixon very effect i havetively played on -- effectively played on. just as many people who deplored the mess in the streets, the pictures of these wildlife looking people with their long hair and strange clothes, they offended main street america or mainstream america. and so the war was particularly effective in dealing with the democratic situation because it was a rallying point for voters and activists. but nixon made great use of

reaction to the war by making very slanderous remarks about the people who demonstrated and so on. and he ran in 1968 and again in 1972 on basically a law and order agenda. he was going to protect the american people from these rowdies who were starting fires and having rallies in the streets. so that's why the war has been painted down that the vietnam war really built the protests -- it did do that, but also solidified opposition to the war. >> all of this and the impact of the war on mcgovern, what does it do? >> well, i think it caused him

to lose his perspective a little bit. he was so horrified by the war and it was a terrible mistake and several trips to vietnam and seen soldiers who lost limbs and krimmed for life and tens of thousands who died and he spoke about the war in terms that were strong, harsh and compromising. gave a speech before the u.s. senate and said this chamber reeks of blood and it's going to energize the anti-war folks but disquiets a lot of voters who thought he was going to withdraw america without any honor and without woreying about the prisoners of war. he was so passionate about the war, he used the strongest possible language to describe it. and he wanted to give the american people a sense they had ownership. this wasn't the fault of the president and the generals but a

problem of the american society that we couldn't see what america was doing wrong in vietnam. politically, i think it hurt him in the general election because americans don't want to hear the country and military spoken about that way. >> and scott, this is his motivation for running for president? >> absolutely. desire to end the war was the most important thing to him. when he did lose, he said, i feel so strongly about this war. he said if i brought peace one day closer than every hour of this bone-crushing campaign was worth it. he was a war hero himself. he served in world war ii as a bomber pilot. he felt vietnam was a mistake, anti-colonial war and united

states read it as a war against communist expansion, which wasn't true. >> we will talk about the early life of george mcgovern. the mcgovern campaign hired a documentary film maker to produce a series of short films about the candidate. as we turn to tell the story of young mcgovern, here's a brief look at the film. >> he was chris cristened george stanley mcgovern. he grew up in mitchell and started school there. but the more important lessons were learned at home. from his mother, a gentle spirit. and from his father, cristian principles and hard work. his father was from the illinois coal country where he earned 10 cents a bucket, but he found time to read the scriptures and

abandoned the mines to the pulpit. 1899, he was ordained a minister. as a boy, george had his fat's love of history, but would not be spared the troubles of his own time. the memory would remain with him all his life. >> scott, back in mitchell, south dakota at the mcgovern museum. tell us, what influenced him, defined him? >> first of all, it is important to recall his father was a minister in the methodist denomination which is a strict

religion and discouraged dancing, drinking and going to movies. he was accused of not being amoral or moral as particular. he got that from his father and this notion between right and wrong and the notion of doing good. he read a lot about the social gospel, how you apply cristianity to public affairs. and he was very a shy chile, which later would influence him, because he had some teachers who thought he had a learning disability and was kind of slow. but he was intelligent but shy and forced him to read allowed. when he got to high school, and he has an influential teacher who was a history and social studies teacher and he convinced george mcgovern to debate and he

was exceptional and won a number of state champions and won a scholarship at dact west lee and. that irly childhood formed him as a public figure and he was a good communicator and good speaker and good arguments and cared about moral principles. >> world war ii. >> he had another teacher who had an influence. gym teacher who directed him to jump over the vaulting horse and he said he couldn't do it. and the teacher said, your problem is you are a physical coward and that stunning him and he thought about it for a number of years. a classmate came up to him and said i would like you to take flying lessons and mcgovern said he was afraid of flying but he remembered what this gym teacher

said and became a certified pilot. when japan bombed pea rmp l harbor, he enlisted in the army air corps and became a pilot of b-24 bombers and stationed in italy, flew 35 combat missions. he was an exceptionally skilled pilot. the b-24 plane was hard to fly. he didn't crash but emergency landings where it was very risky and every time he brought his crew safely, he was a war hero and developed a friendship with a famous historian who wrote "the wild blue," which is a chronicle of the mcgovern experience. >> and how does his early

political career define him -- define his presidential candidacy. >> he initially thought he would be a teacher. he -- initially thought he was going to be a minister and after he came back from the war, he went to the see himary thinking to follow his father. he found a lot of the parish visits and those things weren't up his alley. he switched to history and got a doctorate degree in history. only one of two men with phd's. professors at northwestern who gave him background to eastern europe that led him to believe that the cold war construct was all wrong. so he was going to be a professor but he was interested in politics and got active in

the 1952 stevenson's campaign here in south dakota and wrote letters to the editor. caught the eye of state democrats, who asked if he would be interested in becoming the executive secretary of the south dakota democratic party. the democrats in south dakota were in sad, sad shape. there were 110 legislateors in south dact in 1953. and it was quite a challenge and mcgovern thought about it and it was a challenge worth taking and slowly built up the democratic party. he recruited workers, candidates, raised money, wrote platforms and speeches. democrats got 24 seats in 1954. 1956, he took this party and ran for congress and defeated the republican. he won again in 1958 when he defeated a former south dakota governor. in 1960, he made his first bid

for the united states senate and lost. and so john kennedy felt that perhaps his candidacy had brought mcgovern down in south dakota. and he had offered mcgovern the position the food for peace program in the kennedy administration. >> we are talking about george mcgovern's legacy and candidacy and delve into the primary campaign in 1971. let's go to akron, ohio. >> good evening c-span and thank you for this wonderful series "the contenders." i hope you will do one about the cabinet, too. but any way, my comment and my question is, i heard somewhere and i don't know what the truth is behind this, but just moments before senator robert f. kennedy was assassinated in 1968 after

winning the california primary, senator mcgovern was participating in a phone conversation with senator kennedy and i wonder if it has been revealed what that conversation was about and if you know anything about that phone conversation. >> i never heard that i happened to be in the hotel kitchen at the time robert kennedy was assassinated. i spent a great deal of time then and since then exploring all of the details of the time leading up to robert kennedy's death and never came across that story. but i do know in his hotel room, he did make calls to a number of people to look forward what expected to be the next phase of the campaign, which was to go to new york and campaign for delegates there.

he did talk to many people. he may have talked to senator mcgovern as well. if i'm not mistaken there was a primary in south dakota the same night. i hadn't heard that he actually talked to him, but it's very possible. >> mike in california, good evening to you. thanks for joining us. >> just a few things that i want to throw out. lucas in "nightmare" said that dirty tricks were essential to the narrative. and i think it's more accurate that nixon ran a white backlash campaign instead of law and order. and historical footnote, the only state mcgovern carried was massachusetts. from there and at the time we had bumper stickers saying,

don't blame me, i'm from massachusetts. and that's all i got to say. [laughter] >> senator mcgovern resented the implication he won the nomination because richard nixon became involved in dirty tricks against muskie. mcgovern said he was not a good campaigner and didn't have the fire in the belly and didn't understand that the rules had changed because of the reform commission. the notion that muskie lost the nomination when they allegedly slurred his wife, senator mcgovern thought that was bunk but that nixon campaign was doing things and mcgovern did stories to find out their buses had been canceled and they couldn't get people to and from and there was a rally holding up the hammer and sick will flag. there were the dirty tricks but

he didn't believe that is why he won the nomination. >> john in virginia. >> i read "the wild blue" and only learned about mcgovern's war record and i remember the 1972 campaign, it was my first time i could vote. but i don't recall mcgovern ever mentioning his war record and i think it would have given his anti-war stance more credibility if he had. can you comment on that? >> john, before our guests comment on that, i want to show you and others what george mcgovern had to say about his experience as a world war ii bomber pilot. c-span sat down with him. here he is in his own words about that and we'll come back and talk about it.

>> i flew 35 missions in a b-24 bomber, which is the biggest one we had at that time, that was before the b-52 and b-1 and we were hitting the most heavily defended targets in europe. they shot us to pieces on some of those missions. i wanted to bail out and i wanted my crew to bail out, but i've got a little scotch blood and i knew those planes cost about $300,000. that's nothing by today's standards where you have a b-1 that costs a billion for one plane but it was a lot of money then. so i kept nursing those crip willed planes back to home base and for that i got the distinguished flying cross. >> there it is, the distinguished flying cross. we are live from the museum for

our "contenders" series. scott, how does a war hero become an anti-war presidential candidate? and why as that caller said, does he not talk about it? >> it was the subject of a lot of debate about how much he should emphasize his record. he did mention it from time to time. he never completely ignored it. but he was encouraged by his staff to exclude it from the nomination acceptance speech and thought it was opposite. and he didn't emphasize it more. i agree with the caller, it would have been to his benefit because people got the mistaken impression that he was a pass fifth and didn't believe in using the armed forces. he would endorse clinton's use of armed forces in bosnia. he was not a pacifist.

and jewels, as a was it talked about it? >> not until the end of the campaign. he had a slogan in his speech, he wound up his speeches late in the campaign, leaving the war behind and coming home. and that was one of his slogans. come home, america. and it was in the context of that, some references to his wartime experience. >> well, here is -- before we talk a little bit more about george mcgovern's primary run, let me get this will phone call from jill in brock ton, massachusetts. you are on the air. >> i recall watching senator mcgovern and robert woodward and bob scheiffer at the time of presidentford's funeral and his

friendship with president ford and said he had voted for ford in 1976 and he said he discussed it with his family afterwards and found he did that as well and i about fell off my chair because i'm a strong democrat. i wonder if that came into the mix of information about senator mcgovern ever? >> scott? >> he did have great affection for gerald ford. i don't know that he voted for him but he had problems with president carter. president carter wasn't supportive of him in 1972. and president carter borrowed the strategy to get his nomination in 1976 and he was a little hurt. the magnitude of senator mcgovern's loss that he was a

prahia and there was some hurt feelings. he worked with a number of republicans. he and bob dole have partnered and he was capable of working across the aisle. he wasn't someone who worked in a partisan manner. >> the congressman from south dakota, the senator from there decides to make a run for the presidency. having to -- having decided to run, mcgovern announces his candidacy on january 18, 1971. here's a piece of the campaign film put together on mcgovern's decision to make that presidential run. >> this country was conceived by men who had a dream of human dignity and justice and concern for each other.

and if we begin now to match our policies with our ideals, then i believe it is yet possible that we will come to admire this country not simply because we were born here, but because of the kind of great and good land that you and i want it to be and that together, we have made it. that is my hope, that is my reason for seeking the presidency of the united states. [applause] >> and what is mcgovern's chances heading into the primary in 1971? >> considerably, very slim. he was not a dynamic

personality. he was a very calm man, very soft-spoken. lacked fire, really, except when he talked about the war in vietnam. >> was he considered dull? >> some considered him dull. but his gentleness and his niceness sometimes was ridiculed, but they were genuine. when he ran in the first primaries, he was regarded basically as a weak replacement of robert kennedy because robert kennedy was so dynamic and also because muskie was considered a certainty to be the nominee at that time. he had been very impressive as humphrey's nominee in 1968. he was also a rather soft-spoken man at the time but had a

terrible temper that sometimes came through. that seldom happened with george mcgovern. >> who else is running and how did they compare to george mcgovern? >> senator bimp bayh -- birch bayh and fred harris of oklahoma, but they were all bunched up together and it was muskie's nomination to lose. and some of the things that happened in new hampshire that your other guest mentioned, including appearing to cry in a furious moment outside a local newspaper about things that had been printed about his wife, there was some dispute about whether he was actually crying or not, because it was snowing at the time and muskie denied

very strenuously that he wasn't crying, but nevertheless, that was the impression. but there were other reasons that his candidacy collapsed or began to collapse in new hampshire because one of the big ones was his position on vietnam. he couldn't make up his mind where he stood on vietnam. whereas mcgovern left no doubt where he stood on the war. another point is that mcgovern was genuinely against the war but he was belittled as a peace stick as the expression went in those days. although he was revered, there were other people who didn't see it that way and never would dream of voting for george mcgovern. >> that film, part of what he filmed during the campaign

included the senator speaking to a group of viet nam war veterans at a hospital. here is a little bit of that conversation. >> i love the country no question about that. and you are halfway mad at it, too. believe me, you lose control of your bowl, bladder, and never father a child and never walk again. you are 23 years old, you don't want to be a burden on your family, you know where you go from here, to a nursing home and you stay there until you rot. why aren't there places like the government could set up. no one thinks of a disabled veteran or anybody as another disabled person. if you fall out of your wheelchair, you know who helps you, a guy in a wheelchair, not someone who is walking. >> one of the unconscionable

facts is what you just said, people who are desperately in need of help who can't qualify for it under the president present. i love the united states, but it i love it enough that i want to see some changes made. the american people want to believe in the government and their country. i want to provide the kind of leadership that would help restore that kind of faith. i do not think i can do it alone. of course i cannot. but the president can help set a new tone in this country. he can help raise the hope of the american people. that is what i am trying to do. >> scott farris, the impact of george mcgovern's tone in that campaign film and the impact on his primary run. >> how often do you hear politicians talking that

candidly about the price of war? very seldomly, if ever. that was startling to a lot of the american people prevent -- to a lot of the american people. one person said, let me tell you why george lost the election. america is a great country. it has faults, but george acted like he was angry at the country. you cannot talk about the nation's faults and expected to be elected. that shocked mcgovern. george thought that was not true. he thought that patriotism was pointing out the country's false and trying to improve them. in his mind, he was fulfilling the highest order of patriotism. many people interpreted it as him tearing down the united states by talking so graphically about the cost of

war, our conduct their, and even why we were there in the first place. >> so, how does george mcgovern overcome this and then win the nomination? >> again, he was a bit of a political savant. he was an organizational genius. he understood what it would take to win. we talk about what a good guy he was, and that is true. we should not overlook the fact that he was intensely ambitious as well. he tells the story of himself sometimes. a friend said to him, george, you are the most lauded, self effacing egomaniac i know. and that was true. he had what it tuck in terms of -- he had that fire in ability -- in the ballet and was willing to do what it takes to becoming president by putting in the long hours. gary hart's campaign manager said that muskie would go for the jugular if that is what it took. he had a concept of how to win

that involved all of these insurgents who would organize, flood the early caucus states and story of get him out of these places he was polling at only 1% or 2% and organize. he pulled off a very strong second place showing in the iowa caucus, a very strong second place showing in new hampshire. it showed that muskie was vulnerable. it caused hubert humphrey to get into the race. be out-organize some of the other candidates. he nearly won ohio. we will talk about california a little bit more. he had better organization. he worked harder and he had the devotion of the anti-war insurgents that nobody else really had. >> jules witcover, what was the media making of this grassroots strategy at the time? were you paying attention to it? >> we were paying more attention to muskie, because muskie was supposed to be the winner.

his staff made a terrible mistake in new hampshire. one of his leading campaign people predicted that -- she said, if ed muskie does not win 50% of the vote, i will eat my hat. he won 46% of the vote, but against that prediction, mcgovern was essentially the winner of the new hampshire primary and muskie did not recover from that. if muskie had not stumbled -- mcgovern knowing the game, which he invented, the delegate selection rules, probably would have won anyway, but the fact that muskie had this string of mistakes and bad luck certainly provided the opening for mcgovern. >> and george wallace? the role of him in this primary? >> well, wallace was a spoiler.

he tried to be a spoiler. he got past muskie in florida. wallace won the florida primary and muskie finished fourth. that was kind of the last nail in muskie's coffin and another thing that opened up the way for mcgovern. >> so, muskie stumbled, but did mcgovern make any mistakes in this primary? >> he would later. he got a little complacent, oddly enough. he came from 100-1 odds to win the nomination, but he stumbled badly in california. he came into california riding all of these sudden victories. it came down to him and hubert humphrey. all these other candidates had dropped out. it came down to the california primary.

suddenly they were fat and happy and did not work quite as hard. george mcgovern got a lot of good press early on because he was the underdog. now humphrey was the underdog and he started getting a positive press. they were playing the same expectations game that mcgovern won in new hampshire. but he lost in california. everyone assumed he was going to win in a blowout, but it turned out to be very close. it nearly derailed his nomination. >>we are going to get into that a little bit more, but i want to first talk about dirty tricks. a couple of callers have brought that up. what were some of the dirty tricks happening in the campaign? >> most of them are in new hampshire. we have already talked about the thing that was done to muskie, but throughout the campaign, dirty tricks were integral to nixon's strategy

because that is the way they did business. the whole watergate break-in was a manifestation of their desire not only to win, but to destroy the whole campaign, which was really personified by nixon himself. it was to decimate the opposition, not to take chances. it led to the exits we saw soon after the watergate break-in. >> where does the tag line of amnesty after an abortion come from? explain what it is and where it comes from. >> remarkably, it came from his future running mate, at least according to bob novak in his posthumous memoirs.

they were purblished just a little while ago. eagleton allegedly said he could not possibly have a chance because he favors amnesty, abortion and marijuana. that was later changed to acid just for added value. that was a little unfair. he did not support legalization of marijuana. he would go to college campuses and say, you have heard in the candidate who is supposed to legalize pot. the college campuses would go wild, and he would say, that is not true. we should not have jail penalties for marijuana. the crowds would sit on their hands. he did not favor amnesty for deserters. he did favor for conscientious objectors. and for some of those who avoided the draft in other ways. as for abortion, he believed abortion should remain a decision made at the state level, not the federal level. had he been asked about roe v wade, he would have opposed the

basic construct, because it was a federal matter. none of those labels really applied to him. people were trying to put a peacenik, hippie image on him. >> the line about amnesty, abortion and marijuana was a dirty trick, but it is so common in politics, even now. when we talk about dirty tricks, we talk about acted actions taken by one side to sabotage the other side. to >> at the time that you heard that line, what did you make of it? >> not much. >> did you write about it? >> i do not remember what i wrote about it, but i would not have put it in the category of being a dirty trick. it is the sort of thing that --

mudslinging that's would go on both sides come back and forth, always has done, and probably will continue to do. georgee talking about mcgovern, our 13th contender in our 14-week series. go ahead. >> i was a 17-year-old college student at the time and volunteered for the mcgovern campaign, but i was not able to vote in that election. but my question is, the break- in of the democratic headquarters at the watergate did not appear to be exploited and announced that much by the mcgovern campaign at the time. why was there so much caution with the campaign not to denounce the break-in? it seems to me that the sinister aspects of the break-in may have been a very effective factor and reason for people not to re-elect nixon. i would like to conclude lastly

that mr. mcgovern appears to be the only living contender who is available, and i wondered if he was invited to participate in your program tonight. >> he was invited to participate, and we had planned that he would join us. unfortunately, he took a spill earlier this evening and will not be able to make it. he is doing fine, but regrettably, will not be able to make it this evening. let's take the caller's comments about the watergate break-in. why did the governor not make more of it? >> he certainly tried. the watergate story did not take off the way it should have, the way we would have expected it to. one of the reasons is kind of an inside journalism story. a lot of newspapers including the los angeles times had editors who felt that the story

was unprovable and that the washington post was hanging out there by themselves. they did not always jump in on it. the governor himself had his way -- mcgovern himself had his way with it, but it did not catch on with the press the way he would have wanted it to. >> were the american people reading about it? >> you have to remember that the most discriminating aspects of watergate were revealed after the campaign was over, when the trial began and one of the defendants told the judge that there was more to the story than had come out.

a lot of the stuff that came out was too late for it to be of any benefit to mcgovern, but he certainly did try. >> we have discussed the primary. let's go up to the convention. here is george mcgovern at the convention in miami, joking about giving his speech at 2:30 a.m. >> chairman o'brien, chairman byrd, senator kennedy, senator eagleton and my fellow citizens, i am happy to join you for this benediction of our friday sunrise service. [applause] i assume that everyone here is impressed with my control of this convention and with my

choice for vice president, challenged only by 39 other nominees. [laughter] >> we are back live from mitchell south dakota at the george mcgovern and museum. scott farris, a presidential author, george mcgovern is this speech at 2:30 a.m. >> they had tried to do away with winner take all primaries, but they granted an exception for california. they realize there was a strong

in certain feeling in california that would benefit who ever the insurgent candidate turned out to be. those were the rules adopted and everybody understood that. they went to the california primary, the last primary before the convention, and now the race had narrowed down to mcgovern and humphrey. mcgovern was expected to win big. humphrey actually came within five points. at that point, humphrey then said, why should california be winner take all? the commission had talked about a proportional displacement of delegates. why should california be different? i should get half of the delegates from california, because he was trying to stop george mcgovern.

they were actually good friends. they had a lot in common. and george mcgovern was shocked that humphrey was going to such lengths to change california. this went all the way to the convention floor where humphrey had proposed an alternative delegation that were half humphrey supporters and half mcgovern supporters. mcgovern wad trying to beat that back. wednesday was the day they were supposed to submit their vice presidential nominees. people had been up all night. they were having a floor fight over the delegate convention. they did not have a short list of vice-presidential nominees.

that was not wildly different than in the past. generally, they did not name the vice presidential nominee until the convention. because of the fiasco in 1972 when eagleton was picked, nominees are now picked well ahead of the convention so that they can be vetted. it took down to where they could finally get somebody to run as the running mate. he finally submitted the name just a few minutes before the deadline. by that time, he had angered the feminists. they had put a woman nominee yet. that encouraged other people to put up a whole bunch of nominees, a total of 39, some goofy, some serious. by the time they got the balloting done and nominated his running mate, it was almost 3:00 in the morning. >> who was on the possible short list of vice-presidential candidates? >> it started out as a long list. the night that they were supposed to pick the nominee,

that morning at the hotel in miami, he called together the staff, and they sat around this big green covered table in the hotel, and slips of paper were passed around to all of the staff members. all of the staff members were in on the decision as to who should be the vice president. they would write their opinion on a piece of paper and then it would be collected and they would total them. about 20 different people were nominated, and then they narrowed it down to about 10. and then they narrowed it down to six. i do not think i could name all six, but among that group, in addition to eagleton, were ted kennedy, who had said several times he did not want to do it, o'brien, the campaign manager,

rubikoff, the governor of connecticut, and two or three others. they would take a ballot, take another one and another one, and finally they got down to two people. they were eagleton and kevin white, who was a mayor at the time. after some more discussion, they decided it should be kevin white. and they actually called kevin white and offered him the nomination, and he said he would take it. but an economist and member of the massachusetts delegation

called the governor and said, you cannot take kevin white. the massachusetts delegation will walk out. ted kennedy will object. he had to back off and de- nominate kevin white. that left eagleton. another reporter and i were hanging around outside this meeting for a couple of hours. when it finally broke up, we went into the room and found all the pieces of paper. they were torn up. we meticulously put them all together and spent about two hours patching them together to determine who it was going to be. there were so many names and so many little pieces, we wasted

our time. >> there was no consensus among the staff. >> they had decided by that time that it would be eagleton, but all of those pieces of paper were there, and we did not know they had made a decision, so we wasted about two hours playing detective, trying to figure out who it was. >> why did all of these potential running mates say no? when he does choose eagleton, eagleton except. who does that appeal to? >> most of them said no because they thought he was going to lose. even though senator mcgovern had some very good reasons why he thought he would win, nobody thought it would happen. nobody wanted to be associated with a losing campaign. his tactical error was that he thought he could convince senator kennedy to be his running mate. he spent way too much time

trying to convince senator kennedy instead of trying to find someone else. what he wanted to do was represent the insurgent wing of the party. it was the same problem hubert humphrey had in 1968. he wanted to unify the democrats. he was looking for someone who would be acceptable to labor, and urban ethnic, a catholic. that is why kevin white was considered and eagleton fit the bill. eagleton had some presidential aspirations of his own. the communications director and top strategist called senator eagleton and said, is there anything in your past we should know about? and senator eagleton said no, no there was not. >> we will talk more about that eagleton decision and the fallout from it, but first, let me speak to ed in morristown, new jersey. go ahead. >> senator mcgovern took of robert kennedy's banner in 1968. how much support did he receive from the kennedy forces after he received the nomination and added a kennedy member, as you are about to discuss, to the ticket? >> do you want to take that one? >> the campaign

enthusiastically for him. the kennedy family campaigned enthusiastically for him. when eagleton was dropped from the ticket, sargent shriver agreed to be his running mate. they had a great affection for senator mcgovern. he was viewed as a strong ally of robert kennedy. he called him the most decent man in the u.s. senate. the kennedy family was behind him 100%. >> michael in ohio. you are next. >> this talk about the vice president's pick and so on is an example of how messed up that whole scenario seemed to be. what i always wondered was how come the democratic party never stood behind hubert humphrey, who only four years earlier had a very close election with president nixon, and why they would not have backed him all along instead of him just

becoming another person trying to run for office? >> jules witcover. >> one reason was that humphrey had been a presidential candidate before that and had not made it. muskie was so strong, and also you have to remember that nixon -- not nixon, but lyndon b.

johnson, was the standard bearer in 1968 until he decided to drop out. humphrey did not get into that race until lbj dropped out. he did not have the apparatus to go on. i think he probably would have been a good candidate. >> colorado, bud. you are on the air. >> thank you for taking my call and thank you very much for doing this series. we're talking tonight about one of my very favorite americans. the very first campaign that i was ever involved in. i have always been rather amazed at how much this country dismissed senator mcgovern and was willing to reelect richard nixon.

i read jules witcover's book of the year it came out, while i was in college. i could not quite get it. i think the senator has proven himself over decades to be a very great american, and i'm really grateful for c-span presenting this program. >> jules witcover. >> i would agree with the caller that mcgovern was an underrated, under appreciated candidate. he was up against a candidacy, nixon's, that was very aggressive and destruction, and he made some mistakes in his own campaign. they did him in. without the conflicts of the

campaign, the dirty tricks and so on, i wonder if he could have won the election. >> well, let's get into nixon's role and the mistakes mcgovern made. but first, we need to talk about the choice of eagleton. here is the former campaign aide frank explaining the choice. >> the problem was that we had a very tough road to the nomination. it was not clear until the second day of the convention because of an ugly fight involving california, that george mcgovern would get the nomination. that took a lot of time and concentration. it got kind of chaotic.

there were three or four days in which to choose a vice president, two days, really. two days, two nights. we all got together and talked. we named names, through some names around. tom eagleton was, by all measurements, a good candidate. george mcgovern was from a small agricultural state in the north. tom eagleton was from a border state, a catholic with strong ties to labor. on key issues, he was in agreement with mcgovern. it looked like a pretty good fit. you have to remember that we did not have any fbi, any security agencies available to check anybody out. we assumed that tom eagleton who had run statewide and won four or five times as he had, if there was anything but could

have come out about him, it would have come out. >> what were you being told about the candidate? >> the vetting candidates was a very casual sort of thing at that time. there was no indication that there was anything wrong with it. there was very little time, or any reason really, not to take his word for it that he had done nothing that would damage the campaign. >> after the convention, you go to sioux falls. what is happening? what is the story about eagleton? >> i was not there at the time that eagleton went there and met with mcgovern.

word came that eagleton had had mental health problems and had taken psychotherapy twice. -- shock therapy twice. mcgovern was satisfied with eagleton's explanation. he stood up firm. there was not only support of him, but he made the mistake of saying he was for him 1000%. it was hard to back away from that when they realized the reaction they were getting after the disclosure of eagleton's problems. it was clearly going to damage the campaign. >> what happened next? >> there are trying to find a delicate way out of it and they were not able to do that.

a couple of things happened. once the rumors -- or the truth came out about senator eagleton's treatment for depression, which is what he had been diagnosed with. he was also accused of being a drunk driver, which turned out to be false. there was a sense that he was being picked on. a lot of people have mental and as. he said he was fine. why shouldn't he stay on the ticket? it seemed like his character was being maligned. there was initially hoped he would quietly resign and go away, but senator eagleton was not feeling that way. he felt his reputation had been damaged. even though senator mcgovern said he was behind thomas

eagleton 1000%, he was quietly trying to figure out how to get him off the ticket. there was a very long dance trying to negotiate eagleton voluntarily resigning from the ticket. what happened was that eagleton essentially wrote out the statement that senator mcgovern would make, and there would be no reference to these mental health problems. that was the only condition under which he would resign. of course, this is now an albatross on the campaign. the struggle to replace eagleton took a very long time. it was very embarrassing to senator mcgovern. senator muskie called a news conference to announce that he had declined being the nominee. eventually, he turned to sargent shriver, who had been one of the earlier choices but had been out of the country during the democratic nomination. now he was back. he said he would do it. he turned out to be an effective campaigner, but it was absolutely disastrous.

the campaign was very hurt by the eagleton affair. it is possible he still never would have won, but he may have carried 10 or 15 states and carried 47% of the vote instead of 37% of the vote. >> added americans view that decision? -- how did americans view that decision? >> there was a question of character. many people believed richard nixon was a knockoff of joe mccarthy. they cannot understand how the appeal to middle america. it baffled many americans. but because senator mcgovern had gone back and forth and maybe not been totally honest about eagleton, nixon now seemed more trustworthy. that hurt him very deeply. he was very sad about that. he now realize that the

question was about his character, not nixon's. that was one of the factors that kept water gate from being a big story. people could not put watergate in context, initially. why would they break into democratic headquarters? nobody knew it was part of a broader strategy of sabotaging democratic campaigns. the bigger story was the eagleton affair, not watergate, and that is one of the reasons the democrats could not capitalize on watergate. >> we'll talk more about what is happening with nixon at this time, but first, let me show you a couple of campaign ads from this. >> one of the reasons i am disturbed by the president's $10 million secret election fund is that it indicates that there is something he is afraid to disclose. what are they hiding? i am perfectly willing to publish to be donated every single dollar to my campaign.

but the president is covering it up. it is the sort of thing that puts the tarnish on the whole nation. >> mcgovern become a democrat for the people. >> i can only say the thing that motivated my change was a year of collecting pure, unaffected facts. >> i want to make this pledge to sammy and everybody here. whether you're young, old, black, white, i believe in the american dream. sammy davis believes in it. we have seen it in our own lives. years from now, i hope you can

look back and say this was one of your best votes. thank you. >> what is happening with nixon at this point in the general election? how is he campaigning? >> nixon is coasting, basically. he had a very, very disciplined campaign. it was a carryover from his campaign in 1968, where everything was orchestrated, down to the finest detail. that caution came out of his defeat in 1960 when he made the mistake of pledging to go to every state, and campaigned dawn to dusk. as a result of that, he looked terrible. we will all recall the debate he had with john f. kennedy, where he looked like he was going to expire. so, he and his brain trust

decided that the best way to run richard nixon was to limit what he did and always have him at his best. it happened in 1968 and again in 1972. >> what was it like for you to cover the mcgovern campaign versus the nixon campaign? how were they different? >> i covered them both. one difference was that mcgovern was running desperately. they knew that they were not catching on. they traveled widely. it was one of the first campaigns were jet planes were used extensively and they could go back and forth across the country in a day. just as humphrey had done when he lost to nixon in 1968, campaigning too much.

one of the successes for nixon in 1968 and 1972 was that the campaign realized that if you gave television just one face to use on the evening news, making it the best face you could. only do that one piece. whereas humphrey campaigned, as i said earlier, from dawn to dusk. he made a lot of mistakes. he made some good choices. but the media will always pick the most controversial thing, so nine times out of 10, humphrey would look bad and nixon would look good. the same thing applied in 1972 with mcgovern and nixon.

>> what is the nixon campaign doing to try to weaken mcgovern? >> again, they are trying to paint him as a radical, out of touch with the american mainstream. there also staying above the fray, talking about the accomplishments of the nixon administration. and we talk about why mcgovern thought he had a chance to win. he had a number of accomplishments. nixon's first year in office was very controversial. he had expanded the war in vietnam, and domestically, he raised a lot of hackles by instituting wage control. there was inflation. he began the americanization of the war in vietnam, bringing troops home to try to quell the anti-war demonstrations. he tried to counter his image as a pro-warmonger by going to

china and establishing relations. he managed to orchestrate events so that his presidency reached its peak in 1972. his great accomplishments in office occurred in 1972 and took away a lot of the arguments about why he should not be supported. two other things about misjudgments he made. he thought george wallace was going to run again as a third- party candidate and siphon a lot of votes from nixon not only in the south but in the industrial northeast. it would make those states easier for mcgovern to carry. of course wallace was the victim of an assassination attempt right before the maryland primary, was paralyzed, and was not able to continue the race. he also thought the youth vote would come out in mass in in his favor.

especially with the passage of the 26th amendment which allowed 18-year-old to vote. surprisingly, he barely won the 18-20 year-old demographic, which showed that despite all of the attention given to anti- war activists, a lot of americans were still very conservative. >> we know how this story ends. george mcgovern loses in one of the second worst landslides in american history. what is the mood of the campaign? >> when you're on the campaign plane, and you're in this tube flying around the country, you do not know what is going on in the rest of the country. millions of people believed they were going to win and that they could win. the defeat was crashing to them. >> we need to, as we wrap up this discussion about the general election, we want to

move on to the legacy of george mcgovern. but first, a little bit of the senator from his concession speech. then you'll hear a secret white house recording of a phone conversation between president nixon and the special assistant for national security, henry kissinger. >> we suspect that president nixon will come out of this the winner with about 60% of the popular vote and somewhere between 450-500 or more electoral votes. >> i hope that in the next four years you will lead us to a time of peace abroad and justice at home. you have my full support in such efforts with best wishes to you and your gracious wife, pat. sincerely, george mcgovern. >> dr. kissinger and senator

humphrey are speaking. it will be a few moments before we can get him. i have dr. kissinger. go ahead, please. >> hello, mr. president. i wanted to extend my warmest congratulations. >> we all knew it was going to happen. we got our 60%. >> one could not really be sure until we had seen. >> we got every state except massachusetts, and maybe minnesota. what a critic. did you hear that concession statement? he was very gracious at the beginning. he sent me a wire saying i look forward to working with you and your supporters for peace in the years ahead. i am not going to send in that

kind of wire. would you agree? >> absolutely. he was not generous, unworthy. >> i responded in a decent way. it was as far as i could go, but i am not going to spend much time on him. >> you are looking at one of the cue cards from george mcgovern's concession speech. jules witcover, was his concession speech reviewed by others as not gracious? >> i do not think so. it took a paranoid personality

like richard nixon to take it that way. >> scott farris, your reaction? >> it was generally pretty gracious. nixon's telegram to george mcgovern was not particularly warm and friendly either. they both knew that they did not like each other. most people have not gone back and read all of the concession speeches in american history. i actually did that for my book. george mcgovern does get a little more testy than some of the others. barry goldwater is another one. apparently, when you lose in a landslide you're not feeling that good. part of that is when you lose closely, you may get another shot four years down the road. you do not want to burn bridges. during nixon's second inaugural, george mcgovern was in england at oxford, and gave a speech in which he was very critical of nixon.

he said that america was more in danger of one-man rule that it was at any point in his history. -- in its history. that actually caused a lot more comments than the concession speech he gave. i think the concession speech was in the realm of what is expected of a losing candidate. but the speech in oxford in 1973, a lot of people criticized him for saying those things, especially to a foreign audience. >> we're going to move on to what george mcgovern did after he ran for president in 1972. but first we're going to get to ed in ohio. >> good evening. there is an important article that george mcgovern wrote that was in the washington journal. it is my advice to obama. he went on to say, first, i will order all troops out of

iraq and afghanistan by thanksgiving. >> ed, i am going to leave it there because we're getting a lot of feedback. you have to turn your television down. scott farris, pick it up there with george mcgovern and his impact on president obama. his antiwar views. >> he created a coalition that represents the modern democratic party, the party that elected barack obama in 2008. the obama campaign in 2007-2008 tended to mirror george mcgovern, an insurgent candidate against a more established candidate, hillary clinton.

clearly, president obama followed the george mcgovern blueprint to a certain degree. in terms of the war, george mcgovern has said two things. first, he has been disappointed that president obama has escalated american involvement in afghanistan. he has criticized that and suggested that afghanistan could become another vietnam, which of course was the centerpiece of his campaign. he has offered obama a lot of praise, but also expressed his concerns as well. >> duncan in ohio, go ahead. >> thank you for having me. i was just curious if you had ever heard of an organization called bildeberg, and whether george mcgovern had been to a

meeting with them? >> i have not heard of that. >> we continue to talk about george mcgovern and his post- 1972 career. this is bill clinton, who actually ran the george mcgovern campaign in texas, as many of you know. >> think of just the highlights of this fascinating life. pilot, a teacher, congressman, senator, first director of food for peace, author with senator dole of the food stamp program, courageous critic of the vietnam war, first and only person from south dakota so far to be nominated for president, united nations delegate under presidents ford and carter, advocate for disarmament and peace in the middle east. when i was president, united nations ambassador to the food and agriculture organization,

recipient of the medal of freedom, and with senator dole, the inspiration for the school funding program. george did not tell you what happened with the $300 million. there are 130 million children in this world who never darkened a schoolhouse door. their idea was to say to poor kids across the world and to their parents, you can have one good nutritious meal a day no matter how poor you are, but you have to come to school to get it. after we passed that little bit the initiative in a multi- trillion dollar budget, school enrollment around the world in the first year went up by more than 6 million children. 6 million futures george mcgovern helped to make. >> scott farris, explain why george mcgovern had a passion on this issue and its impact.

>> two reasons. one, he was a generally compassionate man. he saw hunger during the depression. he saw hunger during the war. as a senator from a farm state, he also understood how this was a program with a marvelous capacity to produce food. other farm state senators like senator dole saw the opportunity in this as well. one of the things senator mcgovern did, when the food for peace program was first initiated under the eisenhower administration, it was seen as a way to get rid of agricultural surpluses that the government had purchased, a program from

the new deal. george mcgovern said it is a humanitarian thing. it is about feeding the hungry, especially children. he took the food for peace program, which was a minor program under eisenhower, and dramatically in creased its scope. in six months, he distributed six times as much food as the eisenhower administration had delivered in six years. millions of children around the world got a school lunch. it was probably the greatest humanitarian effort of the kennedy administration, including the peace corps. >> we have about 10 minutes left, talking about george mcgovern. as we told you earlier, we invited senator mcgovern to be on our program this evening. unfortunately, he took a spill earlier tonight and was unable to join us. he has been flown to sioux falls south dakota for further medical attention. unfortunately, he could not be

with us. we wish him the best of health. jake in sioux falls, s.d., go ahead. >> excellent program tonight. my question is whether george mcgovern was ever electable in 1972. could he have been elected if he had avoided eagleton debacle or the late-night speech? >> the conditions we have talked about at some length to night were a mixed bag in the campaign. for all this support that george mcgovern got from war protestors, there were just as many people who did not look at the war that way. they did not think it was a disaster. their attitudes were shaped by

president nixon, who played on their patriotism and played on their emotions, and turned the demonstrations that helped george mcgovern into almost a national disgrace in a way that helped nixon. >> was his political career over after 1972? >> he continued to serve in the united states senate. he was reelected in south dakota pretty handily in 1974. by that time, watergate had come about and president nixon had resigned. senator mcgovern felt a bit of vindication. it is unfortunate that his defeat was so total in 1972

that he was not mentioned as a candidate in 1976. in 1980, there was a big republican wave that brought ronald reagan into office. many democrats lost their seats in congress. in 1984, george mcgovern launched another quixotic bid for the presidency. he was up against gary hart and former vice president walter mondale. george mcgovern got kudos for being a thoughtful presence. he got credit for trying to heal some of the wounds within the party. he maintained a very active life in public affairs, going back to this passion for addressing world hunger. with bill clinton, he helped work on the world food program, which helped to feed many people. hunger and nutrition remains his passion today, as well as reminding people of liberal values. and the place of liberalism and our american political system.

-- in our political system. >> thank you very much. i think you guys have done your studies. i want to just remind everybody to remember george after "losing" and election. i do not think he lost. i think he moved on to be much better things, like you folks were just talking about with the world hunger program. george has survived wars, being in antiwar person yet willing to step up for our country. i think he is a great peacekeeper, and he understands world politics like we do not understand. my question is, for our country, who in 2012 is the closest candidate that can carry

out george mcgovern's policies? who is the closest, best option that we have? >> it is barack obama. i do not think that any of the republican candidates represent anything akin to the sorts of things that george mcgovern running for president in 1972 or the objectives he has carried out the rest of his life. >> what kind of president would george mcgovern have been? >> i actually think he would have been a pretty good president. i base that on the food for peace program. one of the things you need to bring to the presidency is certain executive management skills. what he did with the food for peace program, without a lot of

money, indicates that he was able to carry things out. had he become president, he may have had a difficult time getting us out of vietnam in a way that would have been acceptable to people, but i think he would have been a fine president. i think he had the qualities of judgment and good will that americans want in their president. >> and the future of liberalism in this country? >> again, he has outlined a map for the democratic party to be a major force in politics, to return to its status as the majority party. it is a question of whether the democrats will get over the nostalgia of the new deal coalition. a lot of people remember their parents and families growing up in urban america and would like to restore the democratic party to that urban, ethnic, labor union ideal. i think senator mcgovern realize that there are more fertile grounds for working with liberalism within the democratic party. there are ways to appeal to

minorities, women, to the young, and to continue to broaden their base. he has shown the way for them to be a viable political force. maybe gary hart is right. without george mcgovern, the democratic party might have ceased to exist as a viable party. >> then give this one to both of you. will there be another antiwar candidate? in the future, like a mcgovern? >> the thing the differentiated him from other anti-war candidate was in his heart, in his soul. i think he might disagree with barack obama, who said he is not against all wars. george mcgovern was not against all wars either because he fought courageously in one. but i think if he had been

elected, he would have gone as out of vietnam as soon as he could. it certainly would have been a lot sooner than nixon did, with the country's tail between its legs. >> scott farris, quickly. >> i do not believe anyone will ever run as an anti-war candidate exactly the way he did. he showed what a presidential candidate can and cannot i think people were. unsettled when he was so graphic and uncompromising in his language. i think it is indicative that ever cents mcgovern, the have felt the need to express their bonafide as a commander in chief because they do not want to be called -- i am not another mcgovern when it comes to foreign affairs.

>> we need to wrap up on that point. we want to thank tonight the mcgovern center in south dakota. we would also like to thank jack mortenson, jay van duke, and senator mcgovern's daughter. sepcial thanks to my guests. scott farris, can i just end with you and your thoughts. what is the legacy of george mcgovern? >> again, he transformed the democrat -- democratic party in very few ways many others have transformed the political party. his humanitarian efforts on behalf of the world may be his greatest legacy. who knows how many people are real live today because of george mcgovern. one other thing is we saw

another clip from his coordinator. that's on a lot of idealist who went into politics and made a name for himself. he probably had a lot more influence than some men who won an election. >> thank you both. >> we are not content with things the way they are. we reject the view of those who say, america, love it or leave it. [applause]

>> are c-span series "the contenders" continues with a look at the life of ross perot. >> we are $4 trillion in debt. we are going in debt an additional $1 billion every working day of the year. while we sit here tonight, we will commit an official $50 billion an hour and a half. it is not the republicans' fault or the democrats' fault. i am looking for who did it. the facts are, we have to fix it. somewhere out there there is an extra terrestrial who is doing this to us. everybody says they take responsibility. somebody has to take responsibility for this. >> that was ross perot during the second of three presidential debates on october 15, 1992. talking about one of his favorite issues -- the u.s. debt. he won 19% of the popular vote, the largest vote for an

independent candidate since theodore roosevelt. he ran a second campaign in 1996. today, he is our focus on "the contenders." thank you for being with us. we are doing this series as a way of looking at american history through the lens of presidential candidates who have failed in their quest for the white house but had an outside impact on american history. tonight joining us for our discussion of two hours on ross perot is doug brinkley. what interests you about ross perot? >> he has a pioneer spirit. he really harkens back to the 19th century, early 20th century. he is more like henry ford or thomas edison. he really cares about the country. patriotism has become kind of a

cheap word. ross perot was kind of a superpatriot. he wants to do what is right for our country. this comes out of his naval academy background. his constant service to our country looking for pows and mias during vietnam and constantly supporting our special forces. the clips you just ran tells you that in 1992, perot was always on the central issue of our national election, the debt. today we are at $15 trillion in debt. what he was talking about that great sucking sounds of the jobs leaving america due to nafta outsourcing, it is probably on the left of the issue that most disturbs middle- class americans. jobs have gone overseas and many middle america towns are

languishing. >> the issues he talked about in his campaign are being echoed by the tea party people on the right in the occupy wall street people on the left. >> exactly. he is a centrist. you cannot look at ross perot as the paradigm of typical politics. we often want to label people as right or left. he is something out of an older american wagon trains or world war ii heroes. soldiers, explorers, and mentors, that is what ross perot is about. his entering in 1992 is not about politics as much as it was public service. you have to say this about ross perot in 1992 and 1996, he put a considerable amount of money where his mouth was. he ran. every season we have people flirting with third-party runs, but he did it and it is quite

extraordinary to get 19% of the vote. is kind of unprecedented. it came from middle-class people all over a america. it is interesting to reflect on this united we stand movement ross perot ran in 1992 and with the reform party in 1996. and we wonder will there be a ross perot that enters in 2012. if you look at his platform in 1992, he seems to be right on a lot of key issues including border problems, drugs, violence on the texas-mexico border, the need for education. he has controversial things like putting on a gasoline tax. all of these issues, his legacy really invigorates our current debate. >> for many americans outside of texas, 1992 was perhaps their introduction to ross perot. he had been on the national stage for a while.

in the late 1980's, he began speaking out about these issues that he was concerned about. we looked in our video library and our first coverage of ross perot was in 1987. here he is speaking before the american bankers association that year. >> let's look at where we are and take the rose colored glasses off. all of these people saying the fundamentals are sound, i think we have had enough doctor feelgood. i think we are tough enough to take bad news. i think it is time to look at the facts. we have a $3 trillion debt by 1988. our debt is being funded by foreign nations at this point. the greatest nation in the history of man does not have the will to past -- we continue to pass resolutions that put us deeper into debt and we have given up trying to live within our means of the country.

there is no correlation between taxes paid in and money spent. we are losing at international business competition. some of our banks have problems, savings and loans as serious problems. wall street is bouncing all over the place. our personal spending habits of our people are as unique as our federal spending habits. people spend everything they make. all they can borrow and they have no savings. >> 1987, 24 years ago. except for upping the numbers and the fact that americans are saving because of the 2008 crisis, almost every one of these issues could be talked about with the same words today. >> that is correct. remember why he could give that speech, he was a genius at start up operations. he understood the corporate world. in 1962 he created electronic data systems and ended up selling it a few years before that speech to general motors and became arguably the richest person in texas and was getting on the cover of fortune

magazine. he knows what he is talking about as far as how to make a start up business. he was in early on with the internet revolution. the importance of data collection. he had at one point invested in apple with steve jobs. he really wanted the united states in his adult life to be the great country it was of his childhood, a country that fdr brought us through and the great depression. that can do spirit. it fills him up. the fact we were losing in the 1980's to japan a lot, and today our problems with competing with china. the fact that so many people in congress seem to be bought and paid for. getting rid of lobbyists and corporate corrupt politicians was at the core of the ross perot message.

>> this is a call-in program. we in a few minutes will put our phone numbers on the screen so you can be involved with the issue that led to see he has today. this book was published "disrupting the balance of power." carolyn barta is the author. she is joining us from her home in texas. you knew ross perot as a journalist before many people met hi. can you tell us about his roots in texarkana and what shaped the man we knew of a national stage? >> perot was from texarkana. he had an average texas childhood. as a boy he broke horses and traded horses. he was an eagle scout. even in later tonight i think he

kept all of the traits of the eagle scout. he would set of objectives and goals and try to pursue those goals. he was very much in the texas tradition of the day. as he grew and went to the naval academy and started his own businesses, he was representing the can-do spirit of texas. his vision was a big, the state was big, there were powerless opportunities. the sky was the limit. he really sort of played into what was the texas mythology with texas politicians who were larger than life, very successful businessman who made a fortune here. they were risk takers, they were not afraid to fail.

that was the sort of spirit he had at that i think got him into this thing. >> noting that at the naval academy, he was president of his class the last couple of years. early on he showed leadership traits have the ability to galvanize people under his leadership. just a quick overview of his business career, let's take a look -- he went into business and to ibm as a salesman where he became the top salesman for the company. that was in 1957. in 1962 he founded his own company which was electronic data systems. he then sold it to general motors for $2.4 billion and stay on the board. in 1988 he founded perot systems. in 2009 he sold that company to dell computers for $3.9 billion. he and his family are known as philanthropists.

can you talk about that side of him and his family? >> they have given a fortune to all sorts of charities here in dallas. ross perot himself has made many anonymous contributions in small ways. he has helped individuals without people even knowing about it. there is a hospital here named for margot perot, his wife. he has given a lot of money to the boy scouts. it is amazing their philanthropy. >> you mentioned earlier his involvement with the vietnam pows. can you tell us a little more what you know about his interest and that issue? how they created a divide between him and later president. >> we mentioned he graduated from the naval academy in annapolis as the president. that is a big deal. he was the sort of person in the navy who believe you are

only as good as the guy left behind. he was a great leader. during those years when he was in the navy, he had sometimes had to go and get soldiers that were on leave or got drunk in a foreign town and got them back on the ship. it became sort of a hallmark -- you'd never leave anybody behind. he was very upset during the vietnam war that the united states -- we did not push the pow mia issue in that. ross perot stepped into the fray and it did very dramatically went to back channel negotiations with vietnam to say that we want every one of our guys back. he has become really a hero of the u.s. military veterans for his constant concern about our soldiers and our troops. it recently, i get a top for

veterans day in dallas. it was a good group called daughters of world war ii. there were hundreds of world war ii veterans there. i got to talk to ross perot at dinner one night. one of the amazing stories he told me was that recently when our seals team killed osama bin laden, they thought so much of our special forces they shipped him a staff. he went to fort pierce, florida to the seal museum -- which people should definitely go visit if you are in town on holiday. i think our navy seals should be "time" people of the year. that was just a tribute to how conscientious he is about getting jobs, performance people and his companies, helping veterans whenever he can, particularly the special forces which he thinks represents the best of the best of the american spirit.

>> we visited his boyhood home in texarkana. we will show you that. as we are looking at that, we want carolyn barta to talk about his interest with texas governors. >> he was appointed to a couple of task forces, one by former governor bill clements. another one by former governor mark white. clements was a republican, white succeeded him as a democrat. they both asked ross perot to serve. one was on education reform. i think it just points out how ross perot was always one to speak his mind. he was never afraid to say what

he thought. he thought that in the public schools there should be special classes for talented kids. the brightest kids should go to better classes. some of the parents -- texas parents thought that is elitism. maybe we do not want that in our public schools. ross perot very sarcastically said, ok. let's put all the five girls on the drill team. let's have everybody be the quarterback. it was just sort of an example of how he always spoke his mind. he was never reluctant to take on the top if he was asked to do a job like that for a couple of governors that showed the democrats and republicans both liked him. liked him. for years his name had been

mentioned as a potential candidates for something in texas because he was a leader. he was also in the tradition of old-time texas politicians. people like -- going back to sam houston in the republic of texas. that kind of charismatic leader. speaker sam rayburn, lbj, governor john connally, governor clements who was one to speak his mind, governor ann richards who was then a class by herself as well. he was so much like some of these older texans who would just tell it like it is. they did not mind doing the hard work. if he thought it would help the state or the country, he did not mind doing the hard work to do it. >> let me chime in at that point. one more bit of the perot biography. we want to put this on the

screen before we get to his campaign in 1992. a number of eds workers were held hostage. ross perot was personally involved in the rescue of those, something that was later captured in a book. "on wings of eagles." it became a national best seller and later a movie on television. can you talk about how he did this effectively? >> this is an amazing story. in 1979, jimmy carter was president. you had the beginnings of an iranian revolution. two of his workers for his company for electronic data systems had been held captive. he wanted them sprung free. he went and hired former special forces people to go in and find a way to get that list. -- them loose.

he ended up -- they ended up using a rally to spring not just his two employees, but about 10,000 political prisoners got released. they had a rendezvous and they got a very dangerous trip. cloak and dagger type of story. they were eventually able to smuggle out through turkey. this was a highly successful extraction maneuver of getting in there and getting his guys back. he gets back to about the pows and mias. ross perot works and -- he believes in loyalty first and foremost. if you work for him in your loyal to him and his company, whatever he is up to, he will do anything for you. if you listen to people that know him, that is the number one trade. personal loyalty to people he believes in. >> we have a great photograph. it is of him and richard crenna who played him from the movie.

it was shown nationally on network television. it is 1992, set the stage about the reelection of george h. w. bush at how the public was feeling about him. >> remember, he had quite an -- george herbert walker bush had quite of impressive record of foreign affairs. he oversaw the berlin wall coming down, the breakup of the soviet union, the head of the cold war. in 1991, the gulf war which most people thought was a great success of ousting saddam hussein from kuwait. but the economy was stagnant. by 1992, pat buchanan was going after president bush as having a silver spoon in his mouth and was an elite out of touch -- there was a populist revolt within the republican party. also, you had another resurgence of jerry brown coming in.

bill clinton gets the nomination. you have the new democrat bill clinton and george herbert walker bush. suddenly ross perot goes on cnn, larry king, and says i will run as an independent if i can be on the ballot in all 50 states. if i am drafted. i am not going to go out there and run the typical campaign. people want my ideas, the ones we talked debt the outset here, particularly balancing the budget and stopping of outsourcing of jobs. he was opposed to the war in iraq because he thought it was going to be a mistake. special forces should have gone in and killed saddam hussein. he watched his amazing third- party run and started soaring in the polls and became the darling of the summer of 1992. we will pick up the rest of the story in a little bit. >> let's show that larry king

live interview where ross perot announces his willingness to run. >> let's go down to grassroots america were the people are hurting. people are saying, why are we in this mess? first of all, look in the mirror. we are the owners of this country. we do not act like the owners. we act like white rabbits to get programmers from messages coming out of washington. we own this place. >> is there any scenario in which she would run? did you give me a scenario where you would say, ok. i am in. >> if number one, i do not want to. >> i know that. >> if you are that serious, you the people are that serious, you register me in 50 states. if you are not willing to organize and do that, then this is all just talk. i am saying to ordinary folks, if you are dead serious i want to see some sweat. i want you in the ring.

>> let me ask you about how much of a surprise that announcement was by the time it was made in february of 1992. >> i guess it surprised most people. the truth of the matter is, he had been out on the -- making speeches for, you know, several years. in particularly, leading up to the larry king live interview, he had in fact just a couple of weeks before that, he was in tennessee to speak to a business group. he was interviewed from a reporter there. he told him virtually the same thing. he said if he saw some skin in the game. if people would get in the ring and get him on the ballot, he but think about doing it. nothing much came of that.

it was published. nothing much came of it. ross perot was talking to a man in tennessee and another one in florida who were activists in trying to draft him to run. john j. hooker in tennessee, a flamboyant businessman kept calling in and talking to him trying to get him to run. it got to the point where they started talking about, where should i announce? the considered conventional sources like "the new york times," "l.a. times," "wall street journal." he liked larry king live. throughout the campaign, he liked going on talk shows where he could talk and get his message out. as i was told the story, he had -- john seigenthaler of the tennessean, the editor publisher

there formally call larry king live. i am not sure whether he set it up or just told them to ask the question. ross perot said he was going on larry king live to talk about the economy. he made an impulsive statement. he never thought it would go anywhere. the truth of the matter is he had been thinking about this for quite a long time. even three months before, he made a speech in tampa to a group called "throw the hypocritical rascals out." a man down there was trying to do a draft campaign. there were signs "draft perot." 2000 people listening to him speak down there. he was curious about it. how do you get on 50 ballots? in fact, he asked some of his staff people to do some research to see how you get on the ballot. even mulling it over in his head for a good while, it was a surprise to most of the country. i think he had been doing it

for a good while. >> but his challenge to his supporters to get him on the ballot became the subject of carolyn barta's book that she contends is all about the people who followed ross perot and how they were galvanized to move outside of the conventional two party system in support of issues. and this figure leading those issues. we will talk a lot more about that as the program continues. these are back-to-back clips that give you a sense of flavor. we mentioned that ross perot was very critical of the george bush's gulf war. we will hear from that in an interview he gave to c-span in 1992. immediately after that, also in the spring of 1992, you will hear a clip from a very well- known texas journalist molly ivans who has now passed. -- molly ivins, who is now

past. she is very well known in texas politics. she was asked to talk about this texas politician she knew so well. >> they should understand why we are going to war. let's take the example you gave me. it was four months before the white house could figure out why we were doing it. one time it was jobs in the next time it was oil. finally they got it together and it was we had to get rid of nuclear systems and hussain. guess what we have still got? we did not accomplish any objectives. if i knock on your door and say i would like to borrow your son for the middle east so that this guy can have his throne back, you would probably hit me right in the mouth. >> i was writing about that format they had during the --

that's stupid tax reform idea that they had during the reagan years. i was talking about why it was a bad idea. if you make more than $17,000 a year, you are now in the same tax bracket as h.r. perot. i then added, comma, who makes more than $1 million a year. i made the fatal journalistic error, i did not check. the next day the guys at our business desk in dallas laughing and saying, ross perot makes $1 million a day. [laughter]

then a phone rang and there was an operator saying ross perot calling collect for molly ivans. [laughter] it really is funny. i like the guy. i am sure he is politically incorrect to an extent it would make people's teeth hurt around here. i do like ross perot. he is a hard guy to dislike. there is a lot to like their. the downside is that basically guys who have made a lot of money and business have a hard time working in a system of checks and balances. the other down side is that the man is slightly paranoid, which is like being slightly pregnant. >> our guest here in washington d.c. is douglas brinkley, presidential historian.

and in dallas, carolyn barta. longtime texas journalist who wrote a book about the perot campaign. let's begin your telephone calls starting what ralph watching us in chicago. >> thank you. he missed his chance by not calling for a roadmap to peace on drugs as successful contenders grant used medical cocaine and jfk used speed medically. washington, jefferson, jackson, and lincoln used medical marijuana. each of our last three successful contenders used both grass and coke medically as well as recreationally. thank you.

>> we are really getting at is the so-called war on drugs which became a popular phrase in 1980s in the united states. the problem was all of these urban centers -- whole generations of kids getting addicted to different types of narcotics. his whole life he has been a champion of education. working for public schools in particular, there were public schools where drug gangs were taking over. you could not go into them including in dallas which was a very rough city, people forget, in the 1980's and 1990's. ross perot took a hard line on cracking down on drugs. we had the crack epidemic that starts hitting the united states after that. it was tough on that issue. if you are somebody who is a libertarian and believes that drugs should be legal in the united states, ross perot would not be on your side.

>> matt is watching us in plano, texas. good evening. >> i am very glad you are having this discussion. i want to make a comment and a question. he had a profound impact. here in plano, he ended up moving his headquarters here. because of that, i believe dr. pepper and a few other corporations moved here as well. later on he ended up founding perot systems here as well. he has had a huge impact where i live. i thank him for that. my question is about his choice of stockdale -- p for vice president. how did that come about? he did not look too good in the v.p. debate. it was a hindrance. i am not sure how many votes that cost him, but it did not make him look good. what was the thinking and a decision behind selecting james stockdale as a candidate?

>> in 1992 he chose stockdale. 1996, pate choate, an economist. >> he is one of the greatest americans who ever lived. he is one of the most decorated naval officers in u.s. history. of course, he had been a pow in world war -- in the vietnam war and organized a -- how to have pow resistance. he won something like 26 medals, numerous silver stars, medal of honor winner. he later became president of a naval war college. we are dealing with a very serious person. ross perot admired him. so lavishly. he thought this was the type of person we needed in government. he chose him as his vice president which is an interesting choice. what people forget in 1992, ross

perot did well in the debates. he clearly won the first debate against clinton and bush. some people would say he won all three. that is how he got to 19%. in three debates, he was at 8%. post debates he got up to 19%. stockdale struggled. he only had about one week to prepare. he got out of the gate wrong by making a comment like, who am i? other people had not heard of him before. he actually got a lot of applause when he did the debate but the media want to count on -- went to town on him. he really was not ready for it -- for that media frenzy you have to expect. it made some people question whether ross perot could be president because some people did not think stockdale had the political skills to be president. on the other hand, they do not come any better than admiral

stockdale. i hate that we remember his fumbling of a debate question had not remember what an extraordinary -- the service of the admiral is almost unparalleled. >> spring of 1992 progresses into summer and people who are enthusiastic about ross perot began the work of meeting his challenge in getting his name on the ballot in all 50 states. would you describe to our audience ballot access in this country as it existed in 1992 and how big a task they faced. >> it was a huge task. in order to get on the ballot in any state, you have to meet the laws of the state. if it is a petition you have to get 100,000 and on a petition or you pay $1,000 -- the range of requirements for getting on

a petition is just extraordinarily diverse. in most cases it is very hard because you have to collect all of these petition names. sometimes you have a very narrow window in which to do it in. what happened after larry king live, people started calling the ross perot headquarters in saying they wanted to get in the ring with him. they wanted to do what ever they could do to make him run. they set up a phone bank there at his headquarters in dallas and volunteers came in and manage the phone bank. they were having people call from all over the country. they set up this sophisticated phone bank where somebody would call in the and if they were from a certain state, would

they want to work on the petition drive, did they want to volunteer? did they want to know when ross perot would be next on tv? it would go to -- to answer the person's question. what then the ross perot organization had to do -- perot called an six people from his company and asked them to start figuring out how to do this. how do we get on the ballot in 50 states and start working with people who are volunteering to find out what the law is an estate and to start working to do it. it was an enormous task. once you get on the ballot and as you reach a certain threshold, you establish a ballot position for the future. ross perot established a ballot access position in 1992, 1996,

and even -- he established in 1996 so pat buchanan who ran on the reform party ticket in 2000 had the ballot access and all of the states. initially it is almost impossible. like i said, he never feared doing the impossible. he got his team to work. he got leaders in every state to handle what was needed in that state. >> as the spring moves into summer, ross perot was reaching 39% of public approval ratings. the two parties were really beginning to take this man quite seriously. bill clinton moving to work his nomination of a new democrat and the incumbent president george bush probably wondering what was happening with this

challenge from ross perot. two texans going against each other. can you tell us more about the relationship? >> first off, bush 41 is really a houston figure. it is about international companies at the oil industry. ross perot is working with ibm and with his own data services company. there are different texas industries and a different geography. they got into a terrible feud over the pow and mia issues. he really accused bush and the cia and general of being part of a drug trade and southeast asia. they were actually doing slush fund monies by selling heroin and other opiates. >> we should interject, george bush was head of the cia. >> exactly.

became pretty nasty. there is no love lost between george herbert walker bush and ross perot. that is politics. the bigger question in 1992 as we are talking about this, which just heard about this populist campaign. he put somewhere around $12 million or $30 million of his own money into the game. he was also able to buy tv time. half an hour television commercials. one half an hour infomercial but garnered about 10.5 million viewers. he was following no real rules. george herbert walker bush had been a head of the republican party and clinton was the darling of the democrat party ross perot was a vital center and trying to champion the middle-class everyday american people purses and special interests. he is the original anti-money in washington guy.

that is also an issue we are talking. he saw that was going to be a tumor for us. -- doomo for us. >> let's take our next call from indianapolis. >> how are you doing? >> do you have a question for us. >> on ross perot and bill clinton try to get to neck-to- neck with lyndon johnson and roosevelt, do you think we need to go back and see what we can do about jobs and everything? talking about the republicans and everything. when the republican side with george bush in the white house, you cannot put the problem on barack obama. we have to come together and make it together for the people. give the people what they want in the country things are going bad. >> jerry reflecting the

comments about playing to the middle-class of america. i will move on to darcel from north carolina. >> i was one who signed up for ross perot. i can say i know i was responsible for more than 20 of my friends who i convinced not to vote democratically to vote for ross perot. >> let me ask you, looking back with the hindsight of 20 years, how do you feel about the whole effort for mr. perot? >> first of all, i really appreciate that he went outside of the box. one of his most important speeches was "chicken and chips." you have to bring that tape out. one knew nothing about chicken and the other was computer chips. i thought that was one of the most laughable moment. both president bush and

president clinton had no idea what was going on. they looked sort of an dumfounded. i was very proud that my sorority sister was the head of that. she moderated that debate. i was somewhat concerned about his daughter. i hope you guys mentioned something about his daughter was supposed to be assassinated. they were going to take him off -- he was going to leave the campaign. that was a curiosity as well. i'd was not really quite sure his feelings about race. i felt comfortable. he had a very large turnout in flint, michigan at the hyatt regency. there were all kinds of uaw people there. they were very excited about this man. he seemed to be very sincere. when he was telling somebody who volunteers you need to put

some skin in the game, he will not put all of his money he yard and see it go for naught. i think he was very responsible for any other third candidates party to be involved. >> let me jump at that point. thank you so much. it was interesting. i am sure we will hear from other people involved in the campaign. i want you to answer one aspect of her question, that is ross perot's views on race. >> on race? >> yes, that is what she asked about. >> are you talking about -- oh, on race. he made a speech at the naacp in the course of the campaign. this was shortly before he got

out. things had not been going well in the campaign. the press was determined to put him through a primary because he had not been through one. there had been a lot of negative stories about being conspiratorial. he investigated people. looking into his business and everything. his family. anyway, things were not going well. he did not like the way the campaign was going at that point. he had agreed to go make a speech at the naacp. in the course of the speech, there was a phrase of something like, "you and your people." he used the phrase "you and your people." for what ever reason after it was over with, people interpreted it to be racist that he was making some kind of

racist statement. it really devastated him because he had this image of himself as a great humanitarian who was very tolerant -- racially tolerant and had no animosity or racial prejudices. he came off sounding like a racist. not long after that, he did get out. >> we will pick up the story. we've mentioned by summer he is at 39% in the polls. people working on ballot access had been successful and about half of the states. then july 16, 1992, an announcement from ross perot about his campaign. then just two and a half months later, a second announcement. we will watch a little bit of both. >> we have set among ourselves publicly that we must win in

november. we must win a majority of the electorial votes. if we cannot win in november, the election will be decided in the house of representatives. since the house of representatives is made up primarily of democrats and republicans, our chances of winning would be pretty slim. now that the democratic party has revitalized itself, i have concluded we cannot win in november. the election will be decided in the house of representatives. the house of representatives is not pick the president until january. the new president will be -- will be unable to use the months of november and december to assemble the new government. i believe it would be disruptive for us to continue our program since this would obviously put it in the house of representatives and be

disruptive to the country. therefore, i will not become a candidate. >> the volunteers know that this is a critical time in our nation's history. with their political party has addressed the concerns that affect the american people. they have asked me to run this campaign on the issues and to assure the problems that the american people are concerned with will be dealt with until the election is over. i know i heard many of the volunteers who worked so hard in the spring and summer when i stepped aside in july. i thought it was the right thing to do. i thought that both political parties would address the problems that face the nation. we gave them a chance. they did not do it. the volunteers on their own forged ahead and put me on the ballot in the final 26 states. the day we were on the ballot in all 50 states, the volunteers requested i come back in

because the political parties had not responded to their concerns. my decision in july 30. -- hurt you. i apologize. i thought i've was doing the right thing. i made a mistake and i take full responsibility for it. there is only one issue starting today and that is what is good for our country. looking back will not solve any of our problems. looking forward, we can fix anything. >> he followed this campaign and you understood the disappointment of people working for ross perot. histwhat did you come to learn about the reason for him leaving in july and getting back and in october? >> i think there were several reasons he decided to get out. the press or doing a lot of investigative stories on him he

did not like. another thing was happening in the campaign. they brought some professionals in to help with the campaign. the pros had started taking over. it got really out of hand. he already had ham jordan who was a jimmy carter guy. and he brought and ed rollins. ed rollins wanted to do a slick tv ad. he wanted to do the traditional campaign. ross perot did not want any of that. he wanted a very simple kind of campaign. he wanted to do it differently than anybody had ever done before. he just wanted to talk to the american people, when he could on tv. he wanted to do his infomercials where he would buy time and get on tv with his charts and explain what he

thought was wrong with america and how to fix it. the pros came in and were trying to build up a different kind of campaign. he thought he had lost control of the campaign. it was not fun anymore. i think for a variety of reasons, he decided this was not going anywhere. we are not going to win. is grueling. we might as well cut it off. then there is another part to the story read his volunteers were mostly devastated. they were crying. they were so upset. a lot of these people have put their lives on hold to work for him to get him on the ballot. all of a sudden he is pulling the plug like this. some of them were smart enough to see through that. he urged volunteers to go ahead and get him on the ballot because that would be their leverage. some of them thought, you know, i think he will probably come back.

in fact, he came back and he did the kind of campaign he wanted to do all along. he wanted to do a short campaign. he always thought campaigns should be no longer than five months anyway. he came back and it was a spread to the finish. he had five weeks when he came back in october. he did his infomercials. he went on some talk shows. he finished the campaign like he started it. >> let me jump in there and take a call from mike from minneapolis. >> great program. i have been watching this. ross perot, he used these demonstrations -- these commercials on tv. i vividly remembered as a young person he was demonstrating on the debt that america has and going through all of these things.

i thought those were powerful presentations. i have never seen a candidate use that powerful presentation. and then the thing is i have heard mr. ross perot had accused a former president george bush of disrupting his daughter's wedding. he wanted to take revenge. that is one of the reasons he also ran. in today's elections for 2012, who would mr. ross perot be supporting? >> mike talked about the infomercials and the charts. let's show you a clip of that and we will come back to doug to talk about using charts and infomercials' to talk about policy. >> tonight ross perot plain talked about jobs, debt, and the washington mess. >> good evening. we have talked a lot about the importance of having the american people fully informed so they can make intelligent decisions in the country. this is our first town hall. i thought it would be a good

idea to take the most important problem first. that problem is our economy and jobs. here is the picture on our country's debt. look at how it has grown over the years. we are now up to $4 trillion in debt. that is a staggering load for our country. to help you understand how fast in this debt has grown and one in has group, the green is the debt we had in 1980. the red is the debt that has been incurred in the last 12 years. we had an enormous growth in debt and we do not have anything to show for it. here is another headache. it is like a guy who came into a hospital and thought he had a sore arm and found out he had been green. -- gangrene. here we are.

where tough and we can handle it. look right here at the red. 70% of that $4 trillion debt is payable in the next five years. folks at washington financed long-term problems short-term to keep the interest rates down. that is suicide in business. suicide in your personal life. that is suiciding government. >> did ross perot begin a trend that politicians would follow? >> you guys at c-span follow capitol hill. you see it in congress all the time. this was hitting a large audience. what is amazing is it is still the issue of our time. he is trying to really drive, a point that we were going to go down as a country if we kept racking up debt. he was a business person and a fiscal conservative. he believed you have to keep your books balanced. he ran to make that point more than anything else. i read he once said, i grew up as a young man wanting to become a pearl and i ended up becoming an irritant to the oyster. he wanted to wake us up to what

he saw as a very large problem. the reason may be 10 years ago, we were getting a surplus. in this 2011-2012 environment, this pie chart is freightening. when you put that chart up to today's $15 trillion in debt, ross perot was on to trying to wake us up as a paul revere kind of figure. this could be the doom of the united states if we do not address the problem. >> we have had two callers who asked about mr. perot's accusations concerning dirty tricks with his daughter's wedding. that was one of the issues he talked about with his departure from the campaign in july. in the interest of time, can you briefly tell that story or what his accusations were? >> i do not think he accused

bush of doing it. he thought the republicans were playing dirty tricks. his daughter was getting married. it was one of the reasons he did get out. i should have mentioned it before. i do not know what the story was that they were going to put her head on somebody else's body in a photograph and sell it -- get the tabloids to use it. he was very concerned about his family. his family was really special. the thought of that happening was too much for him. it was another reason he did get out. out.