see you. >> i appreciate that. >> hi, how are you? it is a pleasure. >> how are you? thank you, governor. >> thank you so much for coming. >> how are you doing? hello, ruby. how are you? >> hello. how are you?i did not know thate

there. while. ok. thank you. how are you? good to see you. what are you going to tell them? >> pete obama. >> exactly. how are you?

>> this is the third time. i appreciate that. thank you. >> dodd-frank has got to go. thank you. hi, guys.

>> if you really want to see the candidates, white house political coverage takes you on the campaign trail. >> i do not know who is going to come out and who is not. it is encouraging. we are pretty excited, coming through here. >> go to town halls, campaign rallies, and meet and greet. >> i am responsible. >> we need more services. >> thank you for coming. it was enjoyable.

>> it is a pleasure to have been here. >> we need to bring manufacturing back into the united states. what are some plans to do that? >> i want a tax code that clears out all of the loopholes. >> the road to the white house coverage from new hampshire continues, with newt gingrich at a town hall meeting. after that, rick santorum at a town hall meeting. then, in mitt romney campaign rally in very -- derry. >> i know president obama came in talking about reform. people leave about one part that is when to make a difference. go ahead and lose hundreds of jobs.

that is how that falls. that is where it all stops. >> as editor of military,cinm ward carikk provides -- carroll provides thousands of members of information. we talk about procurement procedures sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> republican presidential candidates continue campaigning across new hampshire this weekend, leading up to the state's primary on tuesday. now, former house speaker newt gingrich. he was in wolfeboro, and joined by a former national security adviser and former u.s. senator bob smith. >> i am the speaker of the house in new hampshire. how are you? [applause] i am pleased to be up here. my son went to brewster academy, so we come up here all the time.

what a great area of the state is that you live in but i am here for an important reason today. i am here to talk to you about the candidate that i have endorsed for president of the united states. the reason i have endorsed him as for the very reason i am involved in politics. i have not been in politics that long. it is my third term in the house. i have moved to forward it into the speakership pretty quickly. as i became involved and spent my first term in the legislature, i began to realize that the republican party in new hampshire had a problem. the problem was this, that we were not presenting to the people of new hampshire a clear conservative alternative. we were not going to the people of new hampshire and unabashedly saying, we are republicans, and we are republicans because we believe in limiting government.

we are republicans because we believe in liberty and personal responsibility. we believe in the government that should be a modest government, a government that should be turned to as a last resort, not the first resort. a government that should assume that we are adults and that we can care for ourselves and we can make decisions for ourselves. when i came into the legislature, i was confronted with the republican party that, when you talked to people, they had good instincts. but they did not think the people of new hampshire would respond to that kind of message. and we had spent decades being, i think, embarrassed about being republicans. and we decided -- some of us in the legislature decided that the republican message, the conservative message is an attractive message. it is a message that speaks to

what is the essence of being an american. and we just had to get out there and talk to people about it. and the failure to do that over time not only lead to increasing numbers of republicans in new hampshire. it led to four years of a democratic legislature. during that time, after we suffered of those defeats, those of us who remained in the legislatures that we are not going to put up with this anymore. we're going to come forward with a strong republican message. we're going to present to the people of new hampshire a clear alternative to what it means to be a republican and a democrat. a clear alternative between what it means to be liberal progressive and a conservative. we think, and we were right, that the people in new hampshire would respond to that. when we did that this last election, we were able to get 75% majorities in the house. [applause]

and as i told you, we decided that this message is one that will be successful in the state level. and i submit to you that this is a message that would have to take to the people of the united states, that we cannot any longer have those who bill themselves as the party establishment saying to us, be embarrassed about being a conservative. the embarrassed about this strong message of liberty and limited government that we say we stand for what we do not nominate candidates who will promote. and that is the reason that i have taken a very, very strong position in supporting newt gingrich. we cannot have a candidate who is a massachusetts moderate, a timid candidate -- [applause] who will go to washington and be the tax collectors for the democrats, go to washington and

fix the problems they have caused the not limit the opportunities for those problems to arise again. a republican who will say, i have to tax you, but i feel bad about doing ed. you know, when we put the budget together in new hampshire, we made a clear choice. we said no more taxes. we're going to shrink government, and we reduced state spending, this budget we just put in place, by almost 18%. i ask you, among the presidential candidates, who has the history and experience of doing that, who has the principles of doing that, and it is not a one-term massachusetts governor who left the office having been elected to no other office with a 34% approval rating. that is the necessity of us turning around from this disastrous presidency, this presidency that has done as one favor. what he has done is chew horn 50

years of creeping socialism into a three-year time span and demonstrated the way this country is going. he is showing us that transformative changes needed, and it will be one candidate who has the history, the experience, the ability, the track record that will turn around this country, and that candidate is newt gingrich. i am so pleased to be about to come to you and enforce them and ask you to listen to him, and i think you will reach the same conclusion that i have. now, before he comes on, we have a great american here that i want to introduce to you. that is just someone i am throw to have had the opportunity to meet, a true american, an american who has had a history, but in the military and following his military career of defending the country, and that this bud mcfarlane. bud, if you come out here, i would appreciate it. [applause]

>> good morning. thank you to each of you for coming out. this is a great, very warm show of support for newt gingrich. i will be very brief. the two blessings in my life i treasure most are having served for 20 years in the u.s. marine corps, and secondly, working for -- [applause] and secondly, having had the good fortune to work for president reagan for five years. [cheers and applause] i mentioned that because that record of service to our country was service at a time when the conventional wisdom was that we were going to have to endure a soviet threat forever, that there was nothing we could do about that.

president reagan came to office, and he said this idea that things always have to be the way they have been is nonsense. this is an evil empire. we can bring it down. we can reform our own government. we can make it smaller. these were heretical ideas, even in the republican party, at the time. but he did it. and, today, we look back on five years in which we brought down marxism, ended the cold war, reduced nuclear weapons, and short changes feasible with good leadership. in those years, i had the good fortune to meet newt gingrich. here was another man who did not believe that things had to be the way they had always been. you could change them.

you could write a contract with america to reform welfare, to balance the budget, and actually do it. this is a leadership of an extraordinary nature. in the years ahead, we're going to face an uncommon, truly complex, daunting agenda of threats to national security. the family of threats that includes cyber security threats, the ability of the subversives to bring down our banking system, to mess up your bank accounts and credit cards. also, your electric power grid. and every electronic system that truly has begun to control most of what we do every day. there going to face continuing terrorist threats, but now and in the future,

threats that include the ability to use biological weapons and bring about mass casualties. you are going to face, also, the threat from iran and others, perforation and nuclear weapons. why do i mention these? well, because somebody, our president, has to have given a lot of thought to these issues, to understand the nature of cyber threats and what we do about it. how can you harden our systems, improve them? make them resistant to these kinds of threats and overcome them? when i look at the family of people running for office this year, there was only one that stood out for two qualities. first, having studied for years

the nature of these threats, where did they come from, what is the nature of the technology, and how do we overcome them? that was newt gingrich. nobody else has given thought to these things running for the presidency. secondly, it is one thing to know the nature of the problem, another to know the solution and to be able to get it done. newt gingrich has gotten it done. who else balance the budget for four years? moved the entire federal government to a very different way of thinking that we can do this and do it? he also brings to the presidency a knowledge of how to move the u.s. congress, how to have the courage to go against conventional wisdom, how to balance the budget, and at home and abroad, show the kind of leadership that president reagan did only 25 years ago. nobody else in this race has those qualities of knowledge and experience. i am here because i believe in newt gingrich.

he can do this. he is the only one who can do this. you have got to get out and support this man. our country is at risk. he can do it. only he can do it. it is an honor, truly, to be here today with you and introduce the next president of the united states, speaker newt gingrich. [applause] ♪ only in america dream in red, white, and blue ♪ [cheers and applause] ♪

>> well, this may be the best venue -- you know, i have got to tell you, i have two reactions. first of all, i am an army brat. my dad spent 27 years in the infantry. so i grew up as a kid around places like this, although i think we built this right at the end of world war ii, and this was the first generally modern tank built. from an army brat standpoint, this brings back lots of memories. from a political standpoint, i look at this tank lovingly. [laughter] because i remember michael dukakis --

[laughter] [applause] and it is just a reminder that governors of massachusetts do not always make good presidential candidates. [cheers and applause] now, before i get started, and want to say briefly some things about the two great people who introduced me. >> before i get started, want to briefly cite things about people and reduced may. we need to get this man a microphone. you have a favorite son from right here at home. i was thrilled to get a call a while back and he said it is so important that a reagan conservative wind. you want to come and volunteer and work full-time. that is senator bob smith. [applause] , up for a minute. do we have a microphone? there we go. talk to the hometown folks. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker.

this is his show and i want to say thank you for coming and thank you for all coming to see speaker gingrich. in 1984 when i was elected, i walked into the congress and did not know where the bathroom was. here is a congressman from georgia who came over and said before you get involved with the minutia that happens here, are you content to be in the budget -- in the minority and fighting this liberal majority of democrats or do you want to take the bull by the horns and take control? >> i think the answer is obvious. >> he said come on and about 10 of us met in a closet area. we plotted the revolution but it is not finished. the reason why i left key largo to be up here in the cold of new hampshire is because i believe in this man.

we need and so desperately right now. [applause] i cannot tell you -- i cannot put into words how much i mean that. he and his wife have produced this movie about ronald reagan. if you saw that movie and you realize that all of ronald reagan's dream come all the things he wanted to do, we held him in the house and senate in those days when ronald reagan was there thanks to newt gingrich. we would probably still be a minority of not for him. we need to finish that revolution to honor president reagan. this man can't do it. he has the philosophy, the conservative principles and values, he is a reagan conservative through and through. let's finish the revolution and let's elect newt gingrich, please, elect newt gingrich next tuesday, thank you. [applause]

>> before it gets started, how many of you are either veterans or families of veterans? virtually all of you. [applause] i think we owe you a real debt of gratitude. i want to say thank you for coming to this rally. [applause] without your willingness to risk everything -- when you swear the oath to be in the armed services, you are basically signing over your life to the commander in chief. this is the flag that george washington flow of valley forge in front of his command headquarters. this is the flag of the commander in chief of the american army. when they met in philadelphia, he presided over the constitutional convention. when they wrote into the constitution that the president is the commander-in-chief, they knew what they meant. he was not an adviser in chief for a talker in chief. he was not a politician in

chief. he bears the ultimate or she bears the ultimate responsibility for the defense of the united states and the defeat of our enemies. that is how real this this. would you signed up, you gave that commander in chief control over your life. because you did that, we are today still a free nation. without our veterans, we would not today be a free nation. i'm thrilled to be here and i thank you. the two great folks who introduced me, speaker o'brien is the model of what we need [applause] what he and his team -- he is very good reminding you that it is the team -- what he and the team did, when they confronted a budget deficit, i want every state to do this -- they did one of the smartest things i heard.

they started by having the ways and means committee report how much money was being spent they then said we can pass any budget up to that amount. normally what politicians do is figure out how much they want to spend and that leaves them with a shortfall and i figure out how much they have to take away from you. they ended up cutting 18% out of the new hampshire expenditures and 11% if you count federal funding. i don't know of any state that had a more courageous and direct effort to protect the taxpayer. they protected the average taxpayer from $3,000 additional taxes. they did it the old-fashioned way. they had to set priorities, cut out waste, make decisions, everything the u.s. congress and the president cannot do. one of the reasons i'm campaigning is i would like to make washington more like new hampshire where as the left

would like to make new hampshire more like washington. that is an easy way to think of the difference. there is a huge difference between speaker o'brien and his team who represent a tea party conservative small government low tax movement and governor romney who campaigned on no tax increase in 2002 and passed a $730 million tax increase. most of them were in the form of fees which were mandatory. there was actually a tax on people who were blind. that is a little hard to imagine but true. the other was a tax on gun ownership. he double the cost of owning a gun so you had to register a gun in massachusetts and pay $100 for a gun every year. it was a tax increase on the second amendment right, in my judgment. the difference between raising taxes because you don't have the courage to cut government and cutting government because you refuse to raise taxes is a

dramatic difference. i am really glad to have bud mcfarlane here. one of the reasons he did a great job is unlike many of the politicians to end up in washington, he came out of a military background and he actually thought his job was to help the president be effective, not maneuver around the president. because he had, in ronald reagan, a president who knew what he intended to do, president who was methodically determined to defeat the soviet empire, bud played a decisive role in one of the most important administrations we have had. reagan had a clear vision. when i talk about being a reagan conservative, i met him in 1974 and campaigned in 1979-'80 and helped develop supply-side economics. i work for the reagan

administration for eight years. it is a simple model. reagan set out to accomplish three things -- he understood something important about leadership. lions cannot afford to support chipmunks. even if they catch them, they starve to death. lions have to hunt zebra and antelope. reagan got up every morning and he said where are my antelope? there were three. rebuild the american economy and get a clear strategy. renew american civic culture so we were proud to be american and defeat the soviet empire. those are pretty big. he would then go in the oval office and chipmunks would run in. the federal government grows $10 billion per month, those are big chipmunks. [laughter]

reagan listened patiently because he was a positive person and he would say, you are a terrific chipmunk. [laughter] have you met jim baker? the president's chief of staff became the largest chipmunk collector on the planet. i really learned a lot about leadership. it wasn't that reagan was disengage, it was that reagan thattwo boxes in his head. he had a chipmunk box and he had an antelope box. this is the difference. this is a great study in real leadership. reagan wants to send a signal and he got down into the weeds if the weeds involve the big issues. secretary of state george shultz told the story that reagan had gone to berlin as governor in 1967.

he said that wall sure is ugly, they ought to tear it down. >> 65-68. >> and the wall was ugly and it should have torn down. 20 years later, reagan is reelected president and carries 49 states. he will go back to berlin and he has this blind he wants to deliver -- mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. the state department hated the line. they thought would be a gorbachev feel bad. [laughter] it did not sound presidential and it was not going to happen. the speech went from the white house to the state department and what critics department editor takes out the line.

it goes back to the white house and reagan personally writes it back again and goes back to the state department. they take out the line. it goes back to the white house. reagan calls the secretary of state. he said george, you need to tell your chipmunks that i am the president and they are not. the line stays in. they get to berlin and that morning before he goes through the speech, there are still senior advisers saying to him please don't give this line. it is not going to happen. the wall be there for 30 more years and you will look foolish. it is one of the greatest lines of his presidency and the wall fell within two years. that is what real leadership is. real leadership understands the principle that matter, the correct division of the future,

and the courage to impose your will when every time a person around you is scared to death of what you are about to do is foolish because as a leader you believe in doing what is right no matter what the staff believes. that is the key. [applause] that is why i think a bold reagan conservative candidate barack obama decisively. whereas a timid, mass. moderate will have a much harder time because when you're facing a fund of $1 billion and the support of the elite media and the white house, you want to create a big gap. i am for american energy and he is against it. i am for paychecks and he is for food stamps. i am for lower taxes, he is for higher taxes. i for helping every american create jobs and he is for class warfare to did -- to divide the

country. most of his $1 billion will fall in the middle if you have a big gap. reagan took on carter and carter was a milder version of obama. he was equally bad performance but not as wobbly. reagan was able to draw such a vivid comparison that made a huge difference. the comparison stock and that is why reagan and carter debated and he came up with "there you go again." carter would make some wild charge and people got it. let me talk to you about two issues that relate to veterans and hampshire. i want to talk about the northern pass. you have my commitment that i will do everything i can to insure that the only way that happens is if it is buried underground along [applause] we have the technology today that we do not have to choose between delivering electricity to boston and the tourist

industry and the beauty of northern new hampshire. we can assist and technological solution which the state could make money from by leasing part of the right of way so you don't have to get into eminent domain and you don't have to go into the taking of private property. i would suggest that allows us to have a win-win solution that enables electricity to arrive in the big city without having run over everybody in between. i think there is no reason to assume that in america everyone in between needs to be run over just so that big cities and big businesses can get what they want. second, i think it is profoundly wrong that in midwinter veterans have to go all the way to boston to get health care.

i am committed to three things that i want you to know about for veterans in new hampshire. first, i am committed to reopening the manchester hospital as a full-service facility, not just an outpatient clinic. [applause] second, i am committed to developing a very sophisticated clinic in the north country that uses tele-madison so you can get a high percentage of your diagnostics and treatment done without having to go as far away as manchester. [applause] third, i'm committed to effect a program that allows you, if you prefer, to use your local doctor and local hospitals the don't have to travel. [applause] i say this as the son of a 27- year career soldier and somebody who values military families and veterans families and knows what you have to go through.

it seems that all you ever have to do to explain this is get somebody off a congressional committee and get them to come to northern new hampshire and let them try to get to boston. if you pick the right week with the right blizzard, they will get the idea. [laughter] if they hit three moves on the way, they will thoroughly understand why it is the wrong thing. [applause] let me talk briefly about jobs and the economy and where we are. this is a big deal. let me draw an historical comparison. i don't see much that is the radical. i'm a history teacher and i try to use facts and use history. last month, we created 200,000 jobs and the obama administration is dancing in the streets and i have to admit, compared to some other months, 200,000 beats nothing.

you have to remember that in august of 1983, with reagan, we created 1,300,000 jobs in one month, six times the number. what does that matter? you have a real crisis in europe that is still sitting there with the euro decaying and european banks decaying. you have the potential for a real crisis in the middle east with the iranians practicing closing the strait of hormuz and the straits of hormuz have one out of every 6 barrels of oil in the world. if either of those happen next spring, this coming spring, you could see the entire world tilt into a deeper recession. the only engine big enough to pull the world economy is the united states. we're still 1/4 of the world economy. when we grow, the sheer momentum of our growth changes things. this is one of the things of why i am running for president.

we know how to do this. this is one of those things were the academic left and the political left in the media left is so dense that you wonder what happened to them. it is as though they had a cookbook that says you take a hard again put in the freezer. [laughter] if you want to test this some time, you might want to go home and try this. an egg in a freezer for a couple of days and it will become hard. when you go to a restaurant and say you'd like a hard egg, if they brought you a frozen egg, you would think they were nuts. reagan have five principles for economic growth -- strong money, a sound dollar, lower taxes, less regulation so people could focus on to open orsahip, american energy [applause]

and praising the people who create jobs. what is the obama model? reagan is for sound money. bernanke and obama are for inflation. the amount of money they are printing now in the long run, they are starting up a wave of inflation on an historic scale. under jimmy carter got to be 13% inflation at 22% interest rates. reagan, lower taxes, obama higher taxes. reagan -- less red tape, obama -- more power to epa and osha. reagan -- more american energy, obama, anti-american energy. reagan, i love people a great job and i want to praise small- business owners and praise people go to work.

obama -- let's attack ever when it was successful. is it any wonder you have this gap? i have grown from the reagan model. i helped develop in the '70s and implemented in the '80s. it was a bipartisan model. tip o'neill was speaker of the house. if we were going to pass the reagan program, we had to get one out of every three democrats to vote for it and we did. we reached out to everybody. we tried to develop an american program, not just the republican program. i get to be speaker. there were two tax increases after reagan and the economy slowed down and i pulled out the same cookbook. two out of three people went to work or went to school and we pass the first tax cut in 16 years, the largest capital gains tax cut in history and we traded

11 million new jobs in four years and unemployment droppedto 4.2%. if you take someone off of welfare, unemployment, food stamps and you put them to work taking care their family and pay their bills and paying taxes, you raise the revenue of the government without raising taxes. you reduce the spend a. clinton and i were able to hammer out four consecutive balanced budgets and paid off $405 billion of debt. that is the only time in your lifetime you have had four balanced budgets. [applause] this is part of why speaker o'brien and i identify with each other because we're speakers to believe in balanced budgets. in that context, what would you do today? i am for sound money. i would fire bernanke, shrink the role of the fed -- [applause]

i would focus the fed on a stable dollar. taxes -- zero capital gains tax so money pours into the united states. [applause] 12.5% corporate tax rate which would free up billions of dollars from overseas and would allow american companies to compete on a fair and level playing field. at two 0.5%, general electric would actually pay taxes. [applause] 100% expenses -- no one realized how much precision manufacturing there is in new hampshire. what you want to do was at 100% expensing. if you buy new equipment, you write it off in one year. we want american workers to be the best equipped workers in the

world with the greatest productivity. it is the only way to have a high value job competing with china and india. if you do that on the equipment side, i would also modernize the unemployment compensation program by having a training requirement attached to it so if you need on and on the compensation, you have to sign up for business training course to learn new skills while we are paying you but we'll never again pay anyone 99 weeks for doing nothing. [applause] >> we would abolish the death tax permanently because it is a destructive tax. [applause] at a personal tax level, you could keep the current deductions and red tape or you could have an optional 15% flat tax in the hong kong tradition. the one-page and here's my tax. if you do that, people have a choice.

hong kong has done this for four years. we are not taking anybody's deductions away. we're giving you the choice of simplicity verses complexity and you can choose. [applause] now you come to regulatory. pretty straightforward -- you want to fix this country quickly, i would ask the brand new congress and january 3, 2013 to stay in session. i would ask them before the inaugural to repeal of acare - [applause] -- to appeal obamacare -- it is the biggest job killing component of regulatory behavior. i would ask them to repeal the dodd-frank bill which is killing small banks. [applause]

dodd-frank kill small banks and cripple small businesses and drive down the price of health. i would ask them to repeal sarbanes oxley which has added paperwork and gained nothing. [applause] i would like all three of those done before january 20 so when i'm sworn in they can bring them in and i consign the repeal of all three and get to work in a positive way. on the inaugural, i would have a series of executive orders about two hours after the inaugural, the first of which would abolish all the while houseczars as of that moment. [applause] other regulatory reforms -- we should replace the environmental protection agency with a brand new environmental solutions agency. we should not retire any of the radicals currently trying to destroy the american economy. [applause]

everywhere i go municipalities tell me how they are being dictated to by washington bureaucrats who have never visited their 10, have no idea about reality, have no concern about the budget and simply issue washington dictates that are destructive. the epa is the largest job killing agency in the federal government. [applause] i would also go to a 21st century food and drug administration on a particular model. we want the fda in the laboratory understanding new science and want them to accelerate getting into the patient and not block it. that will change everything. they will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, dominate the world held market which is the biggest market in the emerging world, and it will enable us to get to patients better ways of saving their lives faster and a lower-cost. the duty of the fda is to turn it upside down -- it is today and obstruction to bringing new

science to patients and it is stunningly expensive and it is guaranteeing that the breakthroughs will occur in china and india. our last scientists will go overseas to develop their products. it will not work for the fda. that is regulatory. let's talk about energy. [applause] i have a very simple model. i am for every form of american energy. i want america and not just to be energy independent, what is to have a surplus of something happens in the straits of hormuz, we can step in and assert our productivity and make sure the world avoids a depression. i want to get to report no american president ever again bows to saudi k, period. [applause]

the two-tiered venue -- as was the coolest place as i have done this. [laughter] the two last examples on energy -- the president goes to. brazil the president has blocked american development of energy offshore and messed up louisiana and people have no idea how the world works. they put a moratorium and louisiana against the advice of their technical experts. they said was the dumbest thing they could do and i think the white house literally did not know these huge ocean drilling rigs move. these are very expensive pieces of capital. they will not sit around for six or a year to be political exhibits for a demagogue politician. the first one that left went to egypt. it took $80,000 per year jobs with them and when they drill oil, the government gets oil reg. it is a major source of revenue. the second one was perfect.

the company that moved at a ceo who was tough. he issued the following statement -- because of political instability in the united states, we're now going to develop all of the congo. under obama, we are less stable copngo and that is not easy. in the middle stop american oil and gas productivity, the president visits and says i really want to be -- i want to thank you and congratulate you for developing offshore oil and gas. i am proud that we were able to guarantee $2 billion of equipment purchases largely from company-owned majorities. he said the most amazing thing -- he said i want america to be your best customer. this guy really doesn't get it.

we don't hire president's to be foreign purchasing agents. the obama model is to borrow from the chinese to buy from the brazilians. it does not work. we hire an american president to be a salesman for american goods and services worldwide to create jobs in the u.s. selling overseas. [applause] [applause] finally, you have the spectacle of the xl keystone pipeline. it is one thing if the white house cannot play chess. it is another thing if a white house cannot play checkers. [laughter] but if a white house cannot play tic tac toe -- [laughter] let me explain why use this

analogy. this is one of the dumbest things i have ever seen. the president has this dilemma. he is in total real auction mode. he does not care about being president. he cares about being reelected. so he will not do presidential stuff, because that is so boring. giving speeches is so much fun. so he has this dilemma. the san francisco environmental extremists hate canadian oil. the construction workers union wants to build a pipeline because there is 20,000 to the 2000 american jobs. he does not want them union mad at him and he does not want the environmentalists mad at him. he thinks, being quite clever, i will postpone the decision to 2013. now, prime minister harper is a conservative who is pro- american. but he is also the canadian prime minister. so he says, you know, if the united states does not want to make a decision, i want to talk to the chinese about paying for

a pipeline, which is more expensive, over the rockies to vancouver. the ideal pipeline comes straight down, it is easy to build a it is fly. we have been building pipelines for well over 100 years. it should go from canada to houston. houston is the biggest petrochemical complex in the world you make money building the pipeline, running the pipeline, and make money processing the oil for the next 30 to 50 years. you make money in the port of galveston shipping oil. but harper says, well, you guys are going to mess around and be totally unreliable, i will go work with the chinese and we will build an off-canada pipeline. if you set three years ago that the u.s. would have a president so incompetent that a canadian- chinese partnership made more sense than a canadian-american partnership, i would thought it would be inconceivable. but i underestimated how self- destructive barack obama is. the last point, of course, as i like people who create jobs. i am willing to be pro people

who create jobs, whether they're small business jobs, self-employed jobs, entrepreneurs, inventors. what has made america great for our whole history has been in the words that are expressed in creativity and entrepreneurship. so the gap between us and obama is that big. [applause] i need your help tuesday. i need your help from now to tuesday, talking to your many friends. i do think there is an enormous gap between somebody who is a bold, brave conservative and somebody who is a timid massachusetts moderate. i think it is big. i think it makes it very different in terms of how you would compete with obama. with your help, if i become the nominee, i will challenge president obama to seven three- hour debates in the lincoln- douglas tradition with a timekeeper and no moderator.

i will agree in advance that he can use the teleprompter. [laughter] [applause] after all, if you had to defend obamacare, wouldn't you want to use a teleprompter? [laughter] and i think, with your help, we can win a decisive victory for america. we can make this one of the most important elections in american history. we can do what i helped reagan due in 1980 at what we did in 1994, which show a clear, cold distinction around which we can rally the vast majority of americans of all backgrounds. and as a result, in january of 2013, we can aggressively put this country back on the right track. and with your help, that is what i will do. [cheers and applause]

so -- questions? i think we have a couple of microphones. how about the gentleman standing back there? >> thank you for coming to wolfeboro. how big are your coattails? nothing personal. >> when we designed the 1980 campaign, i helped cheer the first capital event in history. it was written about in september 1980. reagan came and stood on the capitol steps with every house and senate candidate.

we pledged five specific things. we won six u.s. senate races by a combined margin of 75,000 votes. we took the senate. we took the 33 house seats, as well as the presidency. that was a team to victory. in 1994, we ran the team campaign, three under 50 candidates signed on to the contract with america. we had the largest one-parte increase in american history. 9 million additional votes with the republicans over 1990. 1 million fewer votes for the democrats. so i think it is pretty fair to say -- i know i designed sweeps that were team victories. my goal, as the nominee, would be to carry the senate by a big margin, to strengthen the house, and to do on an agenda. you can go to newt.org for the 21st century contract with america. it is not so much about cartels, that is about building a team. the entire team when 17. my goal would be that we have

the ability to pass what we are going about by having an elected team committed to it. ok? >> mr. speaker, as chief executive, until you can get the epa shutdown and the department of education shutdown, would you say the doors are closed? >> i am not sure i have quite that level of authority, but i can probably order them to re- review every single proposed regulation. get them working for a good long while while we solve it. [applause] >> last night, i asked your opponent how he felt about veterans, are there any veterans? there was just a smattering of us there, hardly anything. it surprised me. he said, how do you feel -- i said, how i feel about it when you sit cutting this, cutting that, i worry about my veterans

benefits up there where i live. i live further north. he said, i am all for the military. he dodged the question. and then i said i have not read anything about the second amendment with him. he said, i am for the second amendment. we know his record in massachusetts. back in 1995, i have a picture of you and me. would you sign it? [applause] remember that? just before you got on the helicopter. >> that is great. >> no one has ever called me slim. so i am writing this to you with great admiration. [laughter] [applause] all right, there's a lady right here.

>> mr. speaker, thank you for being here. listening to you, it is like a breath of fresh air. you know, i think so many people feel that. we need a leader. we need leadership. annie le, north korea has the largest military in the world. china, right behind it. now our present administration -- i do not even want to call him mr. president, but he wants to cut our military. what are your feelings about that? >> i think when you elect a radical, you should expect him to be headed that way. he does not believe we had any enemies, worries about what america is not a better country than it could -- you know, just listen to his speeches. he goes on apologizing for the u.s. he thinks we are the problem. my only advice is we have to defeat him. this guy is totally wrong. [applause]

>> there is a bunch of us here that are getting checks every month from social security. you have in your legislative proposal to save social security. what is your plan? >> my plan for saving social security is two parts. my mother depends on it, so i am very sensitive to this issue. she is a great deal of attention and e-mails me regularly to ensure that i not forget this. [laughter] i would say a couple things. one, i think we should take social security off budget. it was off budget until lyndon johnson combined it to a unified budget. he did it to hide the deficit. the reason why i would take off budget is what obama did in july was totally unconscionable. he twice threatened people and said i may pay social security.

-- i may not be able to send you your social security check. there is over $2 trillion in a trust fund. there is no excuse for any politician threatening anybody on social security, because the money is there. the money has been paid for. i want to say to politicians, keep your hands off social security. so i would move to take it off budget, and i would provide that in the case of the debt ceiling problem, it was the second item paid after interest, the second item pay before anything else, just so people can relax. to say to people -- i had a guy walk up to me at a hospital in southern new hampshire months ago who said that his 87-year- old father was really worried that he was going to lose his social security check. now, for politicians to scare people of that age is just, i think, disgusting. so i think, let's take it away from them, make it automatic, put it over here, keep the trust fund safe, and not have attached.

that is for your generation, and frankly, for your children. for your grandchildren, we have a proposal to allow them, the young people here, to allow them the right to choose, not force them, allow them the right to choose a personal social security savings account. this is not a theory. galveston, texas has this model. chile, as a country, has this model. the principal group in iowa actually runs the chilean system. what does it mean? when you first go to work, you're part of the social security tax would go into a savings account that would be yours. no politician could touch it. let's say you started with a part-time job at 16. that means that for 50 years or more, it is building up compound interest. in the chilean and galveston expense, the average retiree gets two to three times as much money as you get from social security. both of them have a provision that says if you ever fall below the actual social security

number, the government will make up the difference. so you have a safety net. in 30 years, no one has gotten a check short. all of them have been above the social security line. what does it do? first of all, it means that you increase your estate. because, instead of transferring money back and forth, you're actually building up your money into an estate so if anything happens to you, your family now has your estate. there is an economist at harvard who was the chair who estimates that you eliminate 50% of the inequality of wealth over a generation, because every single american worker becomes an investor. they all end up having the state. then you change the fabric of american society. this is important for african- american males who have shorter

life span on average and actually get back less from social security than any other group. so you really dramatically enhance every part of the community having more resources. the second thing you have is, because you are saving this money, it gets invested. so the economy gets bigger. folks estimated that at the end of their lifetime, the american economy will be $70 trillion bigger because of the momentum. chile now has such a huge savings will come as a 2% of the economy is in the savings pool. they now allow them to invest part of the savings overseas because the chilean economy cannot absorb all the savings. compare that to our current mess. you would be totally safe. your grandchildren, totally safe. it is a voluntary program, and the ensure for social security estimates that 95% to 97% of all young people would pick it because it is mathematically so much more powerful than the current system.

that is how we fix it. that way you can relax, your children can relax, and your grandchildren can relax. ok? [applause] >> mr. speaker, i am 30 years old. i have a son and one on the way. my concern is the future of our country financially. i cannot vote for ron paul because it is dangerous foreign policy. but at the he is spot on with respect to how much and how aggressive he wants to be with respect to the amount we need to cut in spending. i understand he has a policy. he wants to cut $1 trillion over 10 years, which is just 1/15 of the $15 trillion in debt we are in as a country. how much are you willing to cut?

it is not just balancing the budget, because that is not enough. what is your proposal for actually try to get on a path to cut our nation's debt? >> that is a very good question. by the way, i agree. i think that ron paul's, particularly his view on israel and iran are so dangerous, and makes it hard to imagine him as president. i think his critique of the federal reserve has a lot of strength to it. i think his critique of spending has a lot of strength to it. a couple things. i say this from a background of being the only person who has actual balance the federal budget four times in a row in your lifetime. i think i have some credentials to get this done. first, you one very dramatic economic growth, because if you have big enough economic growth, it eats up a lot of the problems by the sheer momentum of scale and how much people start making. second, you want to control domestic discretionary spending. we control it twice in our lifetime. in 1981 as a junior congressman, i participated in the first real cut in domestic discretionary spending since

world war ii. in 1995, the second real cut. not slowing down the rate of increase, but actually going down. part of it is just to cut spending. i believe it to apply what strong america describes as -- if you modernize the federal government so it was as efficient as a modern company, i think we would save about $500 billion a year. that is $5 trillion over 10 years. i have to write a book called "stop paying the crooks," which looked at how bad the federal government is at managing payments, and our estimate was that in medicare and medicaid, somewhere between $70 billion and $120 billion a year being stolen. when i say stolen, i mean a dentist who filed 982 procedures a day. i am talking about stolen. so we went to american express, visa, and mastercard. we believe they could apply

their anti-fraud mechanisms, using between $60 billion and $100 billion a year. it does not count food stamps and student loans and other things that it is in medicare and medicaid, we think again saved something on the order of $1 trillion over 10 years. i would close down some of the departments. frankly, the department of energy has been an anti-energy department. i would close it down. that would -- i do not know why we have a department of housing and urban development. i do not know why local housing authorities cannot be required to run local housing authorities and cut out 90% of the washington regulation. these are the kind of things that just grow and grow. i would fundamentally overhaul the washington houses. i would shrink the department of education dramatically. i would cut out the regulations but is in the power back over to states. i would say you have got to figure out how to solve education. the federal government cannot, and by the way, should not.

i do not want that level of power in washington, d.c. [applause] so my goal would be to try to get to -- it took us three years to balance the budget when i was speaker. this is a much bigger mess. my goal would be to try to get to a balanced budget within five years, to be very aggressive. you are right, you then have to run a surplus for enough years that with a combination of economic growth and control of spending, i think our goal should be to get our debt down to about 40% of gdp. if you did that, you pay off all the chinese debt and you have a very, very stable environment in terms of your fiscal situation. there is a guy right up here. he is coming to your right now.

>> good morning, mr. speaker. 20-year air force veteran, and two things i have in mind. one is, would you return us to a bare minimum of don't ask, don't tell policy in the military? and, two, what about repealing 100% of barack obama's executive orders? [laughter] >> first, yes. i would go back to don't ask, don't tell. they want to go back to that. they have been opposed to what obama has been trying to do. the army and marine corps were deeply opposed to it, i thinki would go back to don't ask, don't tell. while it is a great line and it is tenting, i do not want to say i would repeal all of his executive orders until i knew what all of his executive orders are. i certainly have a bias for repealing those, but i do not

want to say yes. i will say, yes, i am for repealing all of this exhibit of orders. one of our dear friends in the press will find executive order number 205 actually makes sense. [laughter] then they will run out and say that gingrich wants to repeal this, whatever it is that actually makes sense. my bias is in your direction, and i am committed to reducing all those executive orders, and a very substantial number of them will be repealed the first day. my goal is on inaugural day, about two hours after the address, to really shift the government by the end of the very first day. we will take reviewing his executive orders as a step in that direction. ok? [applause] >> thank you, mr. speaker. one of the tragedies of the clinton administration was the ranking of the patent office

and the rules for patents. this has cost america daily, because basically we are being ripped off, both in medicines and inventions where we were very successful in the past, adding to the actual foundation of our economy. do you have some plans for doing something for the patent office? and i had one request. when we close this, will you lead us in the pledge of allegiance? >> ok, i would be honored to. all right, the harvard person here. where is our microphone. >> here you go, harvard. >> in the first debate a while back, you stated that he would not increase taxes, even if they agreed to decrease spending 10 times as much. how do you feel like you will be able to do all these big plans when you are so unwilling to compromise? [laughter] >> well, because i have done it twice before. in 1981, we helped pass the

reagan tax-cut program by getting democrats to vote with us. we appealed to the american people, and the american people appealed to the country. they went to the congress and said, you have got to do this. when i was speaker, we passed welfare reform and got 101 democrats voting yes and 101 voting no. the country went to their members and that we have got to do this. part of it is you have to work with people. i am happy to what rate. -- to cooperate. i am not going to compromise. to compromise in washington means to sell out, and i am not going to do that. [applause] that may explain why i feel so strongly about this. in 1981, i helped pass the tax cuts. in 1982, president reagan was talked into a tax increase, because his senior staff did not believe in tax cuts. there were all establishment types.

i fought him that year. and i stood firm on reaganism, which is no tax increase. he gave a speech, which is the only speech to give this president that failed, and people watched the speech and read and explained why we had to raise taxes, and they all said, that was really weird. i wonder who wrote that speech. it was clearly not him. he wrote in his diary that this is the single biggest mistake of his administration. the democrats promised if you will raise taxes, we will cut spending. they got all the taxes and none of the spending. he said i will never do it again. when they tried to sell him on another tax increase, a famous story in the "new york times," or jim baker is trying to sell them on another tax increase and reagan takes off his glasses and looked at him and says if you believe what you just said, why are you in this administration? baker walked out and said we're never talking about a tax increase again while he is president.

1990, i campaigned very hard for bush in 1988. and one of the keys to his money -- he was 19 points behind dukakis in may. he won by six. as one of 25 points. in the convention he said no new taxes. he went on and said read my lips, no new taxes. so he gets there and several people, including the governor, sell them on the idea that it is really ok to break your word and raise taxes. and they came to me and i said, no, i am not going to do this. in one book, it said flatly that i was the one guy who kept saying to them, this is a trap. the democrats are suckering you in to accept a tax increase to break your credibility and to get more money. so i fought him. 1993, bill clinton comes in, he wants to raise taxes because the liberal democrats tell them to. he did not get a single vote. one of the real reasons we want

the house. people were just bad up. -- had up. -- fed up. so i start with a simple promise. i do not believe this country is under-taxed. i believe this country is overspent. [applause] and i am light speaker o'brien. i believe if you push hard enough, you'll get the spending cuts. you have guys over here saying i will only vote for that if you raise taxes, and you almost know for sure they are going to try to not give you spending cuts. i would go in in a very aggressive program of saying, look, we're going to fight this out. but i would cooperate with democrats. i would reach out. i will give you one quick example. senator webb and senator warner have a proposal to allow to develop oil and gas offshore. half the royalties go to the fed. 37.5% to the commonwealth of

virginia. 37% to infrastructure. i think the house republicans should pass their bill without amending it, just send it over, and say, here, here is a democratic bill with bipartisan support, and make senator reid -- is he going to really bottle up two of his democratic senators? that is cooperation, because i happen to share the goal they want to get. that is the way i would approach it. i would cooperate. i would try to get things done. but i would not be willing to compromise core values, because i think then you are on the slippery slope, and then washington takes over. we have had too many competitions who are reasonable. they go to washington and say we have got to be reasonable. that can mean selling at. i have no interest in serving as a reasonable president who sells out the american people to appease the washington

establishment. [applause] one more. somebody over here. this lady right here with the sunflower dress. >> could you speak about your feelings on illegal immigration? i believe you felt sensitivity toward an illegal immigrant who may have worked hard. working hard is not on the dole. will the policy be? >> there is a very important example of cooperating without compromising, in my judgment. there are a series of steps. i do not think you could pass, comprehensive reform. and to reform. bush tried and failed. obama has tried and failed. when it is all on one bill, it is to be. it crashes, it is too big. step one, patrol the border. patrol the border by january 1, 2014.

how do you patrol the border? one, you pass a law that says we're waving all federal regulations. control the border. you do not go through epa studies or doing this other stuff. you just do it. two, there are 23,000 common security employees in the washington area. i am prepared to move up to half of them to texas, mexico, arizona to give you the manpower to go to war. -- to control the border. [applause] once you control the border, i would then -- the next step i would take would be to make english the official language of government. [applause] we have 86 languages spoken in the dade community college. i think there are 80 languages in manchester, because it has been a red the city. -- it has been a refugee city. in cook county, chicago, over

200 languages. we need a single unifying language to bring us together as a people. it is clear english is the only language that could do that. three, i would increase the requirement to be an american citizen in terms of learning american history, people actually learn what it means to be an american. candidly, a descending for high -- i would do the same thing for gh school students. i it would be good for them to learn american history. [applause] four, i would make legal visas easier to the current estate department process is a nightmare. we want tourists to come here. we want business people to come here. we want professors and students to come here. they're going to come here legally and leave legally, we will make it easy to do, not hard to do. five, i would make it much easier to deport people who shall not be here. if you are a member of an el salvadorean gang, we should be able to get rid of you in two weeks. it should not require two years of lawyering. you're not an american citizen but you do not deserve those

protections. goodbye. ok? [applause] next, i would create a legal guest worker program, and what outsource american express, visa, or mastercard, because they know how to run it without regard. -- without fraud, and the american -- the federal government would not have a hope in doing that. having created a legal guest worker program, it would dramatically increase the economic penalties for businesses who are not obeying the law. remember, you do not get illegal workers without illegal employers. now you get down to the hard part. 11 million people already here illegally. they will have a hard time getting a job, because now you have to have a guest worker permit or you are an american citizen or you cannot get hired. most of them will go home and will apply for a guest worker permit from back home. they have deep ties here. sending the was a shock to some

of my colleagues was, what do you do about somebody who has been here 25 years? remember, the community has been working hard, paying bills, married. the head kids and grandkids. they may belong to your church. do you really think that america will send the police in to take some grandfather or grandmother out? as a friend of mine said, a real case, he said -- he had a constituent who was a marine serving in afghanistan and was faced with his grandmother being reported. you ask yourself, what do we do? here is my answer, you take the world war ii selective service board model, which is a local county board. you create a citizen review board. you can only apply if you have been here a long time, if you have genuine ties to the community, if you have been paying your bills and are clearly a member of the community in good standing, and if you can get an american family to sponsor you. if you meet that standard, you

go before the review board. if the review board thinks you are a legitimate member of the community, you can get a certificate of residence, but not citizenship. but you are now here legally. you can get a job. you can continue the rest of your life. if you then want to apply for citizenship, you have to go home long enough to apply. you get in line back home. behind everybody else. and that way, you do not have anybody getting the advantage. one of my competitors said two things that i think are just plain, pardon the language -- well, i will not say it. [laughter] my mother used to teach me, if it is really dumb, do not say it. so let me try to use a different word. i do not quite understand what their thinking was. two things. one, everybody has to go. i cannot wait for them to campaign in florida.

[laughter] ok, and try to go into miami on the battle cry everybody must go. i do not see how they are going to win a general election. that is clearly going to come across in the immigrant community as you have no sense of humanity for people. the second thing they said was, this is creating a magnet. this will increase illegal immigration. that is what i describe. here is a program where we are controlling the border, creating a guest worker program, having probably 9.5 million of the 11 million leave. you have to have been here 20 or 25 years and have a family and have a record of paying all your bills and have an american family sponsor you. what kind of magnet is this? you're going to say to somebody in mexico, guatemala, or china, you have two choices. guest worker program or you can sneak in and in 24 years, you can become eligible for

residency. this is just stupid. that is the word i was going to use earlier. i cannot help it. [laughter] you know what their reasoning is? desire to hit the other candidate. that is all. since i said, and must be a bad thing, because otherwise it would be a good thing. you know, i think that is foolish. i have often said, you know, rick perry has good ideas on the 10th amendment. so i say, those are good ideas. he suggested that we start at zero in every foreign-aid program, and have to earn their way back into the budget. that is a good idea. i do not mind saying that somebody has a good idea. that does not mean a thing you should vote for him. he is a good guy. but, i mean, not as good as me. [laughter] [applause] anyway, this gentleman had a great idea. i want you to come up here and bring the flag. >> [inaudible] >> if they have been here that long, they are paying taxes. in order to be eligible, that

would have had to be paying taxes. >> [inaudible] >> oh, the sanctuary. that is one of the things i would do in the opening day. i would say no century cities or any federal funds, period. -- no sanctuary cities get any federal funds, period. [applause] now, i want you to help lead us. i want all of you to join in. >> [all] i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you. [applause] >> everybody come this way. i would love to see each one of you.

♪ ["let freedom ring" playing] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪ ♪ [inaudible]

♪

>> this camera right here. >> thank you very much. [unintelligible] >> thank you for coming. >> thank you very much. >> these town hall meetings are much more effective than the debates. [unintelligible] >> what do you think? [unintelligible]

>> thank you. >> thank you. good luck. >> you have your -- you have my vote. >> thank you. i need your help. >> look at the camera? this gentleman will take a right here. >> thank you. welcome the south carolina. >> i hope so. >> we're going to need your help. >> one person at a time. thank you. how are you, sir? i need your help tuesday.

>> you have got it. >> thank you so much. we need your help tuesday. >> goodluck. >> all right. we're going to take your picture. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> good luck. >> we need your help tuesday. thank you very much. >> best of luck. >> a pleasure to meet you. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> how are you doing chris chare? >> goodluck.

>> thank you. hi, how are you. thank you. i am for very strict roles. that's right. that is a big fur step. -- big first step. [unintelligible] of lottery and a retraining program. >> thank you for being here. >> we need your help tuesday. hi, i need your help tuesday. >> you bet.

>> hello . >> hello there. >> i remember that. thank you so much. >> need your help. my son is going to vote for you now. >> we need your help tuesday. >> thank you. >> thank you. i need your help. >> thank you so for coming. i am glad you're reinforced my feelings for you. >> we need your help.

during you have got my vote. >> thank you, sir. need your help. >> thank you. i need your of tuesday. thank you. [unintelligible] >> thank you very much and good luck. [unintelligible] >> i need your help tuesday. >> trying to ask your question. >> i do not think so. sorry. it is a great color. >> thank you.

talk to your friends. >> good to me you. >> thank you. that you. -- thank you. there we go. now we have got it. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> hello. how are you? to your friend. the dow right behind you. thank you both. need your help. good, thank you, sir. though, right.

need your help, ok? what is this? a robot? this book is three volumes. i read it when the treasury rates. when you read this, how far and are you? >> about halfway . >> harry selwyn . >> i love that guy. -- harry seldon. >> i love that guy. >> he brings back history. >> my brother and my sister-in- law works for you and arizona. the middletons. big're tearing up some counties for you. pushing hard so good luck. did we get it? >> i need your help tuesday. >> you will get.

that is for this one. i need your help. >> thank you very much. best of luck to you. >> thank you. >> i need your help. [unintelligible] >> really, and they did not get that? [unintelligible]

>> ok. thank you. give that to enter right now. -- to enter right now. hi, how are you? pretty impressive. the right to bear arms. thank you i need your help.

♪ >> my father and my son david. [unintelligible] >> thank you very much. >> hello, how are you? >> you did a great job. >> oh, well, thank you. we need your help. call your friends. oh, ok. thank you. >> we are approaching a homeless

veterans and manchester. we net this out of plastic bags. we put this on the grounds of that when they lay out on the wet ground, they have something to sleep on. >> this is great progress on your part. >> you inspire me. good luck. in all wonderful job. i refer to this on a daily basis. a lot of what in there is very appropriate for today as well. -- is an amazing what time changes? >> it has and chase as much as it should have. -- it has not as changed as much as it should have. >> tell all of your friends. >> i will.

thank you. >> thank you very much. ted and i wish you good luck in the primary. >> i need your help. tell your friends that you want to fix that. they are screwed up and stupid, it is an understatement. >> ted kennedy was a big architect of that. >> i know. great, thank you. >> goodluck.

thank you very much. i need your help tuesday. >> you have got it. >> let your friends know. if you get a chance, let all your friends know. thank you. i will come there. let me step down. you.nd we're glad that >> thank you for coming. i need your help from now until tuesday. go out and tell all your friends, ok? really nice for you to be here. i am grateful. >> ok, your next. [unintelligible] did and i need your help

tuesday. >> thank you very much and god bless you. >> you are amenable ideas. -- a man of bold ideas. >> thank you. thank you very much. silver 10. >> we may not be first in new hampshire but do not give up. >> i am not going to give up. thank you. >> this camera right here. thank you very much. committed a handshake? thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you for being here. >> on the other side, ok.

there you are. >> thank you. >> we need your help between now and used it for -- and tuesday. we need your help tuesday. >> my pleasure but you have to sign the book. thank you a lot. >> tell your friends. >> i absolutely will. >> i e-mail my friends but they get annoyed with me. >> keep e-mail in them. i need your help tuesday. >> you will get it. >> oh, great. i need your help tuesday. who is with you? thank you. thank you. need your help tuesday.

i sharing major held tuesday. -- i sure need your help tuesday. hello. hi. what a group. >> thank you very much in goodluck . >> hello. >> thank you. >> one more for the gipper. >> ok. >> ok, tell your friends. >> you have got it. >> need your help tuesday. >> thank you. there you go. thanks.

keep telling your friends. >> you're my winston churchill . >> thank you. major held tuesday. -- need your help tuesday. >> thank you. >> how are you? [unintelligible] >> that would be great. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> you have got my vote. i am glad you want to keep government out of education. >> you have to reestablish the

system. teachers have to be inside the classrooms. need your help tuesday. didn't you need a congress like you had. >> thank you. proud of you. >> i hope so. i love to be here. oh, ok. >> have you ever notice that the microphones are so close? what's in our relationship with china big? >> friendly to the people and talk to the government. ticked off to the government. -- tough to the government.

>> an interesting conversation. >> thank you. >> thanks a lot. [unintelligible] what part of italy? of beautiful city. we like to go there. >> i would be happy to be there. >> thank you. how are you? thank you. i need your help. good to see you. come here. good. i'll need your help in the

michigan primary. here we go. >> take two place? >> thank you. i think my nephew ask your question the other nine. [unintelligible] he was on 12 news agencies and a nationally. didn't they put it up and it went viral. he met a perfect evening. i will sign it for you, young man. >> thank you for your attention. >> ok. tell your friends the next

couple of days. >> we will. >> i am rooting for you. i have been following uses the early days. this is my wife. >> the go. -- there you go. >> thank you. >> i will make your help the next few days. >> tell all of your friends. need your help. >> you are going to have it. thank you. [unintelligible] >> thank you.

>> sign it on the front or the iraq, it does not matter with this one. -- or the back, it does not matter with this one. and one final thing. >> ok. >> she sent me on a mission, you know. >> i will make your vote. >> do not worry, you're definitely going to have that. [unintelligible] >> i need your help. >> you have got it. goodluck. >> thank you very much. >> dad, a quick picture.

>> would you mind doing this for me? >> thank you. >> really. in this is my daughter. [unintelligible] >> i'll bet she was 12 years old at that time. >> yes. >> thank you very much. i need your help tuesday. thank you.

[unintelligible] [unintelligible] >> mr. speaker, would you sign

this? we have got a whole group here. here for the new hampshire primary. the whole team. they're here someplace. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> hopefully we will see you in pennsylvania. >> i will take it. >> thank you. >> that is right. >> mr. gorbachev, tear down this

wall. it didn't could deceive. i need your help tuesday. -- good to see you. i need your help tuesday. >> an interesting argument terminally. he did not want we can and keep up morale. didn't this tank was at a particular battle. individual tank platoons were armored divisions in february and march of 1945. >> was a capable of standing up to the panzer division? in yes, which is why -- the argument is that it is not good for morale.

no necessity to do it. >> how we go against a king tiger? it and probably not as well as against that team -- king tiger, because it was a road down. >> is it comparable? >> it was technologically inferior. >> this to not last very long. >> it was in korea. when i train in the army, we had 48 . >> i remember. i was old enough. i remember the 60 was coming in. that was the great revolution. >> when i was an army officer, we were told we would be overrun one that first round hit

was important. >> i held unstoried develop land battle. the whole question of how you confront the soviets was a multiple problem. my dad of course served. 1957-1960. we forget the german border is gone. i'm going all-out assault on political, and with it. when obama was running last year, the one thing i complained about is that he had never served a day in uniform in this country. >> and had no respect for. tell me the kinds of stuff that you do in the museum? >> we talk about the american in the world war ii. i generally.

there is a connecting tunnel here that makes the transition and here we do military things. we have other tanks up there. >> really? >> we're in the process of redoing the exhibits appear. the navy exhibit is brand new. we have an operational sherman. we have added armored car. >> you have quite a collection. >> this building right up here. >> what is our schedule? what are you thinking about? >> it is a whole building of tanks. i want to see the tanks. >> i will wait. >> i'll watch it. >> stay behind me, please. you want to --

ask c-span if they want to go and look at the tanks with us. >> keep their word as to what they have promised her they of our broken their word a number of times. and there's probably a way to make get where it is a limited experience. just so you to 90 bid. -- just so you do not keep pets. >> thank you. >> what can you possibly -- >> you are very positive. a tremendous show of support. let me start again. you are very positive here. you had a big outpouring of

support. if you go after mitt romney tonight, might that not hurt your chances? >> i am not going to go after mitt romney. i may define the reality of a reagan conservative and a massachusetts moderate. i may describe the difference between cutting taxes and raising taxes. or being right to live and putting planned parenthood into ruomneycare. .

>> go win for us, mitt. >> thank you. ♪ [indiscrimante chatter]

[indiscriminate chatter] >> i am trying to reconcile some competing values you have a. -- you have. >> how are you?

>> good.

y, guys. how are you? thanks, buddy. how are you?

>> thank you so much. >> hello, ruthie? how are you? say hello to evelyn for me.

>> how are you? good to see you. >> what are you going to tell him? >> beat obama.

[laughter] >> good to see you. thank you. take care. >> over here, mitt. over here. >> mitt, i've been sitting here patiently waiting. thank you so much. >> we have got to get running. >> thank you very much, sir.

thank you so much. >> c-span's wrote to the white house political coverage takes you on the campaign trail. >> it is encouraging.

we are pretty excited. >> go to town halls, campaign rallies, and meet and greet spres. >> i am responsible. >> thank you for coming. >> it was enjoyable. >> it was a pleasure >> if i have questions, i will call you. are you planning to talk to some of these big companies shipping jobs overseas? >> what's new hampshire primary coverage on c-span television and on our website at c- span.org.

>> next, our coverage from new hampshire continues with newt gingrich at a town hall meeting. live at 7:00 a.m., your calls and comments on "washington journal." >> i know president obama came into office picking reform. people leave out the one part that is "to make a difference, which is lawmakers. go ahead and lose hundreds of jobs of your district. that is where it starts and that is where it stops. >> or carol provides 10 million members with news, information, and support. tonight, he will discuss how american tax dollars are spent by the defense department. >> republican presidential candidates continue campaigning across new hampshire this

weekend leading up to the state's primary on tuesday. former house speaker newt gingrich was in wolfeboro for a town hall meeting. he was joined by former reagan national security adviser, bob mcfarlin. >> i am the speaker of the house in new hampshire. how are you? [applause] i am pleased to be up here. my son went to brewster academy, so we come up here all the time. what a great area of the state is that you live in but i am here for an important reason today. i am here to talk to you about the candidate that i have endorsed for president of the united states. the reason i have endorsed him

as for the very reason i am involved in politics. i have not been in politics that long. it is my third term in the house. i have moved to forward it into the speakership pretty quickly. as i became involved and spent my first term in the legislature, i began to realize that the republican party in new hampshire had a problem. the problem was this, that we were not presenting to the people of new hampshire a clear conservative alternative. we were not going to the people of new hampshire and unabashedly saying, we are republicans, and we are republicans because we believe in limiting government. we are republicans because we believe in liberty and personal responsibility. we believe in the government that should be a modest government, a government that should be turned to as a last resort, not the first resort. a government that should assume that we are adults and that we can care for ourselves and we can make decisions for ourselves. when i came into the

legislature, i was confronted with the republican party that, when you talked to people, they had good instincts. but they did not think the people of new hampshire would respond to that kind of message. and we had spent decades being, i think, embarrassed about being republicans. and we decided -- some of us in the legislature decided that the republican message, the conservative message is an attractive message. it is a message that speaks to what is the essence of being an american. and we just had to get out there and talk to people about it. and the failure to do that over time not only lead to increasing numbers of republicans in new hampshire. it led to four years of a democratic legislature.

during that time, after we suffered of those defeats, those of us who remained in the legislatures that we are not going to put up with this anymore. we're going to come forward with a strong republican message. we're going to present to the people of new hampshire a clear alternative to what it means to be a republican and a democrat. a clear alternative between what it means to be liberal progressive and a conservative. we think, and we were right, that the people in new hampshire would respond to that. when we did that this last election, we were able to get 75% majorities in the house. [applause] and as i told you, we decided that this message is one that will be successful in the state level. and i submit to you that this is a message that would have to take to the people of the united states, that we cannot any longer have those who bill

themselves as the party establishment saying to us, be embarrassed about being a conservative. the embarrassed about this strong message of liberty and limited government that we say we stand for what we do not nominate candidates who will promote. and that is the reason that i have taken a very, very strong position in supporting newt gingrich. we cannot have a candidate who is a massachusetts moderate, a timid candidate -- [applause] who will go to washington and be the tax collectors for the democrats, go to washington and fix the problems they have caused the not limit the opportunities for those problems to arise again. a republican who will say, i have to tax you, but i feel bad about doing ed. you know, when we put the budget together in new hampshire, we made a clear choice. we said no more taxes. we're going to shrink

government, and we reduced state spending, this budget we just put in place, by almost 18%. i ask you, among the presidential candidates, who has the history and experience of doing that, who has the principles of doing that, and it is not a one-term massachusetts governor who left the office having been elected to no other office with a 34% approval rating. that is the necessity of us turning around from this disastrous presidency, this presidency that has done as one favor. what he has done is chew horn 50 years of creeping socialism into a three-year time span and demonstrated the way this country is going. he is showing us that transformative changes needed, and it will be one candidate who has the history, the experience, the ability, the track record that will turn around this country, and that candidate is newt gingrich.

i am so pleased to be about to come to you and enforce them and ask you to listen to him, and i think you will reach the same conclusion that i have. now, before he comes on, we have a great american here that i want to introduce to you. that is just someone i am throw to have had the opportunity to meet, a true american, an american who has had a history, but in the military and following his military career of defending the country, and that this bud mcfarlane. bud, if you come out here, i would appreciate it. [applause] >> good morning. thank you to each of you for coming out. this is a great, very warm show of support for newt gingrich. i will be very brief. the two blessings in my life i treasure most are having served for 20 years in the u.s. marine corps, and secondly, working for --

[applause] and secondly, having had the good fortune to work for president reagan for five years. [cheers and applause] i mentioned that because that record of service to our country was service at a time when the conventional wisdom was that we were going to have to endure a soviet threat forever, that there was nothing we could do about that. president reagan came to office, and he said this idea that things always have to be the way they have been is nonsense. this is an evil empire. we can bring it down.

we can reform our own government. we can make it smaller. these were heretical ideas, even in the republican party, at the time. but he did it. and, today, we look back on five years in which we brought down marxism, ended the cold war, reduced nuclear weapons, and short changes feasible with good leadership. in those years, i had the good fortune to meet newt gingrich. here was another man who did not believe that things had to be the way they had always been. you could change them. you could write a contract with america to reform welfare, to balance the budget, and actually do it. this is a leadership of an extraordinary nature. in the years ahead, we're going to face an uncommon, truly complex, daunting agenda of

threats to national security. the family of threats that includes cyber security threats, the ability of the subversives to bring down our banking system, to mess up your bank accounts and credit cards. also, your electric power grid. and every electronic system that truly has begun to control most of what we do every day. you're going to face the continuing terrorist threats, but now and in the future, threats that include the ability to use biological weapons and bring about mass casualties. you are going to face, also, the threat from iran and others, perforation and nuclear weapons. why do i mention these? well, because somebody, our president, has to have given a lot of thought to these issues, to understand the nature of

cyber threats and what we do about it. how can you harden our systems, improve them? make them resistant to these kinds of threats and overcome them? when i look at the family of people running for office this year, there was only one that stood out for two qualities. first, having studied for years the nature of these threats, where did they come from, what is the nature of the technology, and how do we overcome them? that was newt gingrich. nobody else has given thought to these things running for the presidency. secondly, it is one thing to know the nature of the problem, another to know the solution and to be able to get it done. newt gingrich has gotten it done. who else balance the budget for

four years? moved the entire federal government to a very different way of thinking that we can do this and do it? he also brings to the presidency a knowledge of how to move the u.s. congress, how to have the courage to go against conventional wisdom, how to balance the budget, and at home and abroad, show the kind of leadership that president reagan did only 25 years ago. nobody else in this race has those qualities of knowledge and experience. i am here because i believe in newt gingrich. he can do this. he is the only one who can do this. you have got to get out and support this man. our country is at risk. he can do it. only he can do it. it is an honor, truly, to be

here today with you and introduce the next president of the united states, speaker newt gingrich. [applause] ♪ only in america dream in red, white, and blue ♪ [cheers and applause] ♪ >> well, this may be the best venue -- you know, i have got to tell you, i have two reactions. first of all, i am an army brat. my dad spent 27 years in the

infantry. so i grew up as a kid around places like this, although i think we built this right at the end of world war ii, and this was the first generally modern tank built. from an army brat standpoint, this brings back lots of memories. from a political standpoint, i look at this tank lovingly. [laughter] because i remember michael dukakis -- [laughter] [applause] and it is just a reminder that governors of massachusetts do not always make good presidential candidates. [cheers and applause] now, before i get started, and want to say briefly some things about the two great people who introduced me.

>> before i get started, want to briefly cite things about people and reduced may. we need to get this man a microphone. you have a favorite son from right here at home. i was thrilled to get a call a while back and he said it is so important that a reagan conservative wind. you want to come and volunteer and work full-time. that is senator bob smith. [applause] , up for a minute. do we have a microphone? there we go. talk to the hometown folks. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. this is his show and i want to say thank you for coming and thank you for all coming to see speaker gingrich. in 1984 when i was elected, i walked into the congress and did not know where the bathroom was. here is a congressman from georgia who came over and said

before you get involved with the minutia that happens here, are you content to be in the budget -- in the minority and fighting this liberal majority of democrats or do you want to take the bull by the horns and take control? >> i think the answer is obvious. >> he said come on and about 10 of us met in a closet area. we plotted the revolution but it is not finished. the reason why i left key largo to be up here in the cold of new hampshire is because i believe in this man. we need and so desperately right now. [applause] i cannot tell you -- i cannot put into words how much i mean that. he and his wife have produced this movie about ronald reagan. if you saw that movie and you realize that all of ronald reagan's dream come all the things he wanted to do, we held him in the house and senate in those days when ronald reagan was there thanks to newt gingrich. we would probably still be a

minority of not for him. we need to finish that revolution to honor president reagan. this man can't do it. he has the philosophy, the conservative principles and values, he is a reagan conservative through and through. let's finish the revolution and let's elect newt gingrich, please, elect newt gingrich next tuesday, thank you. [applause] >> before it gets started, how many of you are either veterans or families of veterans? virtually all of you. [applause] i think we owe you a real debt of gratitude. i want to say thank you for coming to this rally. [applause] without your willingness to risk everything -- when you swear the oath to be in the armed services, you are basically signing over your life to the commander in chief.

this is the flag that george washington flow of valley forge in front of his command headquarters. this is the flag of the commander in chief of the american army. when they met in philadelphia, he presided over the constitutional convention. when they wrote into the constitution that the president is the commander-in-chief, they knew what they meant. he was not an adviser in chief for a talker in chief. he was not a politician in chief. he bears the ultimate or she bears the ultimate responsibility for the defense of the united states and the defeat of our enemies. that is how real this this. would you signed up, you gave that commander in chief control over your life. because you did that, we are today still a free nation. without our veterans, we would not today be a free nation.

i'm thrilled to be here and i thank you. the two great folks who introduced me, speaker o'brien is the model of what we need [applause] what he and his team -- he is very good reminding you that it is the team -- what he and the team did, when they confronted a budget deficit, i want every state to do this -- they did one of the smartest things i heard. they started by having the ways and means committee report how much money was being spent they then said we can pass any budget up to that amount. normally what politicians do is figure out how much they want to spend and that leaves them with a shortfall and i figure out how much they have to take away from you.

they ended up cutting 18% out of the new hampshire expenditures and 11% if you count federal funding. i don't know of any state that had a more courageous and direct effort to protect the taxpayer. they protected the average taxpayer from $3,000 additional taxes. they did it the old-fashioned way. they had to set priorities, cut out waste, make decisions, everything the u.s. congress and the president cannot do. one of the reasons i'm campaigning is i would like to make washington more like new hampshire where as the left would like to make new hampshire more like washington. that is an easy way to think of the difference. there is a huge difference between speaker o'brien and his team who represent a tea party conservative small government low tax movement and governor romney who campaigned on no tax increase in 2002 and passed a $730 million tax increase.

most of them were in the form of fees which were mandatory. there was actually a tax on people who were blind. that is a little hard to imagine but true. the other was a tax on gun ownership. he double the cost of owning a gun so you had to register a gun in massachusetts and pay $100 for a gun every year. it was a tax increase on the second amendment right, in my judgment. the difference between raising taxes because you don't have the courage to cut government and cutting government because you refuse to raise taxes is a dramatic difference. i am really glad to have bud mcfarlane here. one of the reasons he did a great job is unlike many of the politicians to end up in washington, he came out of a military background and he actually thought his job was to help the president be effective, not maneuver around the president. because he had, in ronald

reagan, a president who knew what he intended to do, president who was methodically determined to defeat the soviet empire, bud played a decisive role in one of the most important administrations we have had. reagan had a clear vision. when i talk about being a reagan conservative, i met him in 1974 and campaigned in 1979-'80 and helped develop supply-side economics. i work for the reagan administration for eight years. it is a simple model. reagan set out to accomplish three things -- he understood something important about leadership. lions cannot afford to support chipmunks. even if they catch them, they starve to death. lions have to hunt zebra and antelope. reagan got up every morning and he said where are my antelope?

there were three. rebuild the american economy and get a clear strategy. renew american civic culture so we were proud to be american and defeat the soviet empire. those are pretty big. he would then go in the oval office and chipmunks would run in. the federal government grows $10 billion per month, those are big chipmunks. [laughter] reagan listened patiently because he was a positive person and he would say, you are a terrific chipmunk. [laughter] have you met jim baker? the president's chief of staff became the largest chipmunk collector on the planet. i really learned a lot about leadership. it wasn't that reagan was disengage, it was that reagan

thattwo boxes in his head. he had a chipmunk box and he had an antelope box. this is the difference. this is a great study in real leadership. reagan wants to send a signal and he got down into the weeds if the weeds involve the big issues. secretary of state george shultz told the story that reagan had gone to berlin as governor in 1967. he said that wall sure is ugly, they ought to tear it down. >> 65-68. >> and the wall was ugly and it should have torn down. 20 years later, reagan is reelected president and carries 49 states. he will go back to berlin and he has this blind he wants to deliver -- mr. gorbachev, tear

down this wall. the state department hated the line. they thought would be a gorbachev feel bad. [laughter] it did not sound presidential and it was not going to happen. the speech went from the white house to the state department and what critics department editor takes out the line. it goes back to the white house and reagan personally writes it back again and goes back to the state department. they take out the line. it goes back to the white house. reagan calls the secretary of state. he said george, you need to tell your chipmunks that i am the president and they are not. the line stays in. they get to berlin and that morning before he goes through the speech, there are still

senior advisers saying to him please don't give this line. it is not going to happen. the wall be there for 30 more years and you will look foolish. it is one of the greatest lines of his presidency and the wall fell within two years. that is what real leadership is. real leadership understands the principle that matter, the correct division of the future, and the courage to impose your will when every time a person around you is scared to death of what you are about to do is foolish because as a leader you believe in doing what is right no matter what the staff believes. that is the key. [applause] that is why i think a bold reagan conservative candidate barack obama decisively. whereas a timid, mass. moderate will have a much harder time

because when you're facing a fund of $1 billion and the support of the elite media and the white house, you want to create a big gap. i am for american energy and he is against it. i am for paychecks and he is for food stamps. i am for lower taxes, he is for higher taxes. i for helping every american create jobs and he is for class warfare to did -- to divide the country. most of his $1 billion will fall in the middle if you have a big gap. reagan took on carter and carter was a milder version of obama. he was equally bad performance but not as wobbly. reagan was able to draw such a vivid comparison that made a huge difference. the comparison stock and that is why reagan and carter debated and he came up with "there you go again." carter would make some wild

charge and people got it. let me talk to you about two issues that relate to veterans and hampshire. i want to talk about the northern pass. you have my commitment that i will do everything i can to insure that the only way that happens is if it is buried underground along [applause] we have the technology today that we do not have to choose between delivering electricity to boston and the tourist industry and the beauty of northern new hampshire. we can assist and technological solution which the state could make money from by leasing part of the right of way so you don't have to get into eminent domain and you don't have to go into the taking of private

property. i would suggest that allows us to have a win-win solution that enables electricity to arrive in the big city without having run over everybody in between. i think there is no reason to assume that in america everyone in between needs to be run over just so that big cities and big businesses can get what they want. second, i think it is profoundly wrong that in midwinter veterans have to go all the way to boston to get health care. i am committed to three things that i want you to know about for veterans in new hampshire. first, i am committed to reopening the manchester hospital as a full-service facility, not just an outpatient clinic. [applause] second, i am committed to developing a very sophisticated clinic in the north country that uses tele-madison so you can get a high percentage of

your diagnostics and treatment done without having to go as far away as manchester. [applause] third, i'm committed to effect a program that allows you, if you prefer, to use your local doctor and local hospitals the don't have to travel. [applause] i say this as the son of a 27- year career soldier and somebody who values military families and veterans families and knows what you have to go through. it seems that all you ever have to do to explain thi get somebody off a congressional committee and get them to come to northern new hampshire and let them try to get to boston. if you pick the right week with the right blizzard, they will get the idea. [laughter] if they hit three moves on the

way, they will thoroughly understand why it is the wrong thing. [applause] let me talk briefly about jobs and the economy and where we are. this is a big deal. let me draw an historical comparison. i don't see much that is the radical. i'm a history teacher and i try to use facts and use history. last month, we created 200,000 jobs and the obama administration is dancing in the streets and i have to admit, compared to some other months, 200,000 beats nothing. you have to remember that in august of 1983, with reagan, we created 1,300,000 jobs in one month, six times the number. what does that matter? you have a real crisis in europe that is still sitting there with the euro decaying and european banks decaying. you have the potential for a real crisis in the middle east

with the iranians practicing closing the strait of hormuz and the straits of hormuz have one out of every 6 barrels of oil in the world. if either of those happen next spring, this coming spring, you could see the entire world tilt into a deeper recession. the only engine big enough to pull the world economy is the united states. we're still 1/4 of the world economy. when we grow, the sheer momentum of our growth changes things. this is one of the things of why i am running for president. we know how to do this. this is one of those things were the academic left and the political left in the media left is so dense that you wonder what happened to them. it is as though they had a cookbook that says you take a hard again put in the freezer. [laughter] if you want to test this some

time, you might want to go home and try this. an egg in a freezer for a couple of days and it will become hard. when you go to a restaurant and say you'd like a hard egg, if they brought you a frozen egg, you would think they were nuts. reagan have five principles for economic growth -- strong money, a sound dollar, lower taxes, less regulation so people could focus on to open orsahip, american energy [applause] and praising the people who create jobs. what is the obama model? reagan is for sound money. bernanke and obama are for inflation.

the amount of money they are printing now in the long run, they are starting up a wave of inflation on an historic scale. under jimmy carter got to be 13% inflation at 22% interest rates. reagan, lower taxes, obama higher taxes. reagan -- less red tape, obama -- more power to epa and osha. reagan -- more american energy, obama, anti-american energy. reagan, i love people a great job and i want to praise small- business owners and praise people go to work. obama -- let's attack ever when it was successful. is it any wonder you have this gap? i have grown from the reagan model. i helped develop in the '70s and implemented in the '80s. it was a bipartisan model. tip o'neill was speaker of the house. if we were going to pass the

reagan program, we had to get one out of every three democrats to vote for it and we did. we reached out to everybody. we tried to develop an american program, not just the republican program. i get to be speaker. there were two tax increases after reagan and the economy slowed down and i pulled out the same cookbook. two out of three people went to work or went to school and we pass the first tax cut in 16 years, the largest capital gains tax cut in history and we traded 11 million new jobs in four years and unemployment droppedto 4.2%. if you take someone off of welfare, unemployment, food stamps and you put them to work taking care their family and pay their bills and paying taxes, you raise the revenue of the government without raising taxes. you reduce the spend a.

clinton and i were able to hammer out four consecutive balanced budgets and paid off $405 billion of debt. that is the only time in your lifetime you have had four balanced budgets. [applause] this is part of why speaker o'brien and i identify with each other because we're speakers to believe in balanced budgets. in that context, what would you do today? i am for sound money. i would fire bernanke, shrink the role of the fed -- [applause] i would focus the fed on a stable dollar. taxes -- zero capital gains tax so money pours into the united states. [applause] 12.5% corporate tax rate which would free up billions of dollars from overseas and would allow american companies to compete on a fair and level

playing field. at two 0.5%, general electric would actually pay taxes. [applause] 100% expenses -- no one realized how much precision manufacturing there is in new hampshire. what you want to do was at 100% expensing. if you buy new equipment, you write it off in one year. we want american workers to be the best equipped workers in the world with the greatest productivity. it is the only way to have a high value job competing with china and india. if you do that on the equipment side, i would also modernize the unemployment compensation program by having a training requirement attached to it so if you need on and on the compensation, you have to sign up for business training course to learn new skills while we are paying you but we'll never again pay anyone 99 weeks for

doing nothing. [applause] >> we would abolish the death tax permanently because it is a destructive tax. [applause] at a personal tax level, you could keep the current deductions and red tape or you could have an optional 15% flat tax in the hong kong tradition. the one-page and here's my tax. if you do that, people have a choice. hong kong has done this for four years. we are not taking anybody's deductions away. we're giving you the choice of simplicity verses complexity and you can choose. [applause] now you come to regulatory.

pretty straightforward -- you want to fix this country quickly, i would ask the brand new congress and january 3, 2013 to stay in session. i would ask them before the inaugural to repeal of acare - [applause] -- to appeal obamacare -- it is the biggest job killing component of regulatory behavior. i would ask them to repeal the dodd-frank bill which is killing small banks. [applause] dodd-frank kill small banks and cripple small businesses and drive down the price of health. i would ask them to repeal sarbanes oxley which has added paperwork and gained nothing. [applause] i would like all three of those done before january 20 so when i'm sworn in they can bring them in and i consign the repeal of all three and get to work in a positive way. on the inaugural, i would have a series of executive orders about two hours after the

inaugural, the first of which would abolish all the while houseczars as of that moment. [applause] other regulatory reforms -- we should replace the environmental protection agency with a brand new environmental solutions agency. we should not retire any of the radicals currently trying to destroy the american economy. [applause] everywhere i go municipalities tell me how they are being dictated to by washington bureaucrats who have never visited their 10, have no idea about reality, have no concern about the budget and simply issue washington dictates that are destructive. the epa is the largest job killing agency in the federal government. [applause]

i would also go to a 21st century food and drug administration on a particular model. we want the fda in the laboratory understanding new science and want them to accelerate getting into the patient and not block it. that will change everything. they will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, dominate the world held market which is the biggest market in the emerging world, and it will enable us to get to patients better ways of saving their lives faster and a lower-cost. the duty of the fda is to turn it upside down -- it is today and obstruction to bringing new science to patients and it is stunningly expensive and it is guaranteeing that the breakthroughs will occur in china and india. our last scientists will go overseas to develop their products. it will not work for the fda. that is regulatory. let's talk about energy. [applause] i have a very simple model. i am for every form of american

energy. i want america and not just to be energy independent, what is to have a surplus of something happens in the straits of hormuz, we can step in and assert our productivity and make sure the world avoids a depression. i want to get to report no american president ever again bows to saudi k, period. [applause] the two-tiered venue -- as was the coolest place as i have done this. [laughter] the two last examples on energy -- the president goes to. brazil the president has blocked american development of energy offshore and messed up louisiana and people have no idea how the world works.

they put a moratorium and louisiana against the advice of their technical experts. they said was the dumbest thing they could do and i think the white house literally did not know these huge ocean drilling rigs move. these are very expensive pieces of capital. they will not sit around for six or a year to be political exhibits for a demagogue politician. the first one that left went to egypt. it took $80,000 per year jobs with them and when they drill oil, the government gets oil reg. it is a major source of revenue. the second one was perfect. the company that moved at a ceo who was tough. he issued the following statement -- because of political instability in the united states, we're now going to develop all of the congo. under obama, we are less stable copngo and that is not easy.

congo. stable than the that is not easy. in the middle stop american oil and gas productivity, the president visits and says i really want to be -- i want to thank you and congratulate you for developing offshore oil and gas. i am proud that we were able to guarantee $2 billion of equipment purchases largely from company-owned majorities. he said the most amazing thing -- he said i want america to be your best customer. this guy really doesn't get it. we don't hire president's to be foreign purchasing agents. the obama model is to borrow from the chinese to buy from the brazilians. it does not work. we hire an american president to be a salesman for american goods and services worldwide to create jobs in the u.s. selling overseas.

[applause] [applause] finally, you have the spectacle of the xl keystone pipeline. it is one thing if the white house cannot play chess. it is another thing if a white house cannot play checkers. [laughter] but if a white house cannot play tic tac toe -- [laughter] let me explain why use this analogy. this is one of the dumbest things i have ever seen. the president has this dilemma. he is in total real auction mode. he does not care about being president. he cares about being reelected. so he will not do presidential stuff, because that is so boring. giving speeches is so much fun. so he has this dilemma. the san francisco environmental extremists hate canadian oil. the construction workers union wants to build a pipeline

because there is 20,000 to the 2000 american jobs. he does not want them union mad at him and he does not want the environmentalists mad at him. he thinks, being quite clever, i will postpone the decision to 2013. now, prime minister harper is a conservative who is pro- american. but he is also the canadian prime minister. so he says, you know, if the united states does not want to make a decision, i want to talk to the chinese about paying for a pipeline, which is more expensive, over the rockies to vancouver. the ideal pipeline comes straight down, it is easy to build a it is fly. we have been building pipelines for well over 100 years. it should go from canada to houston. houston is the biggest petrochemical complex in the world you make money building the pipeline, running the pipeline, and make money pipeline, and make money processing the oil for the