the university of south carolina on the history and politics of south carolina. also, a conversation with michael crannish of "the boston globe" who co-authored the book, "the real romney." after that, the discussion on how the u.s. measures health and the national center of health statistics and dr. pierre vigilance will join us. >> quite an eventful day yesterday. we'll look back over the big news events of the day and ask you the question this morning, is the last 24 hours of campaign news have an effect on the race. here are the phone numbers, 202-737-0007 for democrats.

republican republicans. this is a look back at the presidential news. the presidential debate. yesterday, the former wife of newt gingrich gave an interview to abc news where she talked about his infidelity and requests for, as she described it, an open marriage. earlier in the day, governor of texas dropped his presidential bid and endorsed newt gingrich. we found out that the officials in iowa have updated the results of the caucaus putting santorum ahead, but with no real official change in the tally because of a couple of county there is with results that were still not verifiable. so a big dale on the campaign trail. show you some of the headlines this morning. "wall street journal" calling it a day of fresh drama and the gop

race. perry drops out. and gingrich faces criticism from ex-wife. "the washington post" front page in republican contest today of upheaval. and in "usa today," gop race shaking up before the south carolina primary. the question to you this morning is whether or not any of these events yesterday will have an important effect on the race going forward. we have a line this morning for south carolina residents. and if you'll tell us if you're going to vote tomorrow and what your vote might be if you made up your mind. let's begin with governor perry's decision to drop out of the race. we'll listen to what he had to say in his endorsement. >> as i contemplated the future of this campaign, i have come to the conclusion there is no viable path forward for me in this 2012 campaign.

therefore, today, i'm suspending my campaign and endorsing newt gingrich for president of the united states. i believe newt is a conservative visionary who can transform our country. we've had our differences, which campaigns will inevitably have. and newt is not perfect, but who among us is? the fact is, there is forgiveness for those who seek god. >> and in this morning's "washington post" veteran gan pauls. the not for ready primetime campaign came to grief. perry will be left to reflect on what could have been different and he no doubt believes he deserved better. in the final days of his campaign long after he had chances of retz recollecting his campaign, he was better. he was refuted to be the last

debate on myrtle beach on monday night was one of the best. it was too late. in the days leading up to the withdraw, perry was proof of the adage you never get a second chance to make a first impression and the first impression was politically disastrous. the debates proved his undoing. lapter on in his piece, he writes this about what was side in mr. perry's announcement. there were hints of another run for president, or so said ray sullivan, perry's communications director. he volunteered that if republicans don't win the white house in november, perry might try again in 2016. let's get to your telephone calls beginning with chantilly, virginia. mike is a republican there. mike, you were watching to whether or not you think it will make a difference in the race. >> good morning. thank you for taking my call. a good show as usual every morning. i want to say to you that i'm getting tired of mitt romney. every time they ask him a very simple question, when are you going to file your tax return

and he starts giggling and moving his shoulders, it turns me off. this man cannot handle very simple questions that reporters ask him and he wants to be the president? you know, it seems to me that -- that he has no -- he hasn't even prepared himself. normally that this question is going to come up every debate that he goes to. and i'm getting tired of that, you know, the way this guy not answering the question. i mean, it really -- it doesn't make any sense about the -- the way they ask him the question. but the reality is, i really believe that romney should answer the question he prepared himself. if he wants to be the president of the united states. because if he becomes a nominee, there's more questions that he has to answer. >> let me jump in. you are a republican. do you have a candidate? >> i have a candidate. romney is a good man. i believe he can do better. but the real the i of it, the

man, he's not ready for questions. >> okay, who's your candidate? >> caller: my candidate is romney. >> yeah, you want him to handle it better is what you're saying. >> caller: i want him to handle it better. the thing that also bothers me is the governor of texas when he's leaving and saying that, oh, we should vote for gingrich, gingrich has a lot of baggage. we know that. it's a length of time to look into gingrich. >> sorry to cut you off. we have a lot of callers this morning. mike is from virginia and just got word that the governor of that state bob mcdonald is going to endorse mitt romney today. the support behind the former massachusetts governor a day ahead of the south carolina primary. and let's take a look at that question. mike says he has not yet gotten for him a credible response on the income tax question. he was asked about his taxes in last night's debate. let's listen in.

>> i don't know how many years i'll look. i'll take a look at what the documents are. and i'll release them in multiple years. i don't know how many years. but i'll be happy to do that. let nell you, i know there are some who are very anxious to see if they can't make it more difficult for a campaign to be more successful. the democrats want to go after the fact that i've been successful. i'm not going to apologize for being successful. and i'm not -- i'm not suggesting that these people are doing that. but i know the democrats will go after me on that basis. that's why i want to release these things all at the same time. >> our thanks to cnn for their coverage of the debate last night. columbus, ohio, where does the democrat go on? linda, you're on the air? >> caller: yep, as a 60-year-old woman, a little more, i don't think it's going to matter who you put up as the republican. these are clowns.

i mean, you have romney -- i want everyone to watch wall street. 45 minutes and you'll see what gecko went to prison for and probably what romney should. but gingrich has too much baggage. romney is a card board cutout, a face with the coke brothers and corporations that want to make some money. and for those who think cutting taxes on corporations is dpoik to help us, let's get real here. we cut -- we already know that most corporations pay little tax because of the loopholes. when chinese people were working for 31 cents an hour and living in dorms at 500,000 employees for apple are working over there, they can't possibly bring that back here unless the republicans want us to live in dorms and work for 31 cents an hour. it's not the tax, people, it

isn't the tax that corporations are paying because they pay none. they already pay none. romney is proof of that. >> linda, thanks, another linda. this one is in washington. good morning to you on our republican line. you're on the air. >> caller: hi, dear. i do think yesterday's events will affect christian republican women because i know some of the republican men don't seem to take very seriously what newt gingrich did to marianne. but as a christian woman, it does make a difference. >> is that you, linda? >> caller: yep, i'm a christian woman. i'm in the state of washington so i will not be voting in saturday's primary. >> tell me how you process. was this new information p information for you, what the -- the statements that marianne gave? >> caller: i watched newt gingrich all through the '90s. he seemed so happy with marianne. then all of a sudden, the marriage is over and the whole story about calista came out. and it's very unsettling for a

christian woman. oh. >> how does that affect his qualifications to be president? >> caller: i think it matters who a man is in private when nobody is moving. it matters. >> the debate started off with the question about the marianne gingrich interview on abc and a strong reaction from the contenders. let's listen in to that exchange. >> i am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on the topic like that. and i'm frankly astounded that cnn would take trash like that and yumtz it to open a presidential debate. [ applause ] >> as you noted, mr. speaker, it did not come from our network. it's not in the campaign -- >> it was repeated by your

network. you chose to start the debate with it. don't blame somebody else. you and your staff chose to start this debate with it. >> moments again from the opening of last night's cnn candidates' debate. columbia, south carolina up next. this is james, an independent. you're watching all of this. what are your thoughts today? >> caller: good morning, susan. my thoughts today are about ron paul. i'm a ron paul supporter. i think he's been treated very unfairly by the news media. and last night, wis-tv here in columbia ran a poll and had everybody text in. they did not report the results of that poll but people should know that ron paul won that poll with 43% because i had to call this morning to get that information. gingrich was second at 24%. and mitt romney was in the teens and i think santorum was at like 9%. i think during this time, he's been treated very unfairly

through the news media of this whole period of time he's been run ugh. and he's the only candidate that offers true change with the -- by doing something with the budget, bringing the troops home, putting the money back here. not being so much involved in foreign affair, and doing what's good for the american people. >> now, let me ask you to answer the question about all of the events happening yesterday. do you believe it will change the outcome on saturday? >> well, possibly. i thought ron paul did well. i think it's narrowed down to the group of people that i thought it would end up with. i still for ron paul, i think mitt romney is a good person. newt gingrich is questionable while he's a good debater. but i'm strong lil in support of ron paul because we need a change in this country and i think ron paul would carry us in the right direction. >> thanks so much. texting a comment in for a poll

is a nonscientific way of doing surveys. interesting and informative but not scientific. this is a look at conducted surveys in south carolina thanks to real clear politics who lists all of the polls on their website. look at the top line, the average among the mayor polls and has governor romney at 31.8%. gingrich at 30.6%. so very close here. ron paul at 14.4. rick santorum, 12.0. and here governor perry in the race, 3.6. by the way, candidate santorum scheduled to be on our program at 7:25 for 15 minutes. he's on his way to an event in charleston. he's going to stop by the program for 15 minutes and take your calls, facebook comments, and some tweets. we have already posted on our facebook page if you'd like to ask the question, you can try to get it in the queui and we'll as many of those paz we can.

diane, good morning. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> very well, thanks. >> caller: oh cape, listen. on a few little tiny votes in iowa, it's sue -- it doesn't mean anything. rick santorum has homes there where his children were going to the pennsylvania hybrid charter school while they lived in west -- they lived in virginia and actually they pay taxes, $100,000 in taxes to n ex-glund. that's been disputed numerous times there's an article in "the new york times" this morning reference, you know, he was the -- let seals, the title is -- i think he's changed from

a reformer to an insider. and it rose quickly from a reformer to an insider. that's been going on for years. he's been taking money from lobbyists. he had meetings in rooms there off of k street. and that's when lobbyists gave information what subject matter bills being brought to the floor. so he's been playing both sides of this. it's come police it. it's due duplicit. go home to pennsylvania, take care of his family, don't use his wife and children as the backbone of trying to promote a presidency. i am a democrat. president obama will be elected. i did predict in 1997. i'm well known as a psychic clairvoyant in san diego county, i projected that newt gingrich would win -- not win but run for

president. and possible become a vice president. i don't see him winning any of these presidencies. nor do i see perry. perry should go home and write a big check to the federal government, forget about it, retire and go out and do some hunting. >> if you're a clairvoyant, do you have a sense of what the economy is going to look like for americans next year? >> caller: i'm actually -- anybody who knows me -- anybody knows theish the answer to your question is i have not seen any improvement until after 2013, way into 2013. so our economy will be at a very, very slow pace. we're going to continue and it will -- there will not be any kind of type of gdp until possibly i would say after the first of 2013. i would say the middle of 2013.

>> how do your evaluations, not sure what to call them, compare nationally with the candidates? >> caller: i think romney has done a great -- is doing a great campaign but i don't see him debating obama and winning. it won't work. newt gingrich is cut throat. and so is santorum. and as far as the national debate is concerned, i see perhaps -- and i actually wrote on minute facebook page back in -- actually november of 2010 and i said, y'all should just stay home and watch it on television because you have no candidates that are even -- even, you know, any responsible or even have any credibility to run for the president of the united states. >> dianne calling us from julianne, california who says she's a clairvoyant, well known, and looking ahead to the outcome

of the race. the article she was reading is this in the front page of the new york times. and we're on the jump page right here. santorum rose quickly from capitol hill reformer to gop insider. two quotes -- one is from terry modano, a long-time political scientist in pennsylvania based in franklin and marshall college who followed mr. santorum's career. said it to the paper, there was an evolution there, of santorum. quote, he went from someone who criticized the exercise of power and wanted reforms and turned into mr. insider calling people and making deals. another quote. john t. due doo little, a member of gang of seven, a house member at the time, he said of mr. santorum, you come as an outsider, some people never really learn the levers of power, mr. doolittle said, but others like rick did. you want somebody to be effective at using the levers to advance your values and your ideas. next is the phone call from san

diego. republican. good morning, rough. >> caller: the extremist idea with newt gingrich didn't show the question about her saying he wanted an open marriage. i remember that's when mr. gingrich was attacking bill clinton for his affair with monica lewinsky daily. i got sick of it. i'm a republican. okay, i don't like clinton. but i really don't like you either. and then what a hypocrite. for him to challenge the one who was just reporting and asking the question. that shows his personality. to me, i would never vote for newt gingrich. i also didn't like mitt romney saying maybe i'll show my tax returns, all of the money ingive to the mormon church. but not right now. ron paul is the the only one that served his country.

he's no not hiding money. he has a message. he believes in what he wants. i may not agree with everything, but zero tax, get rid of the irs? i think those are things that need to be done. and the other ones are just -- they're up there for the power grab. and it's obvious. and i just hope how would newt gingrich beat obama? gingrich looks awful. who wants to look at that guy for the next four years. >> russ from san diego. here's politico's takeaway. they have six takeaways in the debate, the first being about that initial exchange. they write, newt gingrich saw the pitch coming. gingrich was looking for a fastball; and proceeded to knock it out of the ball. this is a sports cliche but a fitting one here. gingrich knew full well john king would ask him about the ex-wife claims, the former

speaker sought an open marriage a decade ago and cnn made a clear choice to open with it knowing it would make the network part of a news story. it was simply put gingrich's best single moment in any 2012 debate and he's had many good ones. the overall performance in monday's debate was better but coming so close to the primary last night was exactly what he needed. that's their takeaway. what's yours for asking about whether or not the last 24 hours of campaign news has changed the outcome? once again, a quick review of the cnn debate last night. the interview that mr. gingrich's ex-wife gave to abc news, the dropout of rick perry and the endorsement of newt gingrich by that candidate and the update of iowa caucus results happening yesterday, thursday, we're asking you what effect they might have. it was tough on the speaker this morning. let me show you the front pages. "the new york post" with the big

headline, "exposed," shocking chargings by newt's scorn wife and a tougher one on "the new york daily news." here on the bottom of the page "ex-wife -- newt wanted me and mistress too." and next a call from jacksonville, florida, johnny, an independent. go ahead, please. >> how are you guys doing today? >> great. you're an independent in jacksonville. the primary is the coming up there. the last 24 hours affect what the florida voters might do? >> caller: absolutely. first of all, i want to say that i was definitely hoping at the beginning that rick perry would go a little bit more. just like everything, everything happens for a reason. got a lot of respect for him in his going to newt gingrich side. swaying my vote 100% to back mr. gingrich, just so you understand that. he startles in his career first

of all with a prayer, which is rick perry, obviouslily. the character of the man, absolutely, 100%, everything. the statement about newt gingrich, basically, you know, he did ask for forgiveness. it is what it is. those of you or those of us who are christians understand that. okay? so that being said. but one of the things here is when it comes to other candidates, the statement that needs to be said. an honest man and dishonest person worries. that being said, post your taxes. let the world be the judge. don't hold things out. if you want my vote, post your taxes. that ice one of the most important things. gingrich is the only one out of the four that are remaining that has done that. i have a lot of respect for that man. he's not hiding everything --

anything. he's shown everything -- everybody knows his past. he goes back to the senate for how many years? he has quite a bit of an education. he was a teacher. that gentleman right there has been very impressive. and i will say the lady who's on here, whatever her religion is, i'm a christian. i don't go to her side with what her beliefs are. make sure there's no misunderstanding. >> thank you for the call from jacksonville, florida. bill baydy on twitter says -- "the headlines should read newt joins exclusive club" roosevelt, hart, clinton, and good ole john edwards. underneath the story about mr. gingrich's divorce through the eyes of his ex-wife is the story about mr. gingrich's income tax that those were released, the caller talked about that. he paid a tax rate of 32% in 2010. returns showed his adjusted

income, $3.14 million. and he paid $994,000 in federal taxes, a 31.6% income rate. right below that, president obama's taxes in 2010. $1.73 million. they paid $453,000, a 26.2% rate. the majority of the income came from book sales for the obamas. next is a phone call from manhattan. rob, a democrat. you're on. >> caller: thank you. i can't imagine conservative republican women wanting to be swingers with newt gingrich. but that said, i have a quick programming recommendation after i comment on these cast of characters in the republican party. gingrich is not to be trusted. i -- you know, you can just get a vibe from him that you just don't trust him as far as you can throw him. mr. romney is big corporate, big

money. the rich get richer. the poor get poorer. an easy read on romney. and santorum is ridiculously, excessively conservative. i voted since '76, democrat. carter was my first vote. i would vote for ron paul just for as a three stooges -- poke the finger in the eye of the political system. i think that tea party, occupy wall street, coffee party, independents, could all get behind ron paul. i just think he is a anti-establishment candidate and it would be the first time, i think, republicans would be wise. i think he would be the most competitive guy against obama. and my plan really is to vote for obama unless ron paul is a republican. my programming recommendation -- i would love to hear on c-span, get a medicare actuary who can

talk to the point of selling medicare insurance health policy to the public by the millions, bringing in healthy, taxpayer citizens that with group or individual policies where we pay out the nose. not necessarily talking about single payer. but we know that the biggest bills that we have, our biggest financial problem is health care and the rise in health care costs. and i don't understand why it's not more spoken about our discussed on c-span, what we can get a feeling for. what it's like getting millions and millions of healthy people paying a monthly premium. find the medicare. >> we have a lot of callers on the line. we heard your idea. we heard you and we'll -- i'm sure our producers will add that to the list of considerations.

interesting historical comment column in "the washington post" after rick perry is dropping out of the race yesterday. they call it the top ten presidential campaign flameouts. take a look at this. number ten -- jack kemp in 1988. nine, wes clark in 2004. john connolly is eight on the list, 1980. former texas senator phil gramm in 1996. below that, six, teddy roosevelt in 1912 with the bull moose party. and fred thompson in 2008. the former tennessee senator and "law & order" star entered the primary. but it never seemed his heart was in it. number four, rudy giuliani also in the 2008 race, the former mayor of new york. rick perry gets the number three spot. and the top ten presidential candidate flameouts. two, ed muskie in 1972.

and gary hart in 1988. this is jim in newberry. what part of the state is newberry in? >> caller: good morning, what was your question? >> what part of the state is it in? >> caller: we're in the back country, the central part of the state. >> what are your leanings in saturday's primary. >> caller: thank you for the question and the opportunity to speak a moment to you. i voted a week ago for mitt. i think we have two winners here and two losers. i need to say that. mitt or newt are both good. rick has yet to learn how to be a diplomat. you have to be diplomatic in politics. he was very mean looking last night, i think. and ron, i love his politics, but he's too libertarian for -- for this part of the country yet. i think maybe a few generation ifs we overcome what we've got

in the white house now. he may -- he may well fit into place. the other thing i would like to say is please people in south carolina go and vote. this is an extremely important election. we have a big job in front of us. >> thanks for your call. new berry, c-span on saturday night will right after the polls close at 7:00 in south carolina be live with the candidate's speeches. we'll give you the results as soon as they are announced. and as soon as they do, we'll go to each campaign headquarters to listen in to how the candidates are reacting to how they placed in saturday's south carolina primary. the author of this book, "the real romney" as our guest in the final section here this morning. michael crannish, the bureau chief of the washington globe built on the reportings of mitt romney in the governor's mansion and spent four years on this biography. it's gotten a lot of press

coverage. we're going have you phone in your comments or questions. baton rouge, louisiana, good morning, to sam. did the last 24 hours change anything in the race? >> yeah, i think -- yeah, i think mr. gingrich is doing a good job of getting on the bolshevick medium that we have. let me tell you what, folks, if -- if he gets back in, this might be our last election. so you better watch what you do and vote for the person other than him. >> why, what do you think will happen to make it our final election? >> caller: you know, martial law. there's going to be rioting in the streets. because this guy is terrible. i mean, just unbelievable. he's got the -- got the lady

from california, the clairvoyant voting for him. the people who are looking for handouts. and i'm taxed to the point that i can't do anything anymore. so you know something has got to be done. >> thank you for your call, day torn, ohio is up next. kate is a democrat there. kate, welcome to c-span. >> caller: i watched all of the debates, i'm a dem. i think romney is going to pull it out. what was fascinating is last night on msnbc, almost every host except dylan and rachel maddow opened up the programs saying that santorum had won in iowa. eight precincts are missing up there. you would think that the republicans would be worried. they can't find the votes from the precinctings. a tossup, undetermined.

i wonder if c-span will dig into that. where are the votes from the eight prel singts. the host opening up with that question about gingrich's second wife, that was questionable. but it's not questionable to ask him about that issue. and the guy is vicious. he flips the script on his own horrific behavior and flipped it back over to the media and his wife, talk about a master of hypocrisy. and then, hey, ron paul, he's always great. the guy is not going to win. but he's going to keep the focus on how there's a lot of anti-unnecessary welfare folks out there. but i hope somebody starts digging in to the eight precincts. rachel maddow did kind of cover it more thoroughly about how it kept switching yesterday about who had won, where the votes were. i think it's interesting the language people are using about

gingrich's viciousness. they're calling it like a -- mikka on joe scarborough that he owned the moment and politico said he knocked it out of the park. the guy is a vicious hypocrite. why he wouldn't actually feel any kind of responsibility to acknowledge his very serious and vicious mistakes, instead, flips it on his wife and the media. it's absurd. >> all right, kate from day ton who talks about the iowa caucus results being updated. "usa today" said the loser in the iowa caucuses. virtual tie gives iowa caucus ap black eye. the real winner of the 2012 iowa caucus is -- we'll never know. which means the biggest loser of the 2012 iowa caucuses might be the iowa caucuses. with eight precincts unaccounted for in the wednesday night deadline and other lingering questions, gop officials agreed to all can it a virtual tie. they write the uncertainty has

embarrassed a state that prides itself in the first contest of the presidential nomination. it's more than a black eye, says chris of the university of iowa. this is not that uncommon. we've never had a caucus this close before. this was a problem waiting to happen. the totals change because of transposed numbers, missing precincts, and other irregulariti irregularities. those parties will have to make changes if they want iowa to maintain the special status as home of the first presidential nominating caucus. the informal transparent system worked a generation ago when the caucuses rose to national caucus. but it's no longer getting together. it's high intensity, high-stakes political event. next is a call from ledu, move mo. a republican. >> caller: i have to preface this call by stating my c-span

following, if you will, started back -- >> your called us before from chicago. how come you're calling us from missouri this morning? >> caller: i live here now. i'm from this area. i work for a financial firm in chicago. i do now live in missouri. >> okay. >> caller: i do still have a chicago cell phone, however. but with that said, again, i started my c-span watching -- in last night's debate, something just dawned on me that was stated in the rise of the tea party. the question was, would the tea party show the virtues and choose the candidate that most represents the republican party. and i have to tell you, newt

gingrich is not that. the guy is a political psychopath who compartmentalizes the most mundane and irreverent values that are typical to the republican party. you want to say it's his ex-wife, yes, he has three of them. women are the majority in this country. for anyone to think this -- most women will give this guy a pass? he had no standing with the evangelical life. how can he? and anyone who simply is going against mitt romney is causing his religion and vote for newt gingrich. on a very comical note, newt

gingrich is synonymous with -- the bull in a china shop. >> glad to have you with us in your new location in missouri. joseph ramirez, two students on twitter ask where is george w. bush? the republican candidates want to return to the policies of 2000 and 2008. how could the elephants forget, is what he writes in his column. one thing you would be hard pressed to find mention in the republican debate, george w. bush, who? he writes. the last republican president, you know, the two termer who's been out of the white house for a scant three years might come up with frequency. not so. he's the invisible man of the gop race, the all but forgotten ghost of the administration's pass and in harry potter

parlance, he who should not be named. bush's name has come up a pitiful 56 time, includes mentions by all of the candidates in 16 major debates. president obama got 560 name drops. not to say that the candidates don't have a president at the tip of their tongues. ronald reagan dead for 7 1/2 years and whose white house tenure ended a quarter of a century ago is a favorite topic, surprise, surprise, of the debaters. they invoked his name 221 times. next phone call is beach island, south carolina. hello to kelly, an independent. >> caller: good morning. how are you today? >> fine. what's this race looking for right now? >> caller: the biggest problem is the way the race is being run right now is how the elite media is steering the conversation. so they're not in a position to elect our president, they shouldn't come off as if they're the ones selecting the president or the candidate to be

president. and to lead a debate of such significance and the question of someone's previous marriage -- i can understand that question being brought up. but that's not the most important issue of the day. at some point, that question could have been asked, not understanding the significance of it being the first question to be high employment. we've got problems in the middle east. among other things. and it just seems like the main stream media is -- are the people that are steering the direction and they're picking our candidate. nobody two weeks ago would have thought newt gingrich had a chance. but that's who the media has selected to be the republican nominee and they're doing everything in their power to knock everybody else down to make sure newt gingrich wins the

nomination. therefore, allowing president obama to have another four years in office which this country can't handle. >> are you voting on sunday? >> caller: yes, ma'am, i sure am. based on the debate, i think rick santorum had the best night of everybody last night. he's well rounded. outside of him being a big fan of ear marks in the state of pennsylvania where he served for senator, you can't fault someone for wanting to help the state they represent, outside of that, he has a straightforward record. he's pro life, he's been fighting every since he's been in office for the right to life. he rallied against -- i was amazed at some of the stuff that he brought to the fore -- the videotapes of the late-term abortion and all of that trying to -- trying to put a stop to it. and strong on taxes. he works side-by-side with newt gingrich, with ronald reagan in

office. and newt gingrich acts like he's the only man that served with pronld reagan. he's the one that came up with all of the jobs. the best job creator is mitt romn romney. >> let me jump in. we have a lot of callers. interesting to hear from south carolina voters who are going to vote on saturday. kelly in that state. reactions to what kelly said from twitter by melissa e. that goes by dreadful penny 81. she writes, newt's marriage may not be the most important question of the day, but it calls in to question his integrity and character. kelly, a south carolina voter says life for south carolinians is all politicings these days whether or not they would like to escape it. no way to escape the barrage of negative political ads. here's what henderson writes, with voters heading to the polls in a clear win or go home contest for most of the remaining presidential candidates, there's no way to escape the onslaught of political ads here. the majority is negative.

voters come home to find mailboxes packed with fliers. one contender on the front, one on the back. they pick up their phones hearing strangers out toing one competitor and smearing another. they turn on their tvs to find back-to-back ads, featuring grainy footage, black and white photos and deep-voiced narrators delivering mostly bad news. it's to be the most expensive campaign in history flush with millions of dollars and eager to test whether the negative advertising that worked in iowa will work in a state known for dirty tricks campaigning. that's the news today. beaumont, texas. ken is a republican there. hi, ken. >> caller: hi, how are you? >> our cameras were just in beaumont. our travelling group called local content vehicles. they spent a week in your fair city. >> caller: they're a unique facility. >> yeah, i'm sorry to interrupt you.

they're going to have i9 on book tv and american history tv featuring beaumont this month. >> caller: yes, ma'am. >> on to politics. >> caller: i know it seems brutal. but getting readdy for a fall election, these are issues that are going to come out. and it's a good vetting process to allow this to happen, believe it or not. yesterday it was announced that the keystone excel pipeline was going to be killed. that speaks specifically to the energy policy in this country that needs to be developed. i have a son-in-law that's being deployed to the middle east for a month. it gets very personal. we have the resources in this country. recently, there was a gentleman from the canadian border all the way to port arthur, texas. he did that in 2 1/2 months to protest the pipeline. it's demonstrative of what we're

looking at. do we want to pedal for two months or get on the plane and fly in a few hours or a car and make it in a couple of days. i don't think this country needs to go backwards. but all of the work and efforts have been made to bring us to the point that we're at today. we need to look forward and 23409 try to live in a utopian society but be realistic about what we need to do to move forward both politically and economically. >> thank you very much. c. fletcher chase writes to us from beaver dam, wisconsin. not sorry to see rick perry go. those who would choose to sell off taxpayer-owned infrastructure to foreign owned private companies are not presidential material. rick perry is the example of why voters need to look at what the candidates do or have done and not what they say. mitch daniels was chosen to give the republican response to the state of the union. ashley watching in waco, texas sends this e-mail.

is the moral party giving serious consideration to nominating as their standard bearer a man who abandoned two wives in pursuit of other women. and how little time ron paul receive in the debate last night? having dom in second in new hampshire, why weren't he and mitt standing in the center? the president on the campaign trail visiting florida, the primary january 31 and here's a photograph of the scene as he visited disney world yesterday with the bright blue sky. for obama, a day at disney world and a night of fundraisers. jackie collins is with the president. she writes while the presidential contest in south carolina riveted media attention, president obama literally flew above the fray. on a day that captured the incumbency for a president facing re-election. it was the latest of the near weekly day trips for mr. obama from washington to a swing state location or two where he announces some policy initiative

benefit to the locals, the president's travels a cost of which are a portion between the taxpayers and the democratic party, or mr. obama's campaign depending on a mix of political and official events is expected to pick up as the election approaches. mr. obama will kris cross the country visiting five swing states in three days to echo the election approaches and the state of the union address he'll deliver on tuesday. >> a new national tourism strategy is focused on creating jobs in some of america's most successful business links. some are here today, have signed up to help. we're going to see how we can make it easier for foreign tourists to find basic information about visiting america. we're going to see how we can attract more tourists to our national parks. we want people visiting not just epcot center, but the everglades

too. the more folks who visit america, the more americans we get back to work. it's that simple. >> the president yesterday in his swing to florida. next telephone call is from chicago. good morning to joe, an independent. you're on the air. >> good morning, how are you? >> great, thanks. >> i would like to start with the media slants of a couple of callers you mentioned. the slam of newt's ex-wife whether it's appropriate or not is not the issue. contraction -- cnn knew it would get a lot of play. they would be in the news story as the caller mention md. he knew they had to be ready for it. the question is why would they do that? the gop doesn't want mitt. they'd rather have gingrich. second, we can all agree, we have a lot of problems in the country. and to understand the problem, you have to understand the root causes. and there's only one candidate who's talking about the root

causes, that's ron paul. so ron paul, 2012. >> thank you for calling. next up, forestville, maryland here in the washington area. james is a democrat there. you're on, james. krnkts hello. >> good morning to you, sir. >> caller: hey, good morning, how are you doing? >> great, thank you. >> caller: i was calling in reference to the republican candidate. it seems i wanted to -- hello? >> yep, we're listening. >> caller: i wonder if they're going to really help us out here who's struggling? i mean, everybody is saying what they're going to do. what obama shnt doing. but they -- they -- they say the same thing in their stump speech every day. what are the policies, one of their policies, oh, i know newt gingrich. he did a lot of stuff for reagan and he did a lot of stuff with clinton. i know santorum did a lot of stuff. he was a senator of pennsylvania. but what -- you know, i know ron paul did a lot of stuff in

texas. but what are they going do do? what are their policies? what are they going to do to get people back to working? what are their plans. they don't have none. the same stump speech all over. every time they talk, they talk about the land -- romney talks about the land of the beautiful, this, that. but what is he going to do? what are thal going to do to get us out here and get back to work. i've been out of work for 18 months. what are they going to do. that's all i've got to say. >> thanks for calling in this morning. to the caller who asked about the tally in iowa. here's the article i was looking for in "the wall street journal." patrick o'connor reporting in his story headline, new tally outcomes in iowa. a person familiar with the state party thinking saying that the state was unlikely to continue to examine the votes given the problem with the eight precincts. next, a call from charleston, s southbounding. -- south carolina. martha, a caller there. good morning.

>> good morning, thank you, c-span for your continued coverage. you think the iowa caucuses are confusing. well, voting in south carolina is also confusing. my husband and i retired down here in 1997. and every single election, whether it's a -- you know, an in between every two years, our lines are so, so long for voting. like they don't want the newcomers to vote in the newer neighborhoods. but the voting polls are so long. and i became active in the league of women voters to try to straighten this out. but the way we solved it this week is we voted early on tuesday because we're both over 55. that's our excuse. we voted early for romney. and yesterday c-span had wilson on for a half an hour. south carolina. >> senator wilson, yeah. >> caller: he explained

republicans and democrats can vote in the republican primary. seems to me, that's confusing. i don't know. i try to figure out things, but i'm still a confused, retired person down here. and i -- those of us who voted for obama last time, by the way. i really think that the republican primary in south carolina is almost as confusing as the iowa caucus. >> our plan is to have a political scientist from south carolina join us in a bit. and ask about the registration process works for people who are participating. we told you earlier rick santorum is going to be our guest. he's on the way to the campaign event. he tells us we're still going to do his program. we're watching for that. immediately afterwards, we'll be the political scientist i mentioned, mark tompkins. as we wrap up here, one thing to remind c-span, for all of our

high school and middle schoolers who are intent on competing for this year's student cam contest. the screen right now. student cam.org. the debate, the final deline is tonight at midnight and the winners will be announcered wednesday, march 7. so get your editing done and get it on-line to us as quickly as you can if you want to be part of the contenders for this year's contest. next from middle borrow, massachusetts. christine, an independent. hello, you're on the air. a. >> hi, good morning. you wanted to ask anybody voting for newt gingrich if you thought the rest of the country was going to allow a woman, his wife, calista, a woman who was sleeping with another man's wife to become the first lady of this country. i don't think that will happen.

i don't think either newt gingrich or calista could lead this country. they're morally bankrupt, the both of them. >> thanks for your call. next up, lincolnton, georgia. al, a republican. good morning, al. does the last 24 hours change the campaign? >> caller: i think it might have, susan. a lot of social conservatives and religious right-type folks in south carolina that vote that governs the outcome over there. and i think they might realize they're twisting their principles like a pretzel to vote for newt gingrich. he's too tainted, too much baggage. he really isn't that much of a conservative. >> thanks for your call. c-span junkies asking us on twitter whether or not south carolina keeps all of the delegates since they moved the date up. no, one of the early primary states. and they only get half of the

delegates, part of the penalty for the states that decided to go early. senator santorum is live with us from south carolina. thanks very much. i know it's a busy day for you. our goal with you this morning is to get as many viewer questions as we can in in this last hour before voting -- the last day before voting in south carolina. thank you for being with us. >> my pleasure, thank you. >> i'm going to jump right in to a question that came to us on our facebook page from danielle morrow. many returning u.s. military veterans are in need of medical help as well as transition back to the society. considering the extreme debt situation the u.s. is, do you think veterans should be excluded from cost-cutting measures considering the sacrifices these people have made on behalf of our country or not? >> the answer is they should be excluded from any kind of reduction. these are people, men and women, who stepped forward to defend this count country.

the country has a special obligation to them as a result of that. these are heroic people. they're signing up every day and they' they're re-enlisting every day. i grew up on va grounds, my mom and dad met at a va after world war ii. they lived on the post and in apartments for the first 18 years of my life. and i got a chance to meet veterans and work with them and volunteer at the hospital. and i can tell you that there is -- there are a lot of problems in the va health care system. there's a lot of problems with quote government-run medicine. we need to do a better job of meeting the needs -- particularly when it comes to meeting the mental health issues that a lot of the servicemen and women are dealing with because of the rules of engagement, the way things are. you don't have an enemy lining up in uniform against you, you are constantly on watch for

whoever is around you in a civilian looking like a civilian means somebody who could end your life. that kind of stress is very hard to read -- to come back to america and to readjust. we have to do a lot better job than we're doing. one thing we can't do is cut those benefits. >> senator santorum will be with us for 15 minutes. he's on location of where the campaign event will be today. and we're going to get in your calls, your tweets, your facebook comments. phone numbers are on the screen. take a telephone call from steve watching us in phoenix. steve, you're on. good morning. >> hi, rick, how are you doing? >> you know, my advice would be to be -- be very specific about your stance on things like the pipeline, jobs, things like that. if you want to become a nominee, i really think that that would be -- that would be my advice to bypass all of the -- all of the hoopla and get right specific

with what we're going to do about that pipeline, are we going to, you know, lay somebody on renewables or are we going to get back to basics and make this country great by doing what we do best? that's drilling, farming, mining. things like that. so what do you think? do you think -- >> well, i couldn't agree with you more -- i couldn't agree with you more, steve. that's what i talk about all the time. i'm absolutely for going in the pipeline. i've been a proponent of it. and as i mentioned many times, my grandfather is a coal miner. i worked with coal companies and believe strongly that coal is one of the keys to lower power costs and generation. and obama's administration war on fossil fuels, specifically coal, it's hurting our country. i'm for eliminating all energy subsidies to let the markets work, the green energy subsidies, we need to get rid of

them. the best example of what we can do to change the economy with respect to energy and cost of energy is what we're doing in pennsylvania doing 3,000 to 4,000 wells a year, gas wells. the price of natural gas in the last seven or eight years has gone from $12 to $2.70. that's $100 oil at $20 a barrel. why? we were drilling and we increased the supply. we can do maybe as much oil drilling to reduce the price that much. but we can reduce it a lot if we open up anwar and we allow production in this country. >> back to questions from facebook. senator santorum, do you think consulting back on imported products would increase employment and open more manufacturing companies in the united states? >> you know, look, if you're talking -- i don't know when she means cutting back, i think maybe she means tariffs? >> yeah. >> i don't support it. it's a cost on the american

public. it's a tax. it leads to retaliatory tariffs on our goods. we need to compete. we're not competitive with the major trading partners that we deal with. . we need to compete against china and a 35% corporate tax is crushing our ability to compete.

i eliminate the tax, i do a whole host of other things, which for sake of time, but you can go to our website ricksantorum.com, and see our action plan. we call it our plan. it will help blue collar workers and small town america to participate in this knowledge-based america by having products made in this country. >> and steve jobs' biography, number one on the list since it came out, he was asked about the factories in china and he told -- his response, senator, was one major problem was u.s. educational system not producing the kind of engineers he needed to support the manufacturing jobs, that was a larger problem than taxation. >> well, we have a problem with respect to our knowledge with -- in math and science and -- but look, there are lots of manufacturers, all due respect to steve jobs, a lot of

knowledge-based m manufacturing, i was just at the vmw plant and that is as high-tech as you can get, the bottom line, we have process engineers, plenty of them, we can train them and the more jobs, the more demand for the jobs. a lot of jobs are people coming from oversees to come here. that is okay, too. we can import that knowledge instead of exporting blue collar jobs. i suspect a lot of people working on on apple products in other places around the world would be very happy to have the opportunity to come here and do the same. >> did you support the initiative to bail out detroit, specifically gm? >> no, i didn't. i called for a structured bankruptcy from the beginning. i oppose the wall street bailout, which of course was the funding source for the auto bailout. i was the only one on the stage between myself and gingrich and romney who did on principle

oppose it. people were saying, there could be a financial meltdown. the bottom line is the greater meltdown for this country is having the government eject itself into the private sector, allow the capitalist system to work. that is what i believe in and the same thing with gm, and chrysler, they could have gone through a structured bankruptcy and the only difference between those two car companies coming out of bankruptcy versus the bailout that obama put in place, was that the unions wouldn't have a big ownership share of the company, the bond holder necessary line under the rule of law, should have gotten a fair share of the company and would have gotten so. other than that, you would have had the same company, maybe a better company because they would have been stripped of more legacy cost that frankly it makes it hard for them to be competitive. >> this morning headlines, "gm leads the world in auto sales," in the business section of the "washington post."

they are blasting toyota. let's go back to calls for you. salt lake city, utah is aaron, independent. go ahead, please. >> caller: hi, good morning, senator santorum, i'm dr. aaron -- as a young scientist, i'm concerned about the candidates with the exception of newt gingrich haven't clarified their positions regarding basic scientific and medical research in this country. supporting medical research is important, it creates jobs and will be crucial to controlling the cost of healthcare. nih is largest support for medical research in this country, but needs backing and it is harder than ever for scientists to obtain money for research. >> thank you, aaron. >> yeah, i would say this, that i have been a strong supporter. i believe it is one thing the federal government does a pretty good job at, basic science research. i also supported at the time,

this was 15 years ago, the doubling of the nih budget, national institute of health, to help with basic medical research, and improve our knowledge of the human genome project and others. basic things, not things that can be done in private markets and for profit, but basic understanding of science, which obviously benefits knowledge-based economy. having said that, i have to say that we are in a 1.2 trillion deficit. we are borrowing most of our money from china. to go out and say that we're going to increase funding at that level, we're not going to be increasing funding at any level that i can think of. i mean, we have to look at government in a constrained resource environment and the best thing we can do for medical research is get this economy growing. if we can get the economy growing, there will be pharmaceutical companies and medical device companies and others who are sponsoring more research at colleges and

universitys and in addition to government research. the economy growing has to be the number one priority right now and getting government under control is going to be a big part of that and while again i'm not saying we should cut basic or medical research, i'm not looking at that area or frankly any other area outside of our commitment to protect our country through national security to grow the size of government. >> senator santorum, with us for five more minutes. cloum bia, south carolina, democratic caller, tony, you are on. >> caller: good morning. senator rick. >> hi, tony. >> i love you picked up the general motors being the number one oil company in the world. senator santorum that contradicted your statement and your vote against bailing out the auto industry. what i really want to ask you, two quick questions, do you and your family still collect healthcare from the big government and the last thing i want to say, you will not be president of the united states, so that is a facade, it's not

going to happen. obama will be president again. >> okay. good. >> caller: be honest. well, we'll let the electors figure out who will be the next president of the united states, i don't think it has to do with honesty or honesty to your original point, gm and chrysler should have gone through a structured process, and that would have ended up with the company surviving with different owners and frankly would have been more competitive than the current structure because it wouldn't have to do things the obama administration was twisting their arm to do as result of the money that the government gave them. so i stand by that and i don't know -- i can't remember the second point was, if you recall, i'm happy to answer it. >> i'm going to move on to another facebook comment for your time is short. james henry asked: should creationism be taught in public school as theory of evolution?

>> i don't support teaching creatism as compliment, but i support academic freedom and one of the most important things i think, every child worries about, not worries about, but likes to learn about who they are and how did the world come to be and how did they come to be. of course, i believe that as most americans do, that we are creatures of god and god created the heavens and the earth. i think there is ample evident for that in creation and yet there is a theory out there, evolution, which is legitimate scientific theory, obviously and should be taught in schools. but we should have a discussion about the issue of evolution and what we can learn and what we in fact, don't know and can't know in many respects about that. and also the idea of whether we are in fact just a, you know,

mistake of natural law that just over time we just happened to come into place, you know, completely disordered process, random process that created all of this that we see and you know, that's from a philosophical point of view, very interesting thing to argue about what science can and can't prove. it's very interesting for children to be able to sort through that and have that discussion as to whether we are just random chance application of natural law and time created this entire universe. or whether there was someone directing it and having that discussion is a very, very important discussion, not from a religious point of view, but from standpoint of -- >> our last call from bloomington, illinois from a republican. >> hi, rick. i want to wish good luck.

>> you are producing a part for anything you make is zero percent corporate tax, zero. if you are processing things, for example, if you are processing food products and taking soy beans and turning into soy oil, you are a processor and therefore if you are manufacturing a process component parts, final assembly, whatever it is, anybody that makes anything in america is going to have a zero percent corporate rate.

>> senator santorum is with us in the t.v. arena and senator, just a question from me on topics other than policy. what is your bottom line on results on saturday in order to continue to florida? >> we're going to go forward. this is -- this race has transformed itself in the last 24 hours and i'm not too sure how that will shake out. i've already won one of the tw primaries, i feel very good about the momentum we have across the country. polls are showing we are running second in florida. i feel good and think we can be competitive. this is a long process, we've been slaving away, if you will and the vineyards out in iowa and south carolina doing 7 or 800 town hall meetings and we've had resources to be able to

compete in the race. people, now that the race has narrowed, are starting to rally around us and we are starting to get funds necessary to comb peat in the long-term. we are starting to staff up around the country. we feel this is a race we can and will be successful in and we're going to go on, not just after south carolina, but beyond. >> how significant is the story about speaker gingrich's failed marriage to the kind of voters you are trying to appeal to? >> well, you know, look, i think we all said last night, these personal issues are very difficult and, you know, my feeling is your activities when you are in public life, are subject for scrutiny and people can look at them and make determinations as to whether these are issues of character, as to whether this is the kind of person you want to put into the office of the president, specifically when you do those things in public life, while you are in public life, that i think

has an additional level of relevance. as far as the specifics, i'm not going to get into specifics, but i think people will look at that as they will with everything else, assess that, assess when it was done, how long ago it was done, what the circumstances are and make the determination and i'll trust the american public they'll make the right decision. >> senator, our facebook page, twitter page and phone lines are lighted up with you here to take calls. i hope we'll see you again on the campaign trail. thanks for your time this morning. >> thank you, appreciate it. >> appreciate your time. we'll continue our discussion about south carolina politics, let me introduce you to our next guest of the morning, i mentioned earlier we would be joined by mark tompkins, who is at university of south carolina as a political science professor there. joining us from columbia today. rick santorum just suggested that the race was shaken up in the last 24 hours. let me ask you, through the lens of today's south carolina

voters, give us a snapshot of how important social conservativism is in that state today and how the news from the gingrich campaign might play into that community. >> sure. it seems to me it's pretty important. it's important for your viewers to recognize south carolina is relatively diverse state. we have significant part of the party in the upstate of evangelical conservatives and santorum's careful answers suggested some of the folks will be distressed to learn things that some of us have known for a long time. former speaker gingrich's personal life has been messy, i guess is the word. that may distress some of the folks he's been trying to appeal to. the other side of the coin is former governor romney seems to be holding on to his support we

think the base of that is toward the coast where republicans dominate primary elections. so the storyline on the one hand the folks who aren't enthusiastic about former governor romney, what they're going to do and on the other hand, is governor romney going to hold on to his support and keep that 30 or 35% vote he's been getting in the polls for a while. >> for south carolina political scientist tompkins, we'll take your phone calls, continue our discussion about presidential politics and tweet us and e-mail our questions. we had a caller earlier who is transplant and there have been a number of them over the past decade, south carolina's population, according to statistics, increased 15% in the decade since the 2000 census. this transplant over 65 says she doesn't really understand south carolina's voting rules about who can participate in the primary and who can't. give us an explanation, please. >> quick answer is they need to

be registered, they should have done that already, and then show up at the polls tomorrow morning and declare yourself ready to vote in the republican primary. pretty simple process. >> you can't register same day? >> i don't know the answer to that. i don't believe you can in the primary. they have to have a checkup. >> do you know how typical crossovers have been and if they affect the outcome in past primaries? >> they have affected the outcome in some primaries. republicans have been concerned because they're essentially open primaries and so there have been times when democrats and independents crossed over to either express their support for modern candidates or to conduct some mischief in the primary and see if they can't upset the republican process. don't think that's likely in this race, the people who are going to vote tomorrow are probably mostly committed republicans. >> let's take a call for mark

tompkins from john, a democrat washing in missouri. you are on the air. >> yes, i was hoping to get ahold of rick, but he was only there for 15 minutes. but i was wanting to ask him and why all the other republican candidates this right to work or they don't want the employees to bargain for a living wage, but they want to give corporations zero percent tax, they want to get rid of the regulations, but when it comes to employees, they don't give a crap, i want to see if he can very that and see what the gentleman has to say about why republicans hate unions. >> let me turn that question a little on its head, south carolina is right to work state. can you give us the history of the debate over that in your state? >> well, the histories that we've been a right to work state for a long time. we've been suspicious of unions, that certainly dates back to the textile industry and to important business leaders in

the state. we are concerned about the influence of unions. we've been there for a long time and our expression of our opposition to unions continues into the present and republican candidates are opposed to big unions, of course. so it hasn't been much of an issue in the primary here. >> and moving on to another -- yesterday's events, rick perry's decision to drop out of the race. who are his constituents in south carolina and will they follow his endorsement? are they likely to? >> well, he was polling poorly in the state, that was a surprise to most of us. so the very few voters who had strongly affiliated with him, who knows where they'll go. his endorsement of former speaker gingrich was interesting because that validates gingrich's claim to be a conservative to some degree, so

maybe it shored up some support for the former speaker, who might otherwise have gone to it former senator santorum in light of the later events yesterday, it's not clear it has much impact at all. that story is being drown out by the stories over governor romney's tax situation and his income and on the other hand, speaker gingrich's personal life. >> over this next call, we'll show you some statistics about south carolina and voters and our caller is anthony, independent from florida. go ahead, please. >> caller: hello, i'd like to know what mechanism is in place in states like south carolina that would prevent, let's say in this election, where the democrats are allowed to vote, what is to prevent them from flooding the polls and picking the weakest republican candidate, backing them and allowing that decision to run against the president in the final?

>> there is nothing in principle that prevents democrats from doing that, but in practice, going to vote just to do a little mischief is not something most are inclined to do. and the best evidence we have, it doesn't happen very much here. and certainly tomorrow, certainly tomorrow it's hard to imagine what a democrat would do if they were inclined to do that. who would they vote for? would they come to vote for the not steven colbert candidacy? perhaps, but that is a bit of a stretch. >> the not steven colbert candidacy is being endorsed by steven cane. he is still on the ballot in south carolina, is that correct? >> that's correct. yes. >> next call from travelers rest, mark is there. good morning.

>> mark, have you made up your decision for saturday yet? >> caller: yes, i firmly support ron paul. >> okay. >> caller: do you have a question for us? >> yes, i do. i would like to know what the -- what you think the public's opinion is on on ron paul's stance on reform of marijuana law and the elimination of the war on drugs. i have a big concern of young men doing 20-year sentences, especially in south carolina, for first time offensives of possession of crack cocaine and drugs when their life could be turned around. what do you think the public's opinion of his stance on this is? >> he has been popular among young voters, we saw that in new hampshire. the public is ambivalent about our current treatment of drug offensives and the caller raises important point, we have lots of

folks sent to prison, cost of the prison terms very high, both for the government and the cost of inprisoning people. many of us think that there are probably better ways to do that. nonetheless, that's an issue that only motivates relatively small number of voters. precisely because many people are ambivalent about the issue. >> question about the importance of the military vote in south carolina these days. >> well, it does seem like it is an important consideration. of course many military voters are independents or democrats, but there's certainly an important military presence in the state. we have several big bases here. lots of retired military in the state and some of the candidates have taken positions, for example, on our situation in iraq and afghanistan that would not be pleasing to military

voters, congressman ball comes to mind. and we would expect them to be looking for somebody who took a stronger stance on our role in national defense and what we would do going forward in iraq and afghanistan. but it's not clear who they go for in that, the sdifrpgzs among former speaker gingrich and santorum and romney are not very clear. my hunch is it doesn't make a lot of difference in the results tomorrow. >> for mark tompkins, next, louisville, kentucky. danny is a democrat there, you are on. >> good morning. i have a question for you, actually a question about south carolina voters. it requires a little setup. on this keystone pipeline, it cuts right across the thing called obulaaquiifiyer, the largest aquifer in the world. one third of the things grown in the country are irrigated from

that. provides 80% of water for texas, nevada. now this pipeline cuts right across it, it's funny because transchannel has a pipeline, 30-inch pipeline that goes around it, but cuts east across canada and they can't put this in because canada won't let them. no, you had too many spills on this line. so a lot of people against it are the farmers because, if you have a spill and it contaminates the aquifer, there is no way to clean it. in south carolina, if the question was to build 36 inch pipeline 100 yards from the beach in south carolina, would the voters either tar or feather them, stone them or just hang them? i'll hangup and listen for your answer. [laughter] >> i think i don't want to answer the actual question, i'm not sure what they would do.

i think the caller raises interesting points. the pipeline issue is obviously important symbolically. we heard former senator santorum give the republican response, which is we need more energy, this looks cheap, it would bring jobs and so let's do it. the caller articulates the other side of the coin, it is pretty complicated problem. it does pose risk to important resources and so the obama administration stands on studying and being careful and making sure we do this in the right way. also plausible to many peep and he will people are torn between the two symbols as much as they are well informed about the specifics. i think the caller is right, though, that most folks would not like a pipeline in their backyard. the problem is we have to put it in somebody's backyard. >> next call is from alexandria in minnesota. hi, dave. >> regarding the amount of money

that spent on tax and i don't know if this is up to date, but romney had already spent $56 million here maybe a week ago or something and probably a lot more by now. and the rest of them, the super tax and romney acting completely irresponsible saying he has no power over the super tax or whatever. if he gets elected, is he going to have no power over the government, you know and anybody telling him anything? also, i believe we got the best government money can buy and it's been bought. and another thing that i'd like to say, the other guy got in a thing on the keystone pipeline, i think we as americans are oil aholics and should start oil-aholics anonymous to cut

down on the amount we use. you people are running around wasting it and we are more, more, more oil, dig more and i don't think that is the answer. so ron paul has a good idea to bring the military home, have strong military here and also to build a lot of stuff with money we are wasting overseas policing the world. that is all i have to say. and also, one more thing, romney put his money in the cayman islands, there are plenty of islands here, he doesn't have to put it in the islands. something fishy there. >> thank you very much. >> well, four different things going there. let's start with the big one, i'm sure my friends in the television and media business would have been happy if 55 million had been spent in the state. but the figure i believe is some fraction of that and you may have a better number than i do, susan, but my understanding, more like 5 or 10.

nonetheless, the airwaves have been pretty crowded these days with unpleasant advertising. function of the citizen united decision is we've set up super packs and as long as we don't directly coordinate, jon stewart is free to lead the nonstephen colbert to run ad on on his behalf and mitt romney super pack is free so long as they don't talk directly to mitt romney to do what they are going to do. that is function of the finance campaign law at the moment, which is pretty badly structured right now, we think. we think it could be better. >> let me jump in with a number just on that. "washington post" is reporting presidential campaign ad spending surges past $12 million in the south carolina primary. >> that sounds quite close to me. yes. that's a lot of money in our

market afterall. we've been watching lots of ads and most of them are not uplifting. so there is a sense in which the process could be improved dramatically if we could figure out how to deal with the super pack issue and the other issues citizen united put into the process. >> our time is short here, let me take a call from knoxville, tennessee. >> hi, thanks for having me. basically what i was calling about, i am your typical southern republican voter. i fall into that evangelical social republican category there and i am really starting to wonder what the layout is like in south carolina as far as that goes. and of course the media tells us that all evangelicals and christians are either blocking to santorum or gingrich, but i don't necessarily see that in my

area of east tennessee and big ran it is mainly over the war issue. as a christian, i worship the prince of peace and christ led through example. he lead nonviolent resistance teachings basically to show people he could lead by example, we didn't have to inflict force on others. and then at the fox news debate on monday night, to see the south carolina audience who is supposedly evangelical christians booing the golden rule when it was applied to foreign policy and cheering when newt gingrich got up in such a savage manner and said, kill them all, seeing andrew jackson was a big killer and he was. anybody who knows about american history knows andrew jackson was a traitor to the cherokee indians. so there is a big rift here in

my area of east tennessee and in particular the south between evangelicals who are willing to put their government and the wars the government fight above their christianity, above their religion. then there is -- >> chris, let me jump in, i think we understand the jest and our time is running out. mark tompkins. >> there is a series of complicated issues there. the concern over faith and family it motivates many evangelical christians stands in some is measure apart from our concerns about foreign policy and our role in the world. evangelicals are a diverse group of people and different folks among that community have different views on our activities in afghanistan and iraq. i think your caller illustrates the diversity. >> as we close, question about anticipated turnout. the numbers we have 2573.

there has been 15% increase in population in the state since 2000. what are officials anticipating on saturday for turnout? >> my inclination, i haven't talk to folks directly, but my expectation is that turnout will be a little down from 2008 because there is a little less clarity to this race and each of the candidates is in some way flawed for their own constituents. so the lack of enthusiasm may diminish turnout just a bit. on the other hand, several choices and that may motivate folks. >> mark tompkins, thank you for giving us a snapshot of south carolina voters as primary date nears. saturday primary in that state, which is turning out to be important for the contenders as this shortened pack of contenders who are facing voters tomorrow. thank you for your time. >> thanks for your interest. >> our next segment, we'll continue talking about politics.

our guest, will be joining us from boston, co-author of this new biography of mitt romney called "the real romney," been getting lots of press. we'll talk about the reporting what has been revealed to them. we'll be right back.

>> the obama administration just came down with policy that said that in her program she cannot teach abstinence as a preferable way of avoiding out of wedlock birth. and she can't talk about marriage, she can't talk about marriage as any other than alternative lifestyle no better or worse than any other lifestyle. my question is, why? >> when the president adopts a

stimulus package of hundreds of billions of dollars that nobody has read and then discovers to his great surprise two years later as he himself put it, the shovel-ready jobs weren't shovel ready and the stimulus fails will leave us deeper in debt and some point he has to take responsibility, that was his plan, his proposal and it failed. >> and as candidates meet with voters to get their message out -- >> good luck. >> i know. absolutely. >> thank you. >> you have solutions for all this. >> thank you. >> after the polls closed saturday evening, we'll show you results from south carolina, along with candidate speeches and your phone calls. >> "washington journal" continues. >> and let me introduce you to michael kranish joining us from boston, co-author along with skol hellman of new biography of

mitt romney called "the real romney," and along with a team of reporters from boston globe, has years of reporting into the profile of the presidential contender. michael kranish, let me ask you, of the -- the big question about mitt romney, what is it that animates or informs his desire for public office? >> well, susan, that's a great question. in the book, we try to explain a bit about the family history and about his relationship with his father, george romney, who of course was governor of michigan, tried to run for president and dropped out before the first primary in new hampshire when he had problems. it's really very easy to see straight line there, mitt is trying to fulfill where his father failed, not just to succeed, but because he shares some of the same ambitions. he has a calling for public service as he sees it. he's been thinking about this from an early age, as a teenager, he was following his father around when his father was running for governor, he was

in the state house as a young teenager. late at night, there is anecdote described in the book, past midnight, he's advising his father what to do with legislators. it is something he's been thinking about for a very long time. with a core conviction, believing that business has a lot of answers. he certainly, one thing he says everyday on the campaign trail is that government doesn't create jobs, business does and that in turn creates questions about his own record that i'm sure we can talk about. >> to that life-long desire to be in politics, in new hampshire, mitt romney on one of the campaign events talked about that and gave it a little cast, let's listen to how he described his interest in politics. >> this chance to run for president of the united states, i never imagined i'd do it. i mean, you know, this is just a very strange and unusual thing to be in the middle of. one of the -- i mean, i was just a high school kid like everybody

else with skinny legs. you know, i imagine i'd be in business all my career. >> how does that square with what you just told us in your reporting? >> it doesn't square entirely to be completely frank. the idea he was just another high school kid was not the way other people might see it it. he went to one of the most elite prep school necessary bloomfield hills when his father was governor of michigan. it's not the typical upbringing of most people. he lived in a rarified climate, i'm not saying that in a negative way, it wasn't typical for a lot of people. maybe that is the way he sees it. when you are looking at it, hopefully a fair biography, that is not typical and shaped the kind of person he was. so, i'm sure it is difficult for everyone to imagine running for president, but more than most people, probably something he thought about given that his father had run for president. he was extremely interested in

what his father did and many friends told us and are quoted in the biography about how from an early time, mitt romney was thinking about public office. we go back really several decades, three or four decades, he was telling colleagues, i'm not sure if i want to do that deal, i might run for public office one day and that might not look good. it is something his colleagues thought he was interested in for a very long time. >> for our viewers who like to engage you with questions or comments about mitt romney through the lens of his biographer, michael kranish, joining us from boston, send us tweets or e-mail. we'll put the methods on the screen. we'd like to get to your calls and comments quickly to have a chance to ask more about what the reporting suggests. you talk in the book about how one of his challenges is that his -- the camera lens is translates his personality different from the way people around him see him. so would you talk a little bit about what the public sees that

people in his circle see differently. >> right. well, his friends and his family are surprised at the way he's characterized publicly. the man they see is funny, warm, relaxed, jokes easily, tells stories, very fun to be around. the public persona has been portrayed oftentimes as sort of cold, robotic, detached. why is that? we try to explore that step by step in the biography and one reason appears to be that mitt romney has grownup in this series of bubbles. he grew up in this rarified world of bloomfield hills and the prep school and so forth. he went off to mormon mission in france. he was at brigham young university, the world of private equity he was in was a pretty closed circle type of world. it's not like he ran for the city council and he was mayor and he's a glad hander, he's anything but in the way he's

lived most of his life. as a result of that, it has been difficult for him to connect and it is one of the great challenges that he has in running for president, translating the way his friends see him to the way he comes across in public. obviously he's a man of great wealth. his background is in business in which he earned tens of millions of dollars at times. you just try to relate to the average person and when he does so, it comes off awkwardly. even his closest friends would acknowledge he didn't have a typical life growing up, it is not something he's used to doing and that is a challenge for him. >> so much in the news this week regarding the romney campaign has to do with money. 15% estimated income tax rate. the reporting of offshore accounts in the cayman island, keeping some portion of his wealth. want to ask you because in the -- in your book, you talk about the mitt romney who hit the campaign trail in 2002 was very different from the political neoph yte, and can how

campaign staff anticipated questions like the corporate reader question and tried to inoculate the candidate. when one watches this week, how is it that this team of advisors who have been with him four years let the issues get ahead of the candidate? >> well, that's a really great question, susan tochlt take it back to 1994, when mitt romney ran for the u.s. senate against ted kennedy, he seemed unprepared for the most obvious attack, the same attack we're hearing today, in his business of leverage buyouts that question whether jobs were created or jobs were lost. there were ads similar to what you see now run against him then, pretty devastating and were a major reason he lost that race. particularly on the tax issue you mention about the tax rate, zero surprise to anyone who covered mitt romney his tax rate is essentially the capital gains tax rate on most income.

most of his income comes from capital gains or carried interest, not from typical salary. when he said recently he hases paid 15% tax rate, that is not surprising to anyone who looked at his financial disclosure or watched him over the number of years because that is the way he earned his money. what strikes people, when he said it himself, it comes across in a certain way he's essentially acknowledging to the general public that's the case and that's a lower rate than many people pay. very interestingly back in 1994, he was quoted in boston globe as challenging ted kennedy to release his tax returns and he questioned whether kennedy had something to hide and went on to say if kennedy would release his tax return on the same day mitt romney would release his. susan, it never happened, neither released tax returns n. 2002, this was brought up when mitt romney ran for governor. he was asked, you mentioned in '94, you would be willing to do so, would you do so now?

his aid said he would not do so due to "privacy" concerns. it's been something going on for years. there is a saying in politicss that you should get the story out and get ahead of it and get it out right away so that anything that might be a problem or embarrassing is long since past when crucial days come up. this is something he's been avoiding doing for many years, the boston globe for example, i can tell you for 18 years since he first ran for office has been asking him to release his tax returns and the reason it's important to look at tax returns, not just from the last tax year or even a few years, he has not been clear what tax returns he would release. you would want to see the tax returns from 1984 to at least 1999 when he was running capital and beyond because those tax returns would tell you exactly how he personally profited from certain deals and give you a much better idea about whether he profited to a certain extent, for companies that lost jobs or factories closed f. he releases

tax return for recent years, that will not tell you the key information and we don't know whether he'll do that and if he doesn't, and he is nominee, certainly the obama administration would say, what have you got to hide just like you asked ted kennedy what do you have to hide 18 years ago. >> here is a tweet about money and mitt romney from mike murphy. we assume this is not the political consultant who you talk about in your book. the question is how truthful was the statement he didn't inherit money? >> the question of whether he inherited money or not, as i understand it, there was a loan, i think, some help with his first house a long time ago in massachusetts from his father. and i saw this morning in the "new york times" i think it was, there was a comment, i think on c-span in fact, mitt romney said he did get inheritance of some sort from his father and turned that over to brigham young

university where he had gone to school. so that's what i know about that. more broadly, clearly, mitt romney benefited from a lot of his father's wealth basically as a child, growing up, going to prep school, having every advantage you could possibly have, in that way, certainly he benefited significantly. mitt romney as far as we know has never lacked for financial resources. >> george, a republican, you are on. >> hi. that was my question, was inheritance he mentioned last night. i think you covered it. thank you. >> thanks, george, sorry to preechlt you. since george was interested in that, david brooks with headlines "the wealth issue," was written around your book. here is the way he opens the book. he writes, mitt romney is a rich man, is mitt romney's character formed by his wealth? is romney a spoiled character? has he been corrupted by ease and luxury? his column answers that.

i will ask you from your reporting to answer that question. >> right. susan, i read that column before going on the air and liked it not just because he mentioned our book, but because he really understood the point we were trying to make. there is a chapter in the book, i think is interesting because i got to do some research on the romney family history. and this goes back four generations, you might ask, why is this biography of mitt romney going back that far in history? it's a really intriguing compelling tale about the history of mormonism is the history of the romney family and part of mexico. it is basically to summarize briefly, mitt's great, great grandfather came from liverpool, england and settled in illinois, the heart of mormonism in this country and the mormons were kicked out, this ancestor stayed behind to finish the temple, had to flee and the family went to

the state of utah and eventually this person's son, mitt's great grandfather was told by brigham young to marry and then to take multiple wives and this person believes strongly in polygamy when polygamy was outlawed in the united states, the church told mitt's great gathfather to go to mexico and continue polygamy there. they did that and that in fact is where mitt's father, george, was born. his father was not a polygamist, but that is where george was born. at the age of five, there was a revolution in mexico, the family had to flee back to the united states and that's what happened, george then built extraordinary life for himself, became the head of american motors, became governor and ran for president, as we've discussed. the point of that and the point i think david brooks takes in the column, this family has gone through this extraordinary journey. there has been struggle and flight and rebuilding and

perseverance and determination. mitt hasn't had to have the struggles, clearly because he's had a lot of advantages from birth. but it's ground in him that that is where he comes from. what's really interesting is that this extraordinary family story is not something mitt romney talks about. he doesn't feel comfortable talking about it, in part because a, the background of mormonism is not something some people want to hear about and b, crucial element of the story is polygamy. history factors made him not so anxious to talk about it, but it is deeply engrained part of the romney story. i had a chance to go down to mexico for research and meet with many romneys who live there, many cousins who returned there after the mexican revolution, unlike mitt's direct family. a lot of cousins still live there. one took me around and expressed great pride in the family story that this romney family helped build part of the united states

and part of mexico and played an important role in history and obviously great pride in mitt romney. it's not something he himself can talk about, it's a great part of where he came from. >> a viewer wants to follow-up with you writing on twitter. he says, the question that brooks' column raises for me is was the romney family history or his privileged upbringing more influential in shaping him? >> right. exactly what we're talking about. i think there is no question that his family history privately, sort of in a private place for mitt romney is the way we describe it. it is important to him there is a scene in the book, we describe inside the hallways of his house in massachusetts, where he has five portraits on the wall, those portraits do include the person i mentioned about who came over from england and then the great grandfather who went to mexico and so forth there is no question to us that this is a point that is important to him privately. he just doesn't feel comfortable talking about it publicly.

and certainly his privileged upbringing, it's part of who he is, it just is. just because you are extremely wealthy doesn't mean you can't make a connection to people. many politicians have successfully done that, for example, in new york city, the mayor of new york is a very healthy republican and democratic city and somehow managed to overcome that. it seems to be more difficult for romney to do that and what he does say things sometimes they come across awkwardly, for example, a few days ago he was talking about his overall wealth and he mentioned that most of it comes from capital gains and then he talked about the part that is regular income, the same type people would get if they are getting a salary in the same tax rate and he said it was not very much, referring to $374,000, which is more than most make in a whole year. when you make a comment like that, you can imagine the obama campaign team rewinding the tape and cutting it right for a

commercial. >> next is manhattan, jack is a democrat there, you are on. >> yes. good morning. i'm calling concerning what i would call a jealousy issue. not just mr. romney's financial wealth, but his overall life, his family, the religion is immaterial to me. you know, you take a look, he's been successful financially. his personal life is successful you know, it seems to me most people in life when they go through, they get failures here and there, but maybe this man has a midus touch. you look at his personal touch, five strapping sons, grandchildren, he's healthy as a horse and his young sons seem as healthy as horses, so i think some of it could be just plain jealousy and on the financial wealth issue, a lot of my

democratic brethren who support barack obama happen to be jewish and they're also liberal and ones that i don't know are much wealthier than barack obama. look at the hedge fund managers, the top ones, they are the guys and as far as just financial wealth, they leave mitt romney in the dust. >> thanks. >> well, mitt romney has essentially taken the argument recently that there is a jealousy issue there. he used that word, as i recall it. the way i would respond to that is the issue that's come up in the campaign directly from his opponents hases not been a jealousy issue if you look at what his opponents have said. their complaint is whether he was using his business background to profit personally even while jobs were cut. so at this point, what you can do is look at what the opponents

have said and it is a whole chapter, a long chapter in the book, where we try to explore what actually happened with mitt romney running capital for 15 years. certainly tell you and want to express it's a more complicated story than the 30-second sound bites you see typically in a campaign. understandably, mitt romney cast it in the most glowing term its, his opponents in the most negative terms, but it is a 15-year interesting and complicated story and that's worth looking at. i think during a campaign, that's what opponents will focus on. whether individual voters see it differently, that's another matter. but looking at individual deals and how he personally did become wealthy from certain deals, that seems like grounds to examine that i think everyone would want to look at. >> you title the chapter about his governorship of massachusetts the c.e.o. governor for emma, who is racquetball first on twitter and asks, will romney run government

as he ran and privatize government assets. >> the c.e.o. governor, his background was as business executive, he ran this company for 15 years and when he came in, he was viewed as trying to run the state sort of emulating the vein way and the methodology and brought in partners to help him. certainly a driving characteristic of mitt romney is that he is a data drich person. there is a phrase about him he likes to quote "while in the data," he likes to look at spreadsheet, use powerpoint presentations. this may be one reason people don't connect to him. it is not the typical way a politician tries to relate to people. that is who he is. his own spokespeople will say he's data driven person and wants to gather facts, gather people around him and his management style was to gather

partners and have him discuss for him and argue about what they thought should be done on a particular deal? oftentimes romney would not interject own views, he would listen and later on go talk to individual partners, can we work this and work that? that worked well for investors during that time. when he ran for governor in 2008, he tried the same methodology and it did not work well. he had several layers of advisors and wasn't able to choose between which advisor had ultimate say and delegate as much as he might have wanted to according to those who work with him at the time. this campaign has been a little different. he delegated more, single layer of advisors he's given more responsibility to, but how that will translate into running the white house. you know, when you are running for the white house, you are running to be commander in chief, you are running to be many different things, not just analyst and a data-driven person. you have to bring many, many

skills. you can look perhaps more at goff his governorship to draw clues, certainly he would like to, i don't know if he would privatize certain things. he talked a lot about scaling back government dramatically and his core belief being business creates jobs, not government. stripping away regulations and things like that, other people will disagree with how far things should go on that. but that is certainly going to be a core part of his campaign. >> back in an earlier campaign with his team of boston globe reporters did a profile book of john f. krary, your team keeps lucking out with massachusetts politicians making it to the presidential contender stage. what was different in writing the two books for you? >> it is interesting, i did write a similar biography back in 2004, about john kerry. i would say the main difference

in writing that book, i've been in washington for quite sometime and i uncovered myself kerry since he was a senator. in this case, we worked together, my co-author, scott, had covered mitt romney and the state house here in massachusetts and i wrote an awful lot about family history and about the company and the 2008 campaign. looking at it through a different lens, what was really important in both cases, we were able to rely on great resources that we had collected at the globe in covering him for the last two decades. one thing, for example, is that we have the equivalent of an oral history of romney and his family at the globe. what i mean by that, reporters have done interviews with romney and his family and friends over the years, saved transcripts, a lot of material had never been published. so we set out to do this book, i and my colleagues were able to go back and look at the transcripts, sort of like writing about historical figure and going to the archives, which i've done for a different book.

it is similar type of thing, you can go back and read many pages of transcripts and see things that may not have seen interesting or relevant at the time that absolutely jump out at you and say, here is the key, here is the clue to something that explains things that i didn't understand. we have the time and the space to go much deeper than we could in a newspaper story or series of stories, which we did four years ago when romney first ran for president. so all that was extremely valuable, but the core thing of being able to rely on the globe's background and experience of reporters in covering, that was pretty similar and certainly was helpful to have written the kerry book and a book on thomas jefferson before setting down to write this book with my colleagues. >> next from virginia, michelle. good morning. >> good morning. thanks so much. a quick comment and a question. my comment is that i would much prefer 15% of his larger earnings and great companies like staples that create