questions, you have made a decision not to testify on the xl park plan next week. can you explain why? -- you have made a decision not to testify on the xl pipeline next week. can you explain why? >> 1st, we wish you well as you head off to moscow. that will be an exciting assignment from all indications. with respect to iran, we have a strong partnership with the e.u. and expect to see them taking additional steps to keep the pressure on iran in the comingiran in the coming days. i believe we're making it clear to iran that its pursuit of nuclear weapons and its need less provocation, such as death threats regarding the straits of hormuz, placed it on a dangerous

path. air around may have a choice to make. they may come back to the table, as we have made clear to them, and address the nuclear program concerns that the new it is -- that the international committee rightly has, or face increasing pressure and isolation. we do not seek conflict. we believe the people of iran deserved a better future. they can have that feature. the country can be reintegrated into the global community, able to share in the benefits when their government definitively turns away from pursuing nuclear weapons. last october on behalf of the member nations, the representative sent the iranians a letter saying they are open to negotiations if iran is serious about addressing the

nuclear program, without preconditions. we stand by that letter. the eu did make it public earlier today and we await iran 's response. i think it has been very important that the eu has kept an open channel, and we are seeking clarity about the meaning behind iran's public statements that they are willing to engage, but we have to see a seriousness and sincerity of purpose coming from them. with respect to what we expect of them come i think we have made the letter public. they know we want to see them coming to the table to seriously engage about the future of a program that is prohibited under their obligations pursuant to the and in light of security

council resolutions. we await their response. with respect to the keystone xl pipeline, on wednesday the department of state recommended and the president agreed that the president to permit for the pipeline should be denied. that decision was based on the fact that the state department did not have sufficient time to assess whether the project was in the national interest as a result of the limited time frame set forth by congress. as the president said yesterday, this announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of the deadline that prevented the state department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project or to make other decisions with respect it and protect the american people.

the department's done harrell of the permit application does not preclude any application or applications for similar projects. we are following our normal procedures and actually sending the official -- the official that knows something about this and has been leading our efforts, the assistant secretary for oceans and international environmental and scientific wiaffairs. [unintelligible] we will not know until we see if they're serious about engaging s. they have to give up their nuclear weapons program, they have to be willing to come to the table. [unintelligible] confidence-building measures -- i will not go into any details.

i appreciate your efforts to get me to do so, but what is important is that confidence will start with their conveying a seriousness of purpose to engage with us and our partners in the e3 +3 process, and then the additional steps will await the actual resumption of negotiations. >> i agree to this answer to 100%, but i want to say for the german government, and the representatives of the european union, this letter, on the one hand is necessary to show the iranian government that we are united and that we do not -- in the hands of the iranian

government. on the other hand, it is also necessary to show that we are ready for dialogue, but we are ready for serious dialogue, and -- what our strategy is. [unintelligible] >> thank you. what exactly does the american government to expect from the german government in solving the european debt crisis? printing more money is not the answer. allow me out of fairness a second question. [laughter]

to follow up on afghanistan. [unintelligible] >> with respect to the second question, i am in great sympathy with what happened to the french soldiers. it was terrible. and i can certainly appreciate the strong feelings that are being expressed. we are in close contact with our french colleagues, we have no reason to believe that france will do anything other than continue to be part of the very carefully considered transition process as we look at our exit as previously agreed upon in lisbon. with respect to the eurozone debt crisis, it is not want to

surprise you to hear me say that the united states cares deeply about what happens with this crisis. we have a great stake in the health and vitality of the european economic market, european growth. it is essential for our growth, it is essential for global growth, and we know from our own experience that moving from crisis to recovery depends on rebuilding confidence and getting the economy to start moving again, producing jobs, producing growth. germany has been at the forefront of shaping the strategies to move europe forward, and as the minister said, there is a lot of hard work ahead. where not going to stand over here on the other side of the atlantic and second-best the questions they you have to answer in europe, but we think that our european partners, led by germany, have looked made a

solid foundation on which to build a recovery. i know president obama and chancellor = merkel speak often about this. the minister met with secretary geithner erick earlier today, so we are encouraging german decision making, german confidence-building, german leadership because it is in the interest of the european people and the united states as well. >> it is crucial and important that you understand our point of view. we think a debt crisis cannot be answered by making it easier to take up new debts. we think it is necessary that we have structural reforms. for us, it is always a combination of solidarity, and germany as shown a lot of solidarity. we have put a lot on the table,

200 billion euros. compared to the size of the economy of the nightsticks, this would be $1 trillion. we have to compare the sizes of our economies and the sizes of our countries. this underlines it and makes it clear that germany knows they have responsibility, and all these programs are supported by a majority of the german parliament. i think this is a clear signal. on the other hand, please understand us, if we just put money into the window, if we put money on the table, we would not ask for structural reforms and that would not solve the crisis. structural reforms that increases the competitiveness in the country's in the european union are essential.

we did not ask for anything more as germans, and this is the reason, together with the programs of the last two years, why germany is so successful in the european union, said it is a combination of both. we think it is a debt crisis that has morphed into a confidence crisis. we have to answer that with solidarity and with structural reforms. about afghanistan, i just want to express one thing. of course we all feel sympathy with the families, with the victims, and we understand these discussions very well. you do, we do, but we should

never forget why we are in afghanistan. afghanistan may never become a safe haven for terrorists again. this is the reason why we are there. sympathy and want to express our deepest condolences, but we think we have to continue because to protect our own freedom and way of life in the western committee. thank you very much. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> later this afternoon, mitt romney allstate rally in charleston, south carolina.

the primary is tomorrow, and today bob mcdonnell is expected to endorse the former governor of massachusetts. mr. romney life today at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. c-span plans were to the white house coverage shows you the events leading up to saturday's south carolina primary. >> the administration came down that said sheicy could not teach abstinence as a preferable way of up courting out of wedlock births. and she cannot talk about marriage. she cannot talk about marriage as any other than an alternative lifestyle that is no better or worse than any other lifestyle. i question is, why? >> when the president adopts a

stimulus package of hundreds of billions of dollars that nobody has read and the discovers to his great surprise to years leaders, as he himself put it, that the shovel-ready jobs where not shovel ready, and the stimulus puts us $800 billion deeper in debt, at some put he needs to take a responsibility. that was his plan, proposal, and it failed. >> as candidates meet with voters to get their message out -- >> thank you. >> and after the polls close, will show you results from south carolina along with speeches and your phone calls. >> if you have a saudi prince who is part of the royal family that has bought one of the largest news franchises in the world, you have to look at what are his motives.

>> diana west talks about the spread of islam in the western world. more with syndicated columnist diana west sunday night at 8:00 p.m. >> the german foreign minister was at the brookings institute this morning. he expects any consensus on how to deal with the debt to emerge by the end of the month. this is an hour and a half. >> ladies and gentlemen, we will get started right away. i apologize for the slight delay in our program this morning. foreign minister guido

assures mee l everything is resolved as he tells us in his presentation this morning so the markets can rest easy now. i am fiona hill. i would like to welcome everyone here and the foreign minister on behalf of the institution. also ahead of the foreign policy program is not here. but you are here. we also have an overflow room, and we'd like to say hello to all the audience at c-span who is following us at the media outlets. this is an important speech that we are here present for, and i would like to thank foreign minister westerwelle to leavbe h

us today. i'm going to have it over to the foreign minister for his presentation, and he has offered to take a number of questions from the audience. we will try to accommodate as many as we can. thank you for joining us. [applause] >> thank you. ladies and gentleman, i am delighted to be a guest of the brookings institution today, and i am especially pleased to see so many friends of europe in the audience here. i want to apologize that i am a bit late. i am sorry for the delay, but i just had a meeting with timothy geithner error and was -- with timothy geithner a, which was very instructive. the famous line in mark twain's

memories about wagner is true about europe -- the music is better than it sounds. i say this as a great fan of both of richard l. wagner and of the european integration. there are many questions and concerns about europe these days. i have followed the internal discussions about europe and the important and crucial times in the united states of america, questions about the current crisis, and what it means for europeans, americans, and others around the globe. questions also about germany's approach to the crisis about place it sees for itself in europe. i've come here to answer four fundamental questions as openly as possible. what is the nature of the

crisis we are facing? what are we trying to achieve? what is germany's role in all of this? nd of course, what is in it for the united states? first, the nature of the crisis. the term your crisis is for my point of view convenient, but misleading. in its first 10 years, the common currency has been remarkably successful by any standard. its exchange rate, inflation rates are as stable as that of the torch up market. the bureau has assumed the role of a second global reserve currency in times of globalization. in times of globalization, the euro was the right thing to do. it is also obvious that a

number of european countries are no longer enjoying sufficient -- in the financial markets. the reasons are slightly different in each case. three things are at the root of this crisis. to begin with, the world financial crisis was the trigger. separately, public and private debts, and macro economic imbalances that's a result of lacking competitiveness and flaws in the eurozone's governments. all of these factors are interlinked. in the aftermath of the crisis in 2008, the state had to rescue an ill-invested banking

sector at the same time it had to provide a huge fiscal stimulus for the economy. the german fiscal stimulus was comparable in relative size to the u.s. efforts at the time. as a result, financial markets started questioning the ability of some eurozone members to repair their debt or to grow their way out of the debt burden, first in greece, then ireland and portugal. questioning the political will and dissemination of members to fix the flaw in the construction of the monetary union. second, what we are trying to cheat. -- to achieve.

those are those -- some sort of unlimited guarantee of greek sovereign debt by other eurozone members in the spring of 2010 could have put everything on hold. i frankly do not think that this argument holds up. it focused exclusively on the contingent issue, but completely ignores the deeper origins of the crisis. the same is true in my view for the argument that germany, europe's anger of stability, somehow misreads the nature of the crisis, that we are trying to amend the rule book instead of putting out the fire. from the very beginning, we have

focused on a strategy, linking solidarity with partners under pressure with a firm commitment to fix the eurozone and put all members on a path of fiscal responsibility. both is necessary, and both is interlinked. our philosophy in this present crisis is that we come on the one hand, have to direct the firewall that we have on the one hand, the fight against the spread of the crisis, but on the other hand also we have to be aware long-term engagement is necessary, long-term solutions are necessary, structural reforms are necessary. otherwise this kind of crisis would hit us every few months come every few years, again, and we would not solve the problem, we would not only feel the

symptoms, but we would not care about root and the causes of the crisis with iran. from our point of view, both is necessary, and if we explained it as a politician, as the german politician, it is clear for us that we have to show solidarity, but on the other hand we have to use the opportunity, the chances in this crisis that we solve the structural crisis, that we get answers to deficits in the construction of the eurozone. that me emphasize this point again because it represents the cause of our approach. there are those who argue that we underestimate the severity of the crisis, that we mistakenly focused on long-term remedies for what is in reality a short-

term problem. my answer is it is actually this argument itself that under estimates the nature and the scope of the crisis. yet we need short-term crisis management, but we should not opt for measures that would prolong the crisis in years to come, and our short term measures will only be credible and effective if we address the root causes at the same time. some things in the public opinion, some discuss it in that the long-term solution is something we should get answers in a few months after the present crisis is over. if our idea, if our analysis is right, and we think it is right, that we are in the present crisis which started as

a debt crisis, which morphed into a crisis of confidence, then also a long-term answer is necessary to solve this crisis of confidence. the long-term answer, the sustainable answer is also important for the international markets for all the citizens worldwide who want to see that europeans know what they have with the union and the currency. the combination of both is necessary. it is a comprehensive approach, which we discussed and which we have as a guideline in our policy. solidarity with countries having problems is part of our effort. we're now in the final stage of setting up a permanent european

stability mechanism to deal with liquidity problems. germany's share of these financial guarantees is more than a quarter of the total. the german parliament has approved financial guarantees for more than 200 billion euros. this will be the equivalent of far more than $1 trillion u.s. dollars in guarantees by the u.s. treasury. i think this is a remarkable answer, more than 200 billion euros on the table, expressing knowingwing solidarity, this is our responsibility in interest of europe and also an hour well-defined national interest as a national economy in the federal republic of germany.

if we compare this to the american size of the economy, $1 trillion, translated this into your country and to answer the question to yourself -- can you imagines members of congress approving such a sum to help out non americans? the theory that germany is not demonstrating solidarity with its fellow partners in trouble is simply not accurate. the european central bank also has a very important role in managing the crisis. it will do what it considers necessary and appropriate with its mandate. it is not for me to commend or to give advice, because you know the european central bank is independent, and it was one of

the german goals in the negotiations 15 years ago that the european central bank is independent and not have to follow political order. first, the core of the problem goes even deeper than providing liquidity. the crisis of confidence requires decisive action on two fronts. first, we have to fix the flaws in the euros sun's construction eurozone's construction. it took a while but the consequences of the failure to become apparent because we enjoyed the decay of low- interest rates and strong economic growth, especially in

southern eurozone members. this made its attempting and easy to neglect the dangers productivity and competitiveness gap with the eurozone. we thought we were doing well even without stronger coordination of fiscal and economic policies. this was a mistake. we also allowed hallmark of our monetary union, the stability and growth, to be hollowed out and violated numerous times without real consequences. this was another mistake. we did not reduce public and private in good times. this was our third mistake. we're not addressing and correcting all three of them. this is why we have pushed for change through the european treaties. this is why we hope to conclude a new fiscal compact by the end

of this month. this compact, we will firmly established the principles of the future fiscal response ability. we will introduce strong debt break, provisions in member states, and we will significantly strengthen policy, coordination within the eurozone and its prospective members. i am confident that most non- sure members of the eu will join in the efforts. our door will also remain open to great britain. better coordination cannot be the end of the store. we have to recognize that we need nothing less than a

paradigm change for our country's and our societies. the debt economy itself has reached its limit. fiscal responsibility and sustainability are not the concepts for experts, nor are they hobbies of germans traumatized by memories of three generations ago. they are the imperative of our time. the policies of debt, combined with the shortcomings of the eurozone construction, and compound that by the effects of the financial crisis have led us into the danger zone. we have taken it too far, beyond the point of credibility. allow me the question, as a guest, all modesty and

politeness, can we be sure that this is only a problem of the eurozone? is this that triple origin of the crisis that defies all the easy answers come all the big bazooka up remedies put forward by economists and pundits on both sides of the atlantic and the island in between? that is why we are focusing our efforts on creating a union of stability in europe and moving towards fiscal sustainability and growth here and now. we cannot postpone the fundamental change of direction to a distant future. rescue packages and short-term liquidity are not solutions to the crisis. they are buying up time in which to address the root

causes, no less, but also no more. the key is therefore to strike the right balance between easing the short-term pain and laying the foundations for long- term gain. europe has decided to no longer ease the symptoms of the crisis by fighting that with more debt. this is an enormous challenge. it will be neither easy nor quick, but it is the only viable path for a stronger europe in the future. our partners increase, ireland, and portugal, and many other countries deserve our respect and our support for the efforts and sacrifices they have made. when we discussed the merits of this argument, but is not overt

look the difference in demographic realities of our societies. in germany and many parts of europe, every euro of debt will have to be shouldered by fewer and fewer tax payers in the future. the 80's and gentlemen, by no means -- ladies and gentleman, i knew means by advocate austerity only. apart from the debt issue, the widening gap in competitiveness between members is the most important cause of the crisis. but cuts alone will not do the trick. structural reforms are at the solution for the creation of new growth. they are also essential for the long term cohesion of the eurozone. it is simply not acceptable that one out of five europeans under the age of 25 is without a job.

in some countries, we're even talking about one out of three. we can and we must do better. reforming labor markets is only one element, but a very important one. we know from our own experience 10 years ago, when germany was singled out as the sick man of europe, that these reforms are politically difficult but very beneficial for long-term growth and employment. germany is asking and urging for structural reforms. what we do not ask for it is any other country in europe or the eurozone for more than we did by ourselves in our own country. structural reforms are decisive

because a currency is only as strong as the economy of the country behind the currency is successful. this is the very change -- a challenge that some of our partners in europe are now facing. others like the baltic states have successfully implemented these reforms and have returned to solid growth. we will do more. we will employ and used the you -- eu straka funds to stimulate growth. when will focus the upcoming budget for the years 2014 to 2020 on and innovation and new technology, and move away from subsidizing the economy of yesterday. budgets, to which germany will

be the next big contributor. we should never lose sight of the benefits of free trade. we do -- we work hard to expand free access to the emerging markets. should we not always put -- also put the issue of the trans- atlantic free-trade area high on our agenda, an area that is not weakening our wto efforts for global free trade. we are after all the more deeply integrated through trade and investments than any other two economic areas of the world. this brings me to my third question -- what is germany's role in all of this? when you look at most of the public commentary, you cannot

help but feel at the llama. we're either criticized for being too cautious in accessing the crisis or for being too dominant in dictating our own policies to others. we take both seriously and we believe both are beside the point. to be perfectly clear from the outset, there is no good future for germany without a good feature for a united europe. while there are differences in the opinions among german political parties on the details of crisis management, there is a broad consensus that the answer to the current crisis has to be more europe, not less europe. germany is and remains deeply and firmly committed to a united

europe. integrated single european market is the basis of our wealth and economic prosperity. the integrated decision making in brussels, while often tedious and full of compromises, has been the basis of more than six decades of peace among the european union member states. the integrated trade of four policies, our best chance to preserve our european way of life and assert our interest in a globalized world with new centers of power. going it alone is not an option for germany. however strong our economy may be. history has taught us, with chapters too dark to forget, that european integration was and remains the only convincing

and viable answer to the so- called german question. this fundamental insight continues to guide our policies, and i am personally deeply committed to the ideal of a european germany. allow me, beside my prepared speech, to make a personal remark to you here in washington. i was born in 1961. i am the first generation with parents who grew up in the time of the second world war. and for us, for my generation, europe and the european union was always more than just single markets or a common currency or

a monetary system. i remember the talks with my parents, difficult enough, about the nazi times in the war. i remember in the 1960's and when i was older in the 1972 s when it went -- when i went to school how difficult it was to go to our neighbor countries. i remember when i was in the age of 14 or 15 or even a bit younker, -- younger, when i traveled to france to the atlantic coast, i remember in that iddle of the 1970's, was there with three friends,

traveling around with tents on the railway, and i wanted to buy something in a rural area, in a shop.-- there was a lady in this shop, from our point of view in those times, very old. she was my age now. [laughter] we were three boyxs in this single-room shop. [unintelligible] i was very slim, fair hair, blue

eyes, horrible accent when i tried to speak french, it was really a torture for everyone. [speaking in french] something like that. it was a very serious, impressive moment for the rest of my life. we were in this room and it is easy to see that i was a german the middle of the 1970's. this lady, who was the owner of the shop, did not serve us. went out of the shop, to this little kitchen behind the single-room shop. we could hear that she started to cry. she did not want to serve us.

and that the daughter came out of this kitchen, and she talked to us, three young men, 14, 15 years old, and she said, i apologize, boys. this has nothing to do with you personally. but my father, her husband, was killed in the second world war by the germans. and if you grew up in this situation, i think you would understand, by the debt of your heart, that the euro and europe is more than the single market and a common currency.

it is the answer to the darkest chapter in our history, and it is also our life insurance in times of globalization. please forgive me, that i want to underline my personal commitment and a commitment to my generation, the european commitment of the germans with this very personal or marked, but probably you understand -- remark, but you understand it is a historical question for us, and this will show you that the german commitment about europe and eurozone is out of this discussion. however, it would be wrong to deny that there are different visions of what europe should be. there are those who do not want

an open, tolerant, and integrated europe. those are it -- there are those who stressed the differences by their differences in religion rather than what unites us. they are advocating a fortress europe. this is the vision that we need to oppose forcefully. the re nationalization and the time of globalization is a dangerous concept. the financial political and human costs of this disintegration of europe would be crippling, and it would be foolish to believe that europe could withdraw into some corner. yet it is only if we can put our own house in order that we can seriously and credibly establish europe as a strong political actor on the global

stage. i am deeply convinced that europe has something to offer beyond preserving its wealth and its own security. we are a community. we are founded upon the fundamental rights of the individual. an european model ocan be inspiration in a globalized world. this leads me to my fourth and final point. what is in it for the indicted states? i firmly believe and what vice- president joe biden said in his speech to the munich security conference three years ago. i was there and i could listen to him. in sharing ideals and searching for partners in a more complex world, he said, americans and europeans still look to one

another before they look to anyone else. this is what we have done in the past. this is what we're doing today. this is what we have to do in the future. the effects of globalization confront us with new challenges. climate change is to water and food shortages, cybersecurity, to the protection of the global economy. new powers are rising faster than we could foresee only a few years ago. the growing economic -- increasingly translates into political weight. governments on both continents are shifting to new centers of power in asia and elsewhere.

yet, when we confront the depressant issues of today, -- the pressing issues of today, it is europeans and americans that share the same objectives and resources. we continue to fight alongside each other in afghanistan. at a conference in december, we put forward our strategy for eight transfer of responsibility to the afghan parties. where are working on a political solution to prevent the country from ever again becoming a safe haven for terrorism. we stand firmly together in confronting iran's increasingly dangerous course, and for us like many of you, the security of israel is raison d'etre.

european union will put sanctions in place on monday to make the point that iran past behavior in the nuclear issue is unacceptable and a danger to world peace. we are working closely together and with our partners in the arab league to address the ongoing bloodshed in syria where a brutal regime resorts to violence against its own people. we are joining forces to support the transformation under way in the arab world towards a more representative political systems. both american and european union put a particular emphasis on the empowerment of women as a key to successful transformation. we work closely together to facilitate a negotiated and lasting peace between israel and

palestinians. we will reaffirm our close alliance at the nato summit in chicago in may, an alliance of collective defense, an alliance that gives itself the means to be an element of stability in an increasingly fragile world. possibly, the most important common task of all will be to restore the legitimacy and the viability of our economic model. the proper regulation of the global financial system is still unfinished business. we have to continue to work on it together and in the g-20 framework root this includes making sure the imf has what it takes to play a crucial role in the global system. if we do not address these issues in a convincing fashion, we will face a systemic crisis of legitimacy.

this will buy far transcend our economies. it will undermine our own political systems, and it would sharply diminish our ability cystic -- to successfully promoted our interest globally. ladies and gentlemen, when i look at the american debate over the past weeks, i see mostly a caricature of europe. the image of the continent mired in gloom and self-absorption. i beg to differ. first point, we actually overcame socialism in europe 20 years ago. and we owe this, among others,

to the firm commitment, to the idea of freedom by both democratic and republican american administrations. secondly, the world plus 's most recent index lists seven european countries in its top 10 list. three of them are members of the european zone. european countries are among the fastest-growing businesses in america, investing billions of dollars in treating thousands of jobs in this wonderful country. finally, europe is the largest donor of the bullet assistance and humanitarian aid across the globe. in short, europe is a strong and vibrant continent, and i firmly believe that we will emerge stronger from this crisis.

my vision of our future ships each partnership seized the united states and the united europe -- sees the united europe and the united states as the core of a united west. we can and should be a model of progress. we have to engage with new powers to bring on board new partners in order to build a broader consensus. in a word, where the idea of freedom continues to gain strength, it is imperative that the west, the cradle of freedom, stands together. thank you so much for your attention. [applause]

>> thank you. as you can see from the round of applause, this is a very powerful, well-received speech. many people in the audience, when you address your personal story, everyone fell silent and thoughtful. that made a big impact on the way people think about the exercise that you and our colleagues in europe are engaged in right now. thank you for sharing that. i also look to in your colleagues to signal to a meaningful gesture when you need to leave, because we do not want to hold you up to date. there are lots of questions. some people have already tried to attract my attention. i will try to group questions

together. we will try to fit in as many questions as possible. you have covered a lot of territory in your speech. the primary point were about the eurozone and what the european countries are doing to tackle the issues. he touched at the end up on the issues to discuss the upcoming summit in may in chicago. there may be questions about that. you talk about discussions with the united states counterparts on issues, the arab-israeli peace process, many issues that people here in the audience may want to cover. i will start with one of our colleagues, also used to work with someone you quoted today, joe biden, before he became the vice-president.

you will recognize him as a household name. he has some german connections. >> thank you for your heartfelt speech. i would take issue with only one thing you said. that was the rhetorical question at the beginning when you ask whether the united states would commit the equivalent of $1 trillion to essentially help non americans out of their economic problems. with all due respect, i think that is what -- that is the wrong question to ask pick the question is whether, i would submit, americans wealthier, more competitive parts of the united states, through their elected political representatives, would agree to appropriate money to help the country as a whole, especially their fellow citizens elsewhere? i think this is probably what the european union is striving

toward, and in that regard i like to pose a question about euro bonds. as often talked about. as i understand it, the federal government is -- has said it will not consider this until after the election next year. i wonder how you feel about euro bonds as a means of showing solidarity you expressed, both in terms of short-term and long- term. thank you very much. >> if people could introduce themselves to the minister. >> thank you. you mentioned to the u.k. could you get further details of your assessment of the european zone's response. >> in the back? >> the negotiators are in

greece, hoping to close a deal. do you have hopes for a deal to be done before monday? secondly, you've made clear in her speech germany's commitment to a united europe. can you characterize how far that commitment extends? ? -- is there a point at which politically, germany will not commit to a united europe? >> we have a question about eurobonds and solidarity. and then a very pertinent question about how far germany will commend itself to the enterprise, and of course, the deal that we are expecting.

>> i would like to answer your answer, if you allow. because you use this wonderful phrase. it is a very well used term in germany by politicians if they do not want to answer. [laughter] and i said nothing else that there is a cliche and a stereotype in the public discussion, germany is not committed enough. they do not show enough solidarity. europe and the eurozone is not quick enough in their decisions. the opinions of the leaders of the governments are too weak. i think this is completely

wrong. but you know what kind of discussion you had on the hill about this. not my business. [laughter] but then you can imagine how complicated this is to discuss and to decide such a size of solidarity in a totally different situation, politically different situation. you are one country. and you have experienced structures, services, parliament, decisions, opinion leaders, white house and so wheon and so on. when we are talking about europe ramallah -- about europe, be aware, we have national

countries, and we are together in a union. we are not one country debt. -- one country yet. from my point of view, and i think you can read this between the lines -- from my point of view, it is necessary to develop for the next chapter of the integration of europe more and more into this direction. but at the moment, we are not. at the moment, we are 27 -- probably after sunday and the referendum, 28. 28 member states. next year. 27 national countries united under one political umbrella with one parliament with limited authorities and possibilities. there is no one government. and we do not have a president in the sense that you use the word president in america, in

the united states. this is the way i want to compare it. if there is a public discussion of germany not doing enough, not showing enough solidarity, i want to compare it with the size of our economies. i mean, we are 80 million citizens on the european continent. we are not the so-called super power worldwide. we are, from our point of view, a very successful country and we have shown that in what we do for the last 10 years. excellent growth rate, decreasing unemployment rate, and economic situation demoss social situation -- and economic situation, social situation, the

best in the history. 200 billion in germany, 200 billion or more heroes we put on the table -- 200 billion for more we put on the table. it is really a lot. and i just want to ask that we do not underestimate this money and this solidarity. if you know me, you know i am working for the trans-atlantic friendship, many years before i came to be in the german government. if we're talking about 200 million euros -- 200 billion in

germany, -- 200 billion euros in germany, it is translated into onmore than 1000 billion dollars in the u.s. not to criticize anyone. i want to explain. sometimes i think you look to germany and think that we can do everything. there is the capability to protect, but there is also the obligation to do so. you have to protect the balance. also, just imagine how complicated it is sometimes to decide the european institutions, with one exception, all other

governments, all other parliaments -- 26 parliament, independent, national parliaments decided to support this agreement. they decided to show solidarity and decided to open the next chapter of european integration. this is normal. eurobonds, what do you say? my answer is very short and simple. i do not think you can solve a debt crisis by making it easier to take out new debt. to fight depp with debt does not work in the private life and it does not work in nations. this is our authority and our idea. and please, do not forget, once again, everything that we ask

for in structural reforms, we did before in our own country. retirement age and so on and so on. we did all of this in our country. this is why i want to say, now, please, put on my glasses. not immediately. [laughter] but put on my glasses and looked through my glasses to the situation. do you think that, for example, some member countries in the european union, we were courageously on this structural reform. if we, as germans, say, you get the money, thank you, we are fine. it is a mutual agreement. we showed solidarity. but we ask those who ask for

solidarity to do their homework, to fulfil and to work on the necessary structural reforms, and the competitiveness. we all know this. it is a key question in this crisis for new growth. and then of course, for a balanced budget, which is our long-term goal. the united kingdom, your second question -- thank you so much for this. it is also a bit ironic because i have just been in the united states after the ninth of december summit we had in europe with the european union. and please, understand, i know the public opinion in america is very much influenced by the discussion in great britain, which is very understandable.

because most american people do not follow our german language, which is obvious. and of course, there is a long tradition, and cultural roots, no doubt about it. i want to say, a german -- as german foreign minister, i want to have great burden on board. and we have to look now at how to build a bridge over this troubled water to the continent. and probably, you have a professional background for your question. and you know this very well, it is not the first time. "i want my money back." [laughter] when i was your age, i will never forget this statement from an historical lady, like a movie career. [laughter]

this is my answer. i hope you felt by my words that it was very gentle and open- minded. it is a standing invitation and addressed to london to the public there. third, greece, i think we should stop as politicians and political leaders to enter into the cold -- to answer and a hypothetical questions if it is right, and i'm sure it is right, but we are left in a crisis. then i think it would be better if politicians and government answer questions when they have to hansard, which means when the situation is there to answer the question all of these hypothetical questions mislead us. if the spotlight were to fall

down, i would leave the room. but it probably will not happen. and we work on the opposite. this is why we fixed the spotlight. we have to answer it. we have a present negotiation with greece. and we are waiting for a report. and i will not make comments as to the future of greece before receive the report by the troika, which is vis-à-vis the commission and the imf. i have just left my office on sunday. i have the conviction that it is necessary to do the home market and to do that -- the hallmark and the structural reforms. -- to do the homework and the

structural reforms. it is also necessary for the parties in the government work with papademos and i think they understood that this is a crucial time and everyone has to do their own homework at home. >> thank you. let me take three more questions. this gentleman at the back over here. then this gentleman here and then the gentleman over there. >> i used to deal with the economic issues at the state department in the past. my question is, if southern europe and the periphery are introducing austerity measures and structural reforms, is germany prepared to introduce offsetting expansionary fiscal policies. and if not, have you no fear that europe could be a continent in austerity and facing stagnation and recession? >> thank you. and just behind you? >> thank you for your talk mr.

westerwelle. there is a summit to agree to increase the imf firepower to deal with a further actions in the european debt crisis. there is a total $600 billion package. the german government is criticized by foreign partners for considering tax cuts at that time what is -- while its economy is still in good shape. what is your plan to say to these leaders, to contribute to the imf's plan for greater firepower? >> and a gentleman over here. >> mr. foreign minister, the loan mandate for the ecb is priced stability. with the expansion of thank you

-- of the balance sheet double in the past few years, $2.2 trillion i think, how can we achieve that mandate? >> we have some technical questions here. you are having meetings with christine lagarde. >> i did. >> you already have them >> yes. >> presumably, some of these issues must have come up in that context. >> the background of your question -- you know, it would be impossible to answer yes or no with three words. it is an enormously important discussion that we have in europe. i think is right we have this discussion. my opinion is that it does not make sense in such a situation to help the weaker countries in the eurozone and in europe by

weakening the strong burk countries in europe and the eurozone. just imagine -- the stronger countries in europe and the eurozone. just imagine what kind of situation this discussion would take place in if terminate wasn't so strong -- if germany was not so strong, especially with the quality of the german government in the last two years. [laughter] i have to say this. [laughter] i mean, this is the thing. i followed this discussion of it. some come to us and say, well, you have to reduce your competitiveness. you have to be more careful. do not be so dominant. do not be so busy. you are always so busy.

yeah, that is true. [laughter] but this is the reason. and just as you mentioned, what kind of solidarity we could bring to these european discussions without having such a strong discussions -- strong actions? my opinion is that we should not strengthen the weaker countries by weakening the strong our countries. -- the stronger countries. i would go to the german taxpayer and tell them, well, you have to reduce your expectations, work less. for example, to the democratic

situation, from my point of view -- many other countries will understand, but for example, there change in the retirement age and other things will be the answer. i think it is necessary that a stronger countries show their solidarity, but it is not the answer to weaken them. the fact that the german economy is so successful is a positive and not a negative in this discussion. to answer the first part of your second question, and this is about the tax cuts, about this present discussion. there you are. i'm sorry. about the present discussion that we are having, when we decided that we would support families, especially the medium- sized companies in germany -- and probably we are right. if you look at how we have

received -- have survived the recession after two years, 2008 and 2009, the medium-sized companies are the backbone of our economy. therefore, we think is right to support them and give them more possibilities and more capability. about the imf, you ask what this means. i cannot answer at the moment because the imf did not ask for concrete support. not yet. of course, we will discuss this with the german bundestag if there are questions addressed to it. but i think the german economy plays a key role. if there comes a question for

the dam boulevard and the imf, then we will discuss it with the german bundestag. we know how important the imf is. the next question is about the ecb. i can only repeat what i have said. i have to be very disciplined in public discussions about the european central bank. because -- especially we germans, we always ask for the dependency of the european central bank. i do not want to give a misdirection, which could only be misunderstood as a try to intervene into their policies, which i do not want to do. they do what they think is necessary. and i described what they did, but i think i do not want to

make comments to this because i'm sitting here as the german foreign minister, not a private person. and we are discussing this in front of a wonderful private audience. [laughter] but enough is enough. >> that is a good point, given your colleagues. let me take three more questions, and i will also look to our colleagues from the embassy about when we need to leave. can we take three more? yes, good. the gentleman here. the gentleman there. and the gentleman over by the wall. >> thank you for taking my questions. my question goes to solidarity that you spoke of so eloquently. one of the question has been raised here in the u.k., but also in other european countries, is whether germany

will raise the combined cash -- the 500ined tacap, billion euros. because you have come, you as the german government, have come under some kind of pressure, at least from the italian prime minister, mario monti, who has repeated in interviews -- basically, he said, send this message to berlin. we are undergoing structural reforms. but in order to keep my country behind me, i need to show my people that interest rates on italian bonds are going down. otherwise, i will probably be kicked out of power and the future could be much worse than it is at the moment. in order to do this, i need a signed from the europeans, and in this case, particularly from

the germans. and since you are so adamantly opposed to the introduction of eurobonds, at least at this stage, there needs to be some kind of fire wall, measurable increase at the far wall in place to impress markets and to get those spreads down. what is your response? >> the gentleman here, and then over here. >> thank you. i am a student here in washington. you talk about a community of the ideals that we are sharing in europe. i would ask you to -- in the face of libya and egypt, we have seen an uprising of democratic movements. how can we, as europeans cannot who are all -- as europeans who are all sharing these ideas, how can we, in the future ensure that we are supporting the democratic movement around the world, and not just support them as long as it is in our economic interest?

>> thank you. over here. >> is this the last one? >> i think so. >> thank you for the speech today. i want to ask you about nato enlargement. i know that this is a very contentious issue, especially in light of their recent icj ruling in macedonia with respect to their dispute with greece. where you see larger agenda and what are the chances of macedonia's secession? thank you. >> thank you. and as we indicated, this was the last round. if there are other things that you would like to say, please do so in the context of these questions.

>> in asking about italy and the situation with the new government and the interview that mr. monti gave a few days ago, in berlin and i have just rome ande just been to rah i have respect for what the italians are doing now. i have been to lisbon in the last days, to athens, and to rome. a and i have one message of their -- and i have one message that germany has a great respect for what these countries are doing now, and what they're going through, especially the

middle class in these countries. and i think the for the first time i remember, since many, many years -- and you know it oliveri well -- you know italy very well. i am not sure if i ever remember the government asking for support in the parliament for such a reform package and was supported in italy by 70% or 80% of the mps. do not misunderstand me. listen to what i say and what i said. we have a lot of respect for what this country did. i do not go to rome or to athens

or to lisbon as a teacher. we are there because we think we want to have a partnership between equals. that is always the idea of our foreign policy, my foreign policy, that europe is cooperation instead of confrontation and that we have a partnership between =. -- between equals. and the fact that europe was founded by three member countries, three bigger and three smaller countries, shows you that the most successful countries in dictating what the others do is wrong. we want cooperative leadership,

not for a dictation of one or two or three countries. and it is always important for me to include not only the eurozone countries -- for example, if you remember the strategic situation of berlin in germany, our eastern partner of the eurozone. what a successful country. they even had a positive growth rate in times of recession. what a successful country. breathtaking, the success of poland in the last years. this has been in the background. i know what you would like to get as an answer. [laughter] as a journalist. and i know that some of you are disappointed because they ask a question and then they want to have numbers and dates, and road

maps. but this is not the way it works in such a situation. i can only express goodwill. i can only describe a mentality because it is work in progress. we are in negotiation. it is easy to understand. it is very understandable that mr. monti wants to see the effect of the hard programs for the normal citizen in his own country. if you look back to the very beginning of this new year, you was in thehere wer markets -- can i use the word "relaxation"? the markets were calmer.

this is the wrong word, but not only the interest rates were down, but there was psychological relaxation. and not only decreasing interest rates. and then one of these wonderful reidy agencies -- reaching agencies started with -- one of these wonderful trading agencies started with these absolutely necessary public comments. it is its own story from my point of view. competition is the answer. [laughter] there were decreasing interest rates. in early january, for italy and for spain, if you remember. and it shows us that the agreement of the night of december worked.

i understand completely the position of the italian government, that they want to tell their own people it works, our program works, and we get a response for all our hard work. believe me, i remember -- i mean, 10 years ago, germany was the sick man of europe. just remember how the media discussed the german situation 10 years ago. i remember what it meant for us as politicians to go into the streets to discuss this with people who demonstrated, and to tell them, i'm sorry, we would like to give you better news. but it is necessary that we have to change. it is necessary, and we have to use our deficit and our public spending. the fifth question i will answer secondly. it is about nato enlargement.

i would like to say that nato enlargement is always on the agenda. but it is too early to answer -- you are a student, if i heard it right. you can tell your professor how the decisions and results will be in chicago, is a bit too early. but the german policy for us, it has always been an alliance for security. and by the way, germany showed solidarity. if you look back 10 years ago when the mission started in afghanistan, we were there together. we knew that we owed you the same solidarity you showed us in the last decade. but for us, nato is always more than a security alliance. it is also a community of values. and of course, countries who are

on their way with lovelock, good governance and -- with the rule of law, good governance, and democratic reforms, and i do not want to make any remarks to one special country. this is an abstract description of our policy. it is not possible for me as foreign minister to answer this question before we have an agreement in chicago. it is a bit early. we will see. my last answer is to the second question about libya, tunisia, and egypt. i think we have to differentiate. there are a variety of different

elements in those countries. for example, we have a discussion here -- and by that i'm in the western world. it is the same in my country. you cannot bring together with democracy and so on and so on. if we look to each country in the region, you understand that tunisia is not the same as libya. the development is not the same in libya as in egypt. tunisia, from my point of view has a realistic chance to have -- to become a role model for the whole region. there is a start, after the latest elections, with a party -- i expect and hope that they

will become what we will one day an islamic democratic party, like we have with christian nations in europe. they have probably the first third of their weight behind them and probably two-thirds of the way to go. but i think it is positive. in egypt, it is a very fragile situation at the moment. and therefore, our transformation, a partnership, the effort for the transformation partnership is constructive. , i have just been there a few days ago. i think they have understood very well that they need an inclusive policy to integrate all of the others if they want

to be successful. i welcome this. i left libya much more positive than i was before i arrived in the country. i think it is also positive. but i would like to propose -- and what i would like to ask everyone is, let us not only look to those countries who show was the revolutionary way. there are some countries who choose the evolutionary way and we also owe them a transformation partnership. and it is also important to support civil society. it is necessary to support them by the development of free media systems with pluralism. of course, it is necessary to

work and to defend women's rights, and many other things. but personally, i am 100% convinced the success of the democratic transformation, the transformation into the direction of democracy will depend on a positive economic development. they need a transformation dividend. which changed the lives for the families in these countries. i have been on tahrir square. i have been two times after the revolution internees' yen now. the people i met -- in tunisia now. the people i met there, especially the young generation, they ask for political

transformation, for their fundamental human rights. but they also seek a better life. a better life for themselves and for their families. this is the reason i think those countries in the region who decide to go in the direction of democracy, they need our support we also need to open a world market for their products. because if we want to have a sustainable, constructive development in these countries, we have to help them with economic development and economic success because the revolution is one thing, but the better life is the best proof to the people that democracy is not only something for academic discussion. it is also decisive for them and for their destiny and the destiny of their families. thank you so much.

i apologize if i could not satisfy every question. just imagine if you sat here. [laughter] i wish you all the best. thank you so much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> coming up shortly, republican potential candidate mitt romney. he is holding a town hall meeting in north charleston, south carolina this afternoon. we will bring that to you live this afternoon. while we wait we will hear from michael from the "boston globe." he will discuss the massachusetts governor. >> joining us is the co-author of a biography of mitt romney called ", the real romney."

he has for years into this reporting of the profile of this presidential contender. i guess the big question about mitt romney, what is it about him that animates or informs his desire for public office? host: that is a great -- caller: that is a great question -- guest: that is a great question. his father ran for president and tried to run -- drop out in the first primary where he had problems. mitt romney is trying to succeed where his father failed, but also because he shares some of those same ambitions. he does have a calling for public service. he has been thinking about this from a very early age. as a teenager, he was following his father around when his father was running for governor.

there is an anecdote that we describe in the book where it is past midnight and he is this group -- he is advising whahis father what to do with legislators. that has been with him for a long time. with the core conviction that he has a lot of answers. one thing he says every day on the campaign trail is the government does not create jobs, business does. that speaks to his own record, which i'm sure we could talk about. host: in new hampshire, one of the campaign events, mitt romney talked about one of the events. let's listen [video clip] >> the chance to run for president of the united states, i never met -- imagine i would do it. this is a very strange and unusual thing to be in the middle of. i was just a high-school kid like everybody else with skinny

legs. i imagined i would be in business all my career. host: how does that square with what you were just reporting? guest: it does not square entirely, to be frank. the idea that he was just another high school kid is not the way other people might see it. he went to one of the most elite prep schools in the country when his father was governor of michigan. it is not the typical of bringing of most people. he lived in a very rarified climate. i'm not saying that in a negative way. i'm saying it was not typical of other people. maybe that is the way he sees it. hopefully we have done a fair biography. he was shaped by the kind of person that he was. it is difficult for many people to imagine running for president, but more than most people it was probably something he thought about given his father was governor and he was

extremely interested in what his father did. many of his friends told us in the biography that from an early time he started thinking about public office. we go back three or four decades where he was telling colleagues, you know i do not occur -- you know, i do not know if i want to do that particular deal because i might run for public office one day. it is something he has been interested in for a long time. host: if callers have questions or comments about mitt romney demoss -- mitt romney, you are welcome to send us a tweet. 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 jobs and provide that. i appreciate 31% of something else. my real question was when he spoke about the private man and if i remember correctly, i saw on c-span, governor romney announced four years ago, you have segments afterward, when you see the human side. shortly after the announcement it appeared he was bringing supporters and there was a mom with a child who had down syndrome, but seemed to be a family friend. he got down off the stage when he learned the boy, i thought johnny or something, was missing and went to try to help find him. i have also read when he was a bishop of his congregation, he drove a beater car, even when he had a lot of money because he was sensitive to those in his congregation who had less. i wonder if he could comment on does he have this kinder, softer side, but maybe he's following the scripture to do your good deeds privately and different

trumpet that as much. from the c-span moment it was impressive to me this huge big important moment, he would leave the stage and try to find this lost boy. >> we will break away from "washington journal de " we will go to south carolina where we are expecting this rally with candidate mitt romney to get underway shortly, opening remarks by curtis love this, the state treasurer. [applause] >> he has taken a valuable part of his life and his grande kid'' lives, and he is running for president. he does that because he believes

in america. do you believe in america? i have asked to use the easy question. do you believe in mitt romney? [applause] that is all i can say right there. they only have 24 hours left here before the polls are finished, it is important. give them a south carolina welcome. it means a lot. [applause] ♪

>> again, we are waiting for the candidate to appear at this rally in south carolina. the last day of campaigning in advance of the south carolina primary. our coverage will begin tomorrow evening. we will have coverage on c-span radio and of course online at c- span.org. the crowd is there, they are ready, we will watch and listen as we wait for the candidate to arrive. ♪

>> it is great to have everybody with us. [applause] it is a great day in south carolina, we have guests with us today. show them what we think about south carolina and mitt romney. [applause] this is a real treat. because we have done a lot of work. we have talked to a lot of people, and tomorrow is the day. [applause]

what i want you to know is, a little bit about what i am hearing. a little bit about -- the governor has their feet on the ground and seeing what is going on. yesterday, we started getting calls. of a lot of people support perry ready to jump to romney. [applause] this morning, we started getting all these calls saying that he rocked it in the debate last night. [applause] we thought that was pretty good. we were excited about it. we have been around the state today, pouring down rain in lexington county, hundreds of people standing there to see mitt romney. [applause] [chanting]

that's all for you. so this is what has happened. we have had people like ambassador david wilkins who used to be the speaker of the house jumping on board. people in charge of the military have jumped on board. we have all these people want in on the romney train. let me tell you why they want on. the coolest thing we could ever see is a jobs candidate go up against a government loving president obama. [applause] because in south carolina, what do we care about? we care about jobs, spending, the economy. we don't care about any other distractions or anything else. we care about having a one-term

president. [applause] we know he has been in the private sector 25 years, he does that create jobs. this is what i know. over the past year, the hardest part of my job would be the unemployment rate. balancing the budget. making cuts that are important. what i did not know is that the hardest part was going to be the federal government. they have stopped me from doing my job every single day and you have felt it. the first time we felt it was what they did to boeing. boeing came in and give us the shot in the arm, thousands of new jobs and expanded to thousand jobs in washington state. president obama and the national labor relations board said you cannot do that in a right to work state. we won that, we had them drop

the suit and they are doing just fine -- we are doing just fine. the people of south carolina said they want to illegal immigration reform. president obama and the justice department stopped it. president romney will stand beside us and get that law passed in south carolina. [applause] and we said, if you have to show a picture i.d. to get sudafed, to get into the debate last night, could get on a plane, why would you not have to show a picture i.d. to protect the integrity of the voting process? we listen to the will of the people. i signed a bill, the department of justice and president obama stalked us. president romney will stand

beside us to protect the voting process. we had probably just about enough of the federal government, and when it comes to health care, he says we can't afford it. day one i will repeal obamacare for our country. i am incredibly proud to let you know that we have the coolest first man in the room, michael haley is with us. you know we are a very proud of military family. i love watching him walk out the door in his military uniform loving his job. what we need is a president that understands that you strengthen our military, you don't weaken it and turn around and apologize for it. president romney understands that we need a strong military

and hall will make sure no one ever challenges america. you have heard me say this and i will continue to say this, we are going to take this election tomorrow. i need you to do something for me. it is not showing up at this rally, it is what you do when you leave this rally. we have an election on a saturday that we don't always do, people have no excuse not to vote. email people, tell them we support r turnomney, -- governor romney. we also need you to get on the phone and say, we need you to get out there and vote. i will give you a ride if you need a ride, make sure they get to the polls. let's celebrate really loud tomorrow night when he comes in first place. [applause]

i have said my view, but michael and i are so thrilled because we have great friends in the house tonight. what you have seen across the country is chaos in washington. we don't want anybody that has ties to washington, we see what that does. we want someone that understands jobs, and right now, the governors get it. we are having to deal with the fights of our state. there is someone that is leading all of the republican governors had on saying that we are not going to take this from washington, we are going to fight back. we are fortunate to have the president of the republican governors association that wants to nominate mitt romney. it is governor mcconnell and his wife -- mcdonnell and his wife. >> thank you very much.

good afternoon, south carolina. it is a treat for me to come from the old dominion, the cradle of democracy to the whole matter as a state where i -- the state to endorse mtiitt romney as president of the united states. [applause] governor haley, you have done a great job standing up for the values that make america great. balancing the budget without raising taxes and standing up against the bureaucrats to protect your right to work wala. congratulations. [applause] it is a treat to be here with a the next first lady of the united states. as a lady of tremendous courage and character, a great wife and

a great mother, she has done a marvelous job and your number one asset. i am delighted to be here with my wife of 35 years, the first lady of virginia, maureen mcdonnell. i am delighted to tell you she is endorsing mitt romney for president. in virginia, we call a tw ao-fer that a two-fer. i am endorsing him because he is a strong leader, and he has the best person in the republican party could be barack obama in the debate and in the polls next november. [applause] you know what we need in america more than anything else? we need leadership, people of character that will lead this nation. i believe mitt romney is that

leader. we talk a lot about surpluses and deficits. we have a surplus of rhetoric and a deficit of results with president obama. we need somebody that will put aside sound bites and work on solutions, someone that will get results. he has a lifetime of achievement in the public and private sector in getting things done for the people of massachusetts and for the people that work for him. jobs, the top issue in the campaign. 8% unemployment for over 35 months, almost the entire obama presidency. people are hurting in america. why do we have? more spending, more rhetoric, and no creation of jobs or energy proposals to get america back to work. and don't you agree that it is

time for change and we need a new president of the united states? mitt romney knows how to create jobs, that is why i am endorsing him today. being an entrepreneur in the private sector, he understands that it is not government, but the private sector that creates wealth and opportunity. that is the america mitt romney believes in. he understands you keep taxes and you have strong right to work laws. you can get people back to work. just yesterday, the last couple of days, more of an attack on the energy industry. he won't support the nuclear

industry and chills the keystone pipeline. that is not the way to create jobs. spending and taxes, we need a president that gets it. it is not the governor's money, it is your money. we have the largest increase in the national debt under any president in american history. they can't get a budget, much less a balanced budget. we need a change. mitt romney balanced the budget without raising taxes, he cut $3 billion in deficit spending, he cut taxes multiple times. obama has 19 increases in taxes, running up the debt to an unsustainable and a moral level to this country. mitt romney will run the

finances of the united states like it was his own family money. we need a president, you heard the governor say it so well. i am the son of a world war two veteran. my daughter1 years, was a platoon leader. you must understand that you protect and defend the veterans that serve in these wars if you continue to attract the brightest young men and women to serve. [applause] president romney said it so well. i am getting ahead of myself. we will actually listen to the battlefield commanders on the ground to set military policy.

that is what we need to do. this president continues to advocate policies that will reduce military spending and decimated the greatest naval fleet in the entire world. mitt romney will keep america strong. that is the kind of leadership we need. ?on't you agree we need a president of the united states that understand the traditional values of the american people. we need a president that understands that america is the greatest force for good. america is great because america is good.

over the last couple of >> he as an incredibly decent, honest, and generous man who cares about his family and cares about his country. [applause] i had the honor of growing up right here near mount vernon on the land that was owned by george washington. i was raised 1 mile from mount vernon. in his first inaugural address, washington said something profound about the heart of this country and the dow use we need in leaders. he said the smiles of have and cannot be expected to remain in a nation that this regard the internal rules of order and

right. in other words, character counts and values matter in our people and in our leaders. i am here to ask you to elect a man of decency and to make sure we elect mitt romney the next president of the united states. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, guys. you are the best. thank you. thank you so much. red sox back here. we have a red sox fan. there are probably more red sox fans than patriots fans. i appreciate your support. it is great for the mcdonnell to come here from virginia.

your governor and her husband are fabulous. they have been with me all over the state for the last several days. we have traveled all over new hampshire. today is an unusual day for your governor. she turned real old today. she turned 40 years old today. we are going to send her a birthday song. happy birthday to you. happy birthday to you. happy birthday, dear nikki. happy birthday to you. >> there we go. [applause] >> all i want is president romney for my birthday. we have to get him in the white house. >> i see enough plates to serve

everybody here. maybe quite not that many. we are going to get each of you a piece of this cake. what a wonderful governor you have. a strong, on wavering conservative who is making things happen in this state. she is the best you could possibly have. happy birthday. i love my country and my deep abiding faith in dodd. -- god. i also love this person i met in elementary school. she was in the second grade and i was in the fourth grade. when she was 16 i did. i went to a party at a friend's house and she was there. i noticed her in a big way. she had come to someone else -- come with someone else. i said, i live closer to her

than you do. can i get her a ride home. we have been together ever since. my sweetheart, ann romney. >> it is great to see all of you. south carolina, you are so generous and so warm. we love your hospitality. mitt and i have been married a long time. in the process of those 42 years of marriage, we have five sons. when they were let go, they were not so wonderful. one of my sons is here. come up with my granddaughter. he was always the best behavior. and my oldest granddaughter, who is 16. [applause] when it was particularly difficult and mitt was

traveling, it would be traveling quite frequently. that meant i was home along with these nazi spies boys. he would call home and he would hear an exasperated wife at the other end of the phone. he would remind me to hang in there and it would be ok. the cool thing was he meant it. [applause] it was great having that kind of support. the wonderful thing now as you look and see how great it is to have these boys is, it is a wonderful thing to have the grandchildren. . joy i get in life is watching my grandchildren miss the hague. i say to my sons, you deserve it. you know family is where our happiness really lies.

it is wonderful that i see so many families here and so many children. it is great to see that. we are in an unusual position to make a big difference for the future of this nation. one year ago, i asked mitt when we were thinking of running again -- i told him that years ago i would never run again. i said i would never have another baby after i had my first one. and that i would never do another pregnancy. after last year, i said, i would ask who you are going to run against. we are not 0.2 figure any of those things out. all i want to know -- we are not going to figure any of those things out. all i want to know is can you save america. he said he could. let's get him a chance to do that. >> thank you, sweetheart. move this table back for me,

will you? there we go. i want to get closer to you guys. this is a great state. what wonderful people. what a thrill it has been all but these last days and months to see so many friends here. this election is more than just about replacing one man. i am disappointed in our president. he was critical to president bush or building a huge deficit. is have been three or four times as large. he was critical of the downturn in our economy. he has been in office three years and has not been able to turn it around. he said, if i cannot turn this economy around in three years, i will be looking at a one-term proposition. we are here to collect. [applause] he is over his head. it is badly over his head.

internationally, he has made extraordinarily bad mistakes. this is the slowest recovery we have seen since cooper. the american people want a different course. the president has said he wants to fundamentally transformed america. that is why it is not working. we need to return america to the principles that made us great in the first place. the president has look at debt, he has looked at spending and debt. he put in place stimulus that did not create private-sector jobs. the course it would take us on is bigger and bigger government and bigger and bigger deficits. my course would be cut spending, eliminate programs, caps spending and balance our budget.

he looks at something like health care and said health care is not working terribly well. let's make it more like europe. that is the wrong course. the right course is to make health care like the consumer market. i will repeal obamacare and get america back to the principles of enterprise. [applause] this is a president that has watched as our credit rating has been degraded. this is a president who looks at his friends who have offered sabres, who raise money, or are associated -- who have offered favors, who raise money or are associated with some of his favorite groups. they can come up with decisions that push against right to work states. that kind of crony capitalism is wrong for america. i will restore a fair balance between labor and management and protect these rights of workers

in this country. his approach to enterprise is interesting. he thinks he is best at picking the winners and losers in our economy. how about putting $500 million into solyndra. think about what happens when government becomes a danger is. $500 million they put into solyndra. when we helped to start staples, do you know how much money went into that? about 5 million. instead of meeting in a glass palace, we use the back up and old shopping mall. we sat in naugahyde chairs and old furniture. the money was other people's money. i will get rid of chronic capitalism and returned to the free enterprise system -- get rid of crony capitalism and

return to the free enterprise system. the that the president has taken up -- taken on is one that believes america is in decline. the president seeks to appease other nations. he sent a note to mahmoud ahmadinejad. the right course for america is to not have a pretty please president, but to have a president that will stand up to america and never apologized to america knowing this is the greatest nation on earth. [applause] the president has proposed cutting our military spending by $350 billion and another $650 billion on top of that coming down the road. his own secretary of defense has said those kinds of cuts represent a doomsday scenario. his secretary of defense said that.

our navy is smaller than anytime since 1917. our air force is smaller and older than at any time since the air force founding. he wants to cut the number of soldiers in the military and only half capacity since the first time since the second world war two only fight one war. this is a president who is pulling back on the capacity of our military. at the same time, the world is a more dangerous place. i will restore our navy. i will restore our air force. i will provide the care to our veterans they so generously deserve. [applause] this is an election about a different path. as i have just gone through those items -- i could go on and

on. this president is taking america in a very different place. i think he is taking his inspiration from the capitals of europe. i take my inspiration from the people of america. this president is transforming america into a european-style social welfare state. europe is it working in europe. it sure is not going to work here. the founders of this country were right. when they chose the worst -- the words of why we were parting from the nations that we came from, they said that we were in doubt with in alienable rights. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. our hard work, our risk taking, maybe a little good luck, our dreams. people in this country have

achieved extraordinary things. their success does not make the rest of us poor. their success makes the rest of us better off. that was the brilliance of the founders. that was what made america such a powerful economic engine. the average income of an american is 60% greater than the average income of a european. this is an extraordinary story. it is not a story based upon a government guiding our lives. it is based upon three men and three women pursuing their dream. that must be restored to america. i love this country. i love its beauty. i love its people. i love the patriotism of the american people.

i love the hems of our nation. america the beautiful is my favorite. america the beautiful, for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain. oh it is low pour here rose proved in liberating strive for more themselves their country loved. do we have veterans or members of our armed forces? would you please raise your hands to be recognized? thank you. [applause] this is a veteran rich state. we salute you. there is another burst -- verse to let me mention. o beautiful for patriot's dream. when the founders wrote to the declaration of independence and constructed the constitution of our nation, they were not just

seeing a temporary phenomena. they were writing and acting for an enduring and prominent nation. those principles are the principles to which we must return. they are the blueprint. i know how jobs are created. it is not by pushing government deep and -- deeper and deeper into our lives. i love the constitution. i read here its founders. i will get america back to work and i will make sure we get back to being a shining city on a hill that ronald reagan spoke of. thank you.

♪

♪

>> how are you? hi. how are you. thank you for being here. thank you. hi there. how are you? thank you for being here. thanks for being here. good to see you. good to see you. thanks for coming by today.

♪

>> the wrong way. of myself.pictures >> thanks for being here. hi. how are you? >> good luck. >> thank you. how are you? how are you doing?

[chanting "mitt, mitt, mitt"] >> we came four years ago.

>> all the best to you, sir. thank you. thank you. hi. how are you? daughter.r my

much.nks so good to see you. i'll sign that. looks good. campaign.king on your >> best of luck tomorrow. >> thank you. thank you.

hi there. how are you? >> will you please come outside? ♪ >> how are you doing? great to see you. how are you doing? good to see you guys.

♪ >> i would love to see that i come in first, but we are making progress. [unintelligible] what a wonderful place that is. uron.iful lake here o

[unintelligible] i plan on doing my very best. >> you've got to do it. >> thank you, thank you. thank you. how're you? [unintelligible] >> people love that in south carolina.

>> thank you. how are you doing. take your time. thank you. there we go. thank you so much. how are you doing? good to see. hi, how are you. thank you so much. thank you. thank you.

♪ thank you. hi, how're you doing? good to see you. hi, how are you? thank you for being here today. >> you did real well last night. >> thank you. thank you guys. [unintelligible]

thank you. all right. thank you so much. hi, how are you? nice to see. isn't it wonderful? i agree. hi. good to meet you. thank you. how are you doing? good to see you. [unintelligible]

there you go. thank you. thank you. good to see you. you bet. thank you. thank you guys for coming. thank you, thank you so much. i will be there soon. [unintelligible] >> i will remember you. >> courageous people. >> freedom loving and hard work.

if not we have great admiration for the public. >> god bless you. >> thank you. >> i have a cold. i cannot shake your hand. [unintelligible] my gift to you. >> thank you so much. good to meet you. >> god bless. >> take care. >> thank you, thank you.

hi, how are you. hi there. thank you. yeah, exactly. >> we should have introduced you, governor. working with the press. [unintelligible] >> thank you. how are you? good to see.

all right, how are you? thank you. thanks. how are you doing? good to see you. take care. that's good. oh, boy. we need to keep you coming up here, time and time again. every time i turn around -- ♪

thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. thanks for being here. >> thanks for coming. thank you. >> could to meet you guys. -- good to meet you guys. ♪

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] ♪

>> the south carolina primary is tomorrow, and the road to the white house is there. we will bring you results and candidate speeches. 10 days later, the florida primary. you can follow the campaign at our website, c-span.org /campaign2012 and followed the conversations on facebook and twitter. >> a deeply promising time for our history. for the past 12 months, the world has known changes of almost biblical proportions, and even now, months after the failed coup that doomed a failed system, i am not sure we have

absorbed the full impact, the full import of what happened. but communism died this year. >> find state of the union address is going back to 1950 you online, and watch president obama at deliver -- and watch president obama delivered this your's address. it is washington your way. >> rick santorum was a guest on this morning's "washington journal." this is 15 minutes. >> senator santorum is with us now from south carolina. senator, thanks very much. i know it's a busy day for you. our goal with you this morning is to get as many of your questions as we can in this last hour before voting -- in this last day before voting in south carolina. thanks for being with us.

>> my pleasure. >> i will jump right into question that came to us on our facebook page from danielle -- guest: the answer to that is absolutely yes they should be excluded from any kind of reductions. these are men and women who have stepped forward to defend this country. this country has a special obligation to them. they volunteered. these several people are signing up everyday and are reenlisting everyday. i can tell you as someone who grew up on a v.a. grounds. my mom and dad met after world war ii and lived on the post at apartments for the first 18

years of my life. i had a chance to meet veterans and work with them and volunteer at the hospital. i can tell you that there are a lot of problems in the va health-care system. there are a lot of problems with government and medicine. we need to do a better job at a meeting the needs particularly when it comes to the mental health issues that a lot of these servicemen and women are dealing with because of repeated quotation, rules of engagement, and the way things are. you don't have an enemy of lining up against you in uniform. you are constantly on watch for whoever is around you. a civilian could be someone to end your life. that kind of stress, it is hard to come back to america and readjust. we have to do a lot better job than we are doing. the one thing we cannot do is cut their benefits. host: senators and storm path will be with us 15 minutes. he's on vacation from where the

campaign event will be today. we will get in your calls and facebook comments and tweets and e-mails. steve is watching us in phoenix, a republican. good morning. caller: how are you doing? my advice would be to be specific about your stance on things like the pipeline, jobs, things like that. if you want to become the nominee, i really think that would be my advice. bypass all the hoopla of and get right through the specifics with what we are going to do about the pipeline, are we going to waste our money on renewals or get back to basics and make this country great by just doing what we do best, and that is drilling, farming, mining, things like that.

what do you think? guest: i cannot agree with you more, steve. that's when i talk about all the time. i am absolutely for building the pipeline. i've been a proponent. my grandfather was a coal miner. i have worked with coal companies and believe strongly that it is one of the key is to lower power costs and generation and that the obama administration's war on fossil fuels is hurting our country. i want to eliminate all energy subsidies and let the market or. we need to get rid of green energy subsidies. what we are doing in pennsylvania, drilling 3000 to 4000 gas wells per year. the price of natural gas in the last seven or eight years has gone from $12 down to $2.70. it's because we created an increased supply.

we can do not maybe as much oil drilling to reduce the price that much, but we can reduce it a lot if we open anwr and allow more productivity in this country. host: the next question is from facebook from kelly. guest: no, i don't know what she it means by cutting back. i assume she means tariffs. i don't support tariffs. that is just a cost for the american public. it is a tax on foreign goods, but it leaves to retaliatory tariffs on american goods. what we need to do is compete. we are not competitive with our major trading partners. we are 20% more costly on average and that excludes labor costs, which are higher than those of most of our trading partners. we have to get the government out of the ways of

manufacturers can compete and bring those jobs back from overseas. apple has thousands of people employed in china making apple products. they should be made here. i'm sure there would be made here if we had the opportunity to do so on a competitive basis. that's why the corporate tax for manufacturing should be cut to zero. i would cut it in half for everybody else. for manufacturers and processors, we want those jobs here. we need to compete against china and a 35% corporate tax is crushing our ability to compete. i would eliminate that tax and do a bunch of other things. go to our web site to see our entire manufacturing plant, called the maid in the u.s. a plan. that plan will boost our workers and small town america can dissipate in the knowledge- based economy. has: steve jobs' biography been number one since it came out. he was asked about factories in china.

his response was that one of his major problems was u.s. educational system not producing the kinds of engineers staff that he needed to support those manufacturing jobs. he called that a larger problem than taxation. guest: we do have a problem with respect to our knowledge in math and science. there are lots of manufacturers -- manufacturing done. i was just at the plant in spartanburg and yesterday at the boeing plant. that's about as high tech and knowledge-based as you can get. we have process engineers, plenty of them. we can train them. the more jobs there are here, the more demand for those jobs. a lot of those jobs are people coming from overseas to come here. that's ok. we can import that knowledge instead of exporting blue- collar jobs.

i suspect a lot of people working on apple products in other places around the world would be very happy to have the opportunity of to come here and do the same. host: did you support the initiative to bail out detroit specifically gm? guest: i did not. i called for structured bankruptcy from the beginning. i opposed the wall street bailout, which was the funding source for the automobile bailout. i was the only one up on the stage between myself and gingrich and romney that did. even though people said there could be a financial meltdown, the bottom line is the greater meltdown over the long term for this country is having the government injected itself into the private sector in such a big way, allow the capitalist system to work. the unions would not have the big ownership share of the country is the difference.

the bondholders should have gotten their fair share of the company. other than that, you would have had pretty much the same company and maybe even a better company because they would have been stripped of even more legacy costs' that it makes it hard for them to be competitive. host: in the headlines, gm once again leads the world in auto sales. host: let's go back to calls for you. salt lake city, utah. independent line. erin. caller: good morning, senator. i am a scientist. i'm concerned about the fact the current republican candidates with the exception of gingrich, have not qualified their position on whether they support medical research. medical research is important.

it is crucial to control the cost of health care. funding has stagnated. it is harder than ever for young scientists like myself to receive funding for research. guest: i have always been a strong supporter. it's one of the things the federal government does a pretty good job at, which is basic science research. i also supported -- this was 15 years ago, the doubling of the nih, national institutes of health, to help with basic medical research and improve our knowledge of the human genome project and other things. if i think it can be done in the private market and for profit. but the basic understanding of science, which benefits a knowledge base economy, i believe in that spirit we are at a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit and are spending 40 cents of every dollar and boring

most of that from china. to go out and say we will increase funding at that level, we will not be increasing funding at any level that i can think of. we have to look at government as in a constrained resource environment. the best thing we can do for medical research is get this economy growing. if we get the economy growing, there will be a lot of other pharmaceutical companies and medical device companies and others who will sponsor more research at colleges and universities, in addition to government research. the economy growing faster be the number-one priority right now. and getting government under control will be a big part of that. while i am not saying we should cut basic or medical research, i am not looking at to that area or frankly any other area outside our commitments to protect our country through national security to grow the size of government. host: senator santorum with us about another five minutes. tony, democratic caller from columbia, south carolina.

caller: senator, you just said -- susan, i love that you picked up on gm being the number of automobile company in the world. senator, that contradicted your vote against bailing out the automobile industry. i want to ask, do you and your family still collects health care from the government? also, you will not be president of the united states. that is a facade. it's not going to happen. obama will be president again. be honest. guest: well, we will let's the electorate figure out who is going to be the next president. i don't think it has to do with honesty. gm and chrysler could have and should gone through a structured back up the process. the companies would have survived with different owners and would've been even more

competitive than the current structure, because they would not have to do things the obama administration was twisting their arms to do as a result of the money that the government gave them. no, i stand by that. i cannot remember his second statement. if you recall, i am happy to answer. host: i will move on to another facebook comment. james henry asks -- guest: i don't support teaching creationism as a complement. what i do support is academic freedom. one of the most important things that every child worries about or not worry about, but likes to learn about is who they are and where did they come from and how the world came to be. of course i believe, as most americans do, that we are creatures of god. and god created the heavens and the earth.

there is ample evidence for that in creation, and yet there is a theory out there of evolution which is a legitimate scientific theory. it should be taught in schools, but we should have a discussion about the issue of evolution and what we can learn and the fact that we do not know and cannot know in many respects about that theory. also, the idea of whether we are in fact just a mistake of natural law, that over time, we just happen to come into place in a completely disordered, random process that created all of this that we see. that is from a philosophical point of view. it is a very interesting thing to argue, what science can and cannot prove, and is interesting for children to sort through that and have the discussion as to whether we are just random

chance, the application of natural law and time, creating this entire universe, whether there was someone directing it. having that discussion is very important, not from a religious point of view, but from the standpoint of science and what science can and cannot prove and show. our last call. caller: domestic content might be a set of criteria for the elimination of -- guest: every manufacturer. if you are producing a part for anything you make is a 0%

corporate tax. if you are processing things, if you are processing food products and you are taking soybeans and turning it into oil, you are a processor. if you are manufacturing anything, whenever it is, anybody that makes anything in america is going to have a 0% corporate rate. it is for everyone out there, and it will be a huge, huge incentive to bring not only the final assembly that we have here in charleston, but the boeing plant, but also making the component parts. host: senator, a question from me. what is your bottom line on results from saturday in order to continue to florida? guest: we're going forward. this race has transformed itself in the last 24 hours, and i am

not sure that will show by saturday. i have already won one of the two primaries. i feel good about the momentum we have. polls show that we are running second in florida right now, and beyond that, this is a long process. we have been slaving away in the vineyards out and iowa, doing 700, 800 town hall meeting street in the last weeks we have had resources to be able to compete in the race. we're starting to get some of the funding necessary to compete in the long term, starting to snap up around the country. we feel this is a race we can and will be successful in and we will go on beyond. host: a significant is the story about newt gingrich's failed

marriage to the kind of voters you're trying to appeal to? >> we all said last night that these personal issues are very difficult. when your activities when you are in public life are subject to scrutiny and people can look at them and make the determination as to whether these are issues of character, as to whether this is the kind of person that you want but in the office of the presidency. we do those things in public life, i think that has an additional level of relevance i will not get into the specifics, though, but people will look at that, as they will come and assess that. when it was done, how long ago, what the circumstances were come and they will make their determination. i trust the american public to make the right decision. host: we hope to see you again

on the campaign trail. thank you for your time this morning. >> wrote to the white house coverage as the candidate events leading up to the saturday primary. >> the obama administration came down with a policy saying that in her program, she cannot teach abstinence as a preferable way of avoiding birth out of wedlock. she cannot talk about marriage. she cannot talk about marriage as anything other than an alternative lifestyle that is 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 he peters out that the schauble-ready jobs

were not ready in the stimulus fails to leave as $800 billion further in debt, at some point to needs to take responsibility. that was his plan, his proposal come and it failed. >> good luck. >> thank you. a map of the polls closed, we will show you the results from south carolina as well as the candidates' speeches and your phone calls. >> some would say we are reactionary. others will say we stand for socialism. there will be the inevitable both. it is time for a change, and so on. we will hear nothing that we have not heard before. >> as candidates campaign this year, we look back at 40 men

iran for the office and lost. go to our web site, c- span.org/thecontenders to see those contenders to have a lasting impact on politics. >> let them stand on the status quo while we seek to refresh the american spirit. [applause] let the opposition to collect their $10 million in secret money from the privileged few, and let us find 1 billion ordinary americans who will contribute $25 each to this campaign, a 1 million member club with members who will not expect special favors for themselves, for a better land for us all. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. >> the u.s. conference of mayors was held this week in washington, d.c., and president

obama is former chief of staff and current chicago mayor rahm emanuel discussed what he is doing with community colleges in his city. this is 15 minutes. >> did you enjoy last night? did you enjoy last night? i can see you are still thinking about last night. as i said yesterday, this has been one of our most successful conferences and i am excited we get the opportunity to hear from one mayor that is making news that has brought with him a

great deal of experience as an activist, as a congressman, as the chief of staff to president obama, and now as the mayor of that the great city of chicago. we all know and love rich daley. there are not a whole lot of mayors quite like h im who gave everything to the city of chicago. i'll tell you, rahm is a tour de force. he works 24/7. if he has an idea, he runs with it. coming from chicago, that means a whole lot. help me welcome the great new mayor from chicago, rahm emmanuel. [applause]

[laughter] >> sorry, a personal joke, okay? we just met together last week. if i was young, i would have shared it, but that's what you get with maturity. i'm glad to be here. thank you for that introduction, tony. last week, one of the things we discussed is community colleges. we have a lot of focus on the k- 12 reforms, and one thing i'm trying to do come and we are succeeding, is to extend it to it's full day of education and a full year of education because our kids in the city of chicago had the shortest school year and the shortest school

day. they do not have short futures. they have big ambitions. the schools they are in should represent their ambitions. [applause] i know the length of the day and length of the year works for the adults, but no one can tell me how it works with the kids because they were never talked about. it does not make sense. we will have it all day, though ambition for our children's future. in chicago, we have launched a new reform to our community colleges. some mayors may come and some do not, but we have oversight of the community college system, 727,000 children attend them. if you put all of our four-year institutions together, depaul,

chicago, northwestern, loyola coming university of illinois, altogether, the community colleges have twice as many students as all of the four-year institutions. they never get the focus for the attention that they deserve. nationwide, up 52% of all people going to college are going to community colleges. in chicago, we have great four- year institutions. we have two of the five best business schools, both and kellogg. the great law schools. we of the destination of choice when people graduate, the city and the state. chicago is the magnate people graduating from the big 10 states, and arbor, madison, they come to chicago after graduating.

in the work force skills that, -- skill set, we do not pay attention to the people that actually do the data entry, do the hospitality work, and that also deserves attention. what we have done in chicago is for the first two schools, malcolm x will be our health school. we have brought in walgreens, express scripts, hospitals to do all of the curriculum and training. they are running the program, not just partnering, but when you go to malcolm x, that will be the school for health care, nursing, pharmacy, health care i.t., that is where you would go. that is a growing profession and

growing in job opportunities, but we have not really trained for it. we are now bringing the people to actually do the curriculum that do the training. the graduation rate in community colleges is 7%. i want the kids to have that opportunity to graduate so that they have a career. if you're going to do the choice, the hard work, and show all their responsibility, it's not graduation i want to be measured by but employment. i want those kids to be measured by it. when a person walks in to the age her office of any employer and they say -- to the h.r. office and they say cornell, sarah lawrence, northwestern, that has an economic value.

i want that when you go to apply for a job in the hospital, i wanted to have economic value because they showed responsibility, took a risk, and sacrifice. the most telling example remain was when i was on the public transportation platform. a young man going to a downtown school for business administration, on the train on the weighted target where he works on the south side. he is doing everything right, working a full-time job and going to school. can i honestly say i'm doing everything right to make sure when he graduates and it says "harold washington," that his resume means he has full economic value like the other individuals that graduate from other schools? i did not think i am. i owe it to him because he has done everything right and has shown responsibility, working and studying full-time come and i have to make sure that when he

graduates, the diploma he puts theis resume has value way when everyone else puts their college graduate school that it has value. i know this is true for others, but we all know employers who are looking for workers. i have workers digging for jobs, like you. i have the best weapon in an arsenal to deal with that gap between people looking for a job and the people looking for people who want a job, the best arsenal is the community college and they have been on the sidelines and work-force development. they have been a second thought. we need to make them my primary thought. the other schools i will target on the south side, we will make them transportation, distribution, and logistics.

the third largest logistics' company will be doing the training. ups and fedex will be doing distribution. canadian national on the railway. united airlines is coming in and they will do the training of the teachers, the curriculum development, so when you graduate from that school you can then move on to fedex, ups, other companies were third parties are sent in the work force and that is where you go. we are going to knock off two schools per year, the other schools will be in professional services, banking, accounting, business and administration, another in hospitality and culinary, another in high and manufacturing where we have real strength in the chicago area. the third school will be computer entry, computer

science, information technology space. six fields and the industry has all agreed to help us really manage the curriculum and training of the teachers. i put our community colleges into the center of this discussion. i believe we will continue to have the leadership of chicago with a great four-year institutions, both city and state, and we will continue to be the leader in the midwest in my view, and there are other midwesterners who should be as proud as i am, to be the destination of choice for people in the surrounding areas, but i want to make sure the kids graduating from my public schools have a shot at the future. three out of four jobs created over the next 20 years will all require more than a high-school education, a minimum of two years post-high school education.

the bulk of people who are going to college go to the community colleges. they need as much attention as what is given to our four-year and other research institutions, which is great, but these kids count, too. they have value. we are changing the entire community college system by the time my first term is up, a college to career focused. we will move away from what i think has not had an economic impact for the graduates, the ability to have an employment and job in the back end. to have a real come transformative impact on the economy. the key thing is i can tell these companies that they will have a steady flow of people with these skills in these professions, chicago will continue to lead in transportation and logistics. the continue to have a flow of

nurses, lab technicians, pharmacists, home health-care experts trained on a curriculum developed by the leaders in the chicago area, we will grow in the health-care sector. i say this in computer science, but there is not one of us who do not have openings today in the worst recession. but they have openings and they cannot find people to fill them. how many of us on a day-to-day basis are walking down the street and find people who come to us who say they are looking for a job. i've got people looking for people to hire, people looking for jobs, and we have this mismatch. obviously chicago is slightly different in this sense that i have the ability to do something with community

colleges that some in this room cannot do because of their own structure, but i do advocate this model. the governor of tennessee is now doing a similar thing there throughout the state. if you do not have control, i will work with you to assure you and model that will give you the ability to do one or two more schools to link up with specificallympanies that has transformed their economy. i saw this book in the computer industry in austin, texas, and louisville ky, with ups. ups can in and totally transformed. i will be the microphone in about 20 minutes and you can talk about it. ups did this whole deal on community colleges and they set up a major operation there because they had a steady work force they could rely on.

i cannot stress enough, while all of us have stories and ideas to learn from each other on k-12 the community college for economic growth is something that has been on the sideline and ignored for too long if you want to have your economy grow. it was the juggernaut economically in the post-world war ii era. then there has been a focus appropriately on the four-year institutions and research institutions. i want to close with the story began with. i want the opportunity when that young man graduates from harold washington to work full-time that he has an opportunity to walk into a place and when he says "harold washington," the head of human resources will

know that means something. it has a punch to it the same way as saying you went to the university of chicago medical school going to malcolm x. it has meaning for all the sacrifices, all the responsibilities that have shown. i think it's the one place, and i will just end on this, and i thank you for the opportunity to address you on this topic, but it is the one topic i know. usually when we try to do things, people in the corporate. and what people in the neighborhoods think come in usually goes in different directions. i have been amazed by the response in the streets and neighborhoods that have had the same sense of energy and commitment that i have had from the business community and the ceo's. it is not a divider. it is a united air on a joint passion. -- it is a uniter of passion.

you will find corporate leaders to come forward in a way and usually you have to push demand control them to do it. my problem is now to sit there and absorb all the enthusiasm coming out of the corporate world in the greater chicago. why? it makes sense. we have aligned our interest with their bottom line. when that makes -- when that happens, you can make beautiful music. i want to thank you again. we will make mistakes along the way, but austin, texas, louisville, ky, and tennessee have all done this. they have done different things that we have learned along the way and eventually after four wills, all six schools move into professional sectors that are growth engines for chicago's economic future and

job creation. thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> next, michael bloomberg talked about education. he said he was moving forward with his plan to overhaul 3300 schools and replace half of their teachers. the conference was held here in washington, d.c. [applause] >> mayor, gracias. thank you for that kind introduction. good morning to everyone. it's a pleasure to be here. i hope all of you had a happy new year. personally, i had a great time with my good friend lady gaga in times square. i would tell you about it, but i never kiss and tell.

let me start with another rumor and that is because the only reason i came here it was to collect on the bet that i made with the mayor of green bay on the packers-giant scam. if anyone is hungry for some wisconsin chatter, the man to see. the giants. i'm here to discuss an issue that i believe has reached a critical juncture and that is education reform. it really is astonishing how little is being said about our schools on the campaign trail because i think everybody knows that education is a top concern, a top concern for parents, and a top concern birse students. it affects them personally.

is the the people borrowing to vote, the people who will take care of us when we are older. you just cannot walk away and from what is going on in the schools. when it comes to math and science, we are near the bottom of the pack. when it comes to literacy, the best you can say is that we are average. take a look at our economy. take a look at how many high skilled jobs are available today that companies cannot fill even though there are 13 million unemployed americans. the truth is they do not have the skills required for the jobs. look at what is happening to the

middle class. real wages have been stagnating for years. to many young people are unable to find a career path to lead them to the american dream. is there a connection between these three developments? i do not think there is any doubt about it. there is no doubt that if we're going to remain the world's economic superpower, we have to stop taking our success for granted. as the global economy continues to move from one driven by manual labor to one driven by knowledge and ideas, we have to move with it. we have to lead the change. we cannot do that without the outstanding public schools. when i was elected mayor, the big city public school system of the york had been failing for decades. very little was being done about it. that was true for virtually every city in this country. over the decade, mayors and governors have led the charge

for reform, overhauling dysfunctional school government structures, increasing the number of charter schools, helping parents get more information about schools, and holding schools accountable for success. mayors including rahm emanuel and kevin johnson, antonio in los angeles, and mayor booker, thanks to the leadership of these mayors and others, the number of students enrolled in charter schools has more than tripled. a good portion of that growth has come in new york city. we have opened 139 new charter schools in our city. we have created more than 500 new small schools that give parents, kids top-quality options. parents and students both

deserve that. school choice is an important way to hold schools accountable for success. when people vote with their feet, you know it is real and it is pretty obvious which direction they're going. i think it is fair to say we know we still have an enormous weight to go. work is only going to get harder. in new york and all run the country, the most promising and successful reforms are under attack from ideologues on the right and left. i remember a conversation i had with bill bennett, the former education secretary under president bush 41. and asked him why we did not have standardized, national

testing. i have never forgotten what he said. he said because the right will never accept anything with the word "national" in its and the left will never accept anything with the word "testing" in it. i think that is right. ideologues are blocking national standards. that is not allow for comparison with in the country or around the world. that is what accountability really is. i understand education is a local issue and localities should have flexibility in running the schools.

to do that, we can still have national standards that hold everyone accountable for success and to let us see where we stand. if you cannot measure it, you cannot fix it. we have a saying in new york, in god we trust, but everyone else, bring data. the good news is we're moving closer to that goal through something called common core standards. that is something almost every state is adopting and that the obama administration strongly supports. just as the ideologues on the right are resisting national accountability with testing, ideologue's on the left are resisting accountability through any testing. without testing, there is no accountability. without accountability, we're back where we were 10 years ago was schools failing and no one doing anything about it. some said they do not want

students objected to high-stakes testing in schools. let me tell you about the high- stakes testing their about to face when they get out of school. in school, you have to make tough decisions. do you hang out with the gang or not? get pregnant when you are and whether or not? do you do drugs or not? those are high-stakes tests. our kids are subject to those tests. they have to answer those questions every day. to ask them whether they can read or write is something that will not put undue stress on them. unless we find out whether they can do that, we cannot improve the quality of the education. we cannot help students with the things they need to focus on. there are ideologues that believe testing is ok as long as teachers cannot be removed from the classroom. we wanted race to the top funding because our state legislature passed a law

requiring all teachers to be rigorously evaluated based on student achievement metrics. it was supposed to give us the ability to identify ineffective teachers to help them become effective. if they cannot become effective, we could move them out. our school system has to be run for the kids and not for the people that work in the system. we are there to educate. [applause] our legislature passed that law. unfortunately, they put in a little thing, one giant roadblock there was anything but little. it was what made the difference. it gave the local unions the ability to veto any evaluation plan. here we are two years later, and not a single district has an evaluation program. instead, we continue to have a

pass/fail system with a 98% passing rate. our students do not have the luxury of pass/fail and neither do you and i who have to make a living. neither should our teachers. we have to raise the bar for them just as we are for our students. nobody thinks 90% of any group is in the top 30% or top 70%. we have to raise the standards. we have to help those at the bottom. if they cannot do the job, we have to replace them. the only way we're going to reform public education is by doing exactly that. i do not mean just tinkering around the edges. i mean really transforming it into a system of excellence and

putting the needs of the students first. that has been my message in new york. it is the message our new governor is delivering as well. andrew cuomo has been governor for a year. he could not have been more strongly in favor of making sure that we put an effective evaluation system in, help teachers that need help, and that those who cannot perform get moved out. the governor and i both strongly supports the right to bargain. i have said i did not agree with wisconsin. people have a right to organize. we have to decide what we're willing to do and what we're willing to not do. we should not be willing to have teachers who are ineffective in the classroom because we're leaving our kids out in the cold without the skills they are going to need to be self-supporting and without

the education they need to participate in the great american dream. our job is to do what is right for our children. i have yet to hear how it is good for children to make it harder to remove ineffective teachers from classrooms. i can promise you we will not sacrifice our children's future by giving in on that point. the system has to be run for the people we're here to serve. the attacks on education by ideologues on the right and left must be met and then it off by the sensible center. that is the people you are here with today, the mayors. mayors are pragmatists and problem-solvers. they do not have the luxury of being on both sides of an issue. they have to be explicit as to where they stand.

they cannot say, i voted for it but did not vote to fund it. they have to go out there every day -- it is like saying i am pro-choice but not for women. [laughter] mayors are where the action is. mare's pick up the garbage, educate the kids, keep calm down. they make their cities' economics work and increase life expectancy. they do all the things we want them to do. they are expected to make hard- headed decisions based on the facts and not special political interests. that is what the mayors have done on so many issues. that is what we have to do on education, including accountability measures like teacher evaluations and sensible plans to improve or find other careers for those teachers who are not getting their students to move ahead and get what they need to produce a paper in the great american dream.

i spoke on martin luther king day and said all the battles are meaningless if our children do not have the skills to understand and participate and be part of the great american dream. education is one of the basic civil rights. the reason teacher evaluations are so important is that all the best research tells us the single most important factor affecting a student progress is the effectiveness of the caution teacher. there was a recent study that got a lot of press about three weeks ago by harvard and columbia economists who found students with ineffective teachers are less likely to become pregnant, more likely to go to college, and more likely to get higher paying jobs. i think we all knew that intuitively.

would anyone here want their child to be in the classroom with an ineffective teacher? of course not. we know how important great teachers are. we remember them from our own lives. great teachers make an enormous difference. if we expect the american school system to rise to the top of the pack, the only way we will get there is with great teachers leading the way. the only way that will happen is if we do more to recruit, reward, and retain great teachers and replace ineffective ones. teaching is probably the most important job there is today. i have enormous respect for teachers and in the personal investments they make in their students. over the past in years, i have worked to invest in them by expanding professional development. we have raised base salaries by 43% in the last 10 years. a starting teacher in new york city now makes $45,000. that teacher can make well over $100,000.

you have to put your money where your mouth is. [applause] in the last 10 years, all of the agencies in new york city have increased their compensation by 32%. inflation was 33% during that time. teacher incomes have gone up 105% because our teachers were underpaid. we were losing them to the suburbs. i cannot think of any better investment we can make them to have a better teacher in front of every single child. many student graduating from college today have college loans that could lead them to cross teaching off of a list of possible careers. what we do to make more teachers apply to our school system? we cannot let it happen that they go elsewhere simply because they have loans to repay.

we cannot let our top students who want to be teachers to decide they cannot afford it. one program we are in the process of instituting in new york city is we have proposed an incentive to anyone who finishes college in the top tier of the class to come teach in the new york city public schools. if you commit to stay, we will pay off up to $25,000 of your student loans. our teachers deserve it and so do our children. that is the recruitment. we also have to worry about retaining the best teachers by offering them a big raise. teachers to they have lots of options. if you are a good teacher, you are worth a lot of money in the private sector in many careers. in washington, teachers were given a choice to decide for themselves if they wanted a contract that would pay them an extra $25,000 a year if they were rated effective. guess what they did in washington, d.c.? the teachers said yes. they wanted to be rewarded for

their success, just like any other person in any other job. why is anybody surprised about that? i do not know. we all want recognition and respect. it would also be nice if we could get some money to enjoy more things. the harder we work and better the job we do, a thing most people would say, the better you should be rewarded. teachers' unions have historically opposed merit pay. more teachers today are asking why. when they are given a voice, they say yes. by all accounts, the raises have been the essential to keeping effective teachers for moving out of the d.c. public school system. if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, mayor gray should be fired because we want to make the same offer to our teachers. we have proposed the following deal. if you are rated highly effective for two years, we will

increase your salary by $25,000 a year. our teachers deserve that and so do our children. it is something we have to bargain on with the teachers' unions. will they stand in a way of the most effective members being rewarded for their work? i think this is an idea whose time has come. i am confident that teachers are allowed to decide the matter, they will support it in new york city the way they did in washington, d.c. we have already won the most important battle ball. that is the battle for public expectations. 10 years ago, people said you cannot fix the schools until you cure poverty. the chancellor said to me that they had the wrong way. you cannot cure poverty until you fix our schools. too many people were resigned to the reality of bad schools

just as they were once resigned to higher crime rates. in the 1990's, mayor's show the world of high crime is not inevitable. you could make the streets safer if you used data-driven strategies and help people accountable for the results. mayor giuliani dramatically cut crime in new york city. we have cut it another 35%. today, new yorkers expect the streets to be the safest of any big city in the country. the voters will not collect any future mayor who's not 110% committed to the bowl. if you expect the worst, you get the worst. if you expect to do better, you can do better. thee willing to take on special interests who find comfort in the status quo. when i took office, education

was about as bad as it could get. school crime was the norm. kids were promoted regardless of whether they learned anything. promotion was often based more on political connections than merit. we refused to except what president bush once called the soft bigotry of low expectations. we expected more of our students. that meant expecting more of the adults in charge. working with the state legislature, we abolished the broken board of education and handed control of the schools to a chancellor appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the mayor. by raising standards and inject accountability into schools, we raised graduation rates 40% since 2005. that is compared to 8% in the rest of the state.

all the kids in new york state took exactly the same test. we have cut the dropout rate and school crime in half. we've increased the number of students enrolling in college. but almost any measure, students are doing better. our school system is heading in the right direction. today parents expect the schools to be first-rate. more parents are staying in our city rather than moving to the suburbs because of the change expectations. i realize many mayors do not control their own school system, but we do have voices. we have the ears of other politicians. we're all in this together. just as we have seen on many issues, when mayors stand together and speak together, we put problem-solving over

ideology. we can make an enormous difference. if we stand together on school reform, we can make sure our kids nationwide get the education they need to keep the american dream alive in this new century and beyond. let's go get it. thank you. [applause] >> c-span road to the white house coverage suzy decanted events leading up to the saturday but primary. >> the obama administration just came down with a policy that said in her program she cannot teach abstinence as a preferable way of avoiding out of wedlock birth.

and she cannot talk about marriage. she cannot talk about marriage as anything other than an alternative lifestyle that is no better or no worse than any other. my question is -- why? >> the president adopts a stimulus package of hundreds of billions of dollars that no one has read. then he discovers, to his great disprized -- surprise, that the schauble ready jobs were not schauble ready and the stimulus leaves us $800 billion deeper in debt. at some point he needs to take responsibility. that was his plan, his proposal, and it failed. >> and its candidates need to get the word out. >> thank you. >> after the polls close on saturday, we will show you the results along with the candidate's speeches as long as your phone calls.

>> if you have a saudi prince who is part of the royal family of saudi arabia who has effectively bought one of the news franchises in the world, you have to look at what his motives are. >> diana west writing about culture, politics, and the spread of islam. "there is an argument that nation out to register as a torrent agent. >> more with the former washington times editorial and syndicated columnist diane a west. >> he argued a couple of things, he argued that american policy towards japan in 1940-1941 was a rather provocative and, perhaps, in a juvenile way he said we were putting pins into a rattlesnake and eventually it

would strike back. -- "erbert hoover's for eag freedom betrayed." and the former executives look the soviet union. "sweet heaven when i die." then jay wexler on understanding the constitution by looking at "the odd clauses." book tv on c-span2. >> a little history ahead of the gop primary including changes in party affiliation, race issues, and the impact of evangelical voters. >> let me introduce you to our next guest.

santorum just suggested that the race has been shaken up. through the lens of today's south carolina voters, give us a snapshot of how important social conservatism is in that state today and how the news from the gingrich campaign may play into that community? guest: it seems to me that it's pretty important for your viewers to recognize south carolina is a relatively diverse states we have a significant part of the party in the upstate of evangelical conservatives. as santorum's careful answer says, they will be distressed to learn some things we have known for a long time. former speaker gingrich's personal life has been messy, i

think is the world, which may distress from the people he's trying to appeal to. former governor romney seems to be holding on to his support. we think the base of that is down in the charleston area where more established republicans seem to be. on the one hand, the people who are enthusiastic about governor romney, what they will do, and on the other hand, will governor romney be able to hold on to his support and keep that 30% of though he has been getting for a while? host: we will take your phone calls and continue our discussion about presidential politics. you can also tweet in or call your questions. there have been a number of transplants of within last decade. the south carolina population

increased 15% in the decade since the 2000 census. this transplants and she really does not understand the south carolina voting rules about who camper to debate and who cannot. give us an explanation, please. guest: they need to be registered. they should have done that already. then you show up at the polls tomorrow morning and declared herself ready to vote in the republican primary. host: you cannot register same day? guest: i do not believe you can in the primary. host: do you know how typical cross over as have been and whether they impact the primary? guest: they have in some primaries. they have been concerned because they essentially open the primaries so there have been times when democrats and republicans would cross over to either express their support for a moderate candidate or to

conduct mischief in the primary to see if they cannot upset the republican process. i did not think that is likely in this race. the people who will vote tomorrow are mostly committed republicans. host: let's take a call from a democrat in missouri. you're on the air. host: i was hoping to get on with rick. i was willing to ask him and why all the other republican candidates do not want the employees to bargain for a living wage? they want to give these corporations a 0% tax, get rid of all the regulations. when it comes to the employees, they did not give a crap. i would seek to can answer that and see what the gentleman has to say about why republicans and eight unions. host: south carolina is a right

to work state. can he give us a history of the debate about that in your state? guest: we have been a right to work state for a long time. we have been suspicious of unions which dates back to the textile industry and important business leaders in the state to were very concerned about the influence of unions. we have been that way for a long time. our expression of our opposition to the unions continues into the present. all the republican candidates are opposed to big unions, of course. it really has not been much of an issue in the primary here. host: moving on to yesterday's event, rick perry's decision to drop out of the race. who were his constituents and will then follow his endorsement? guest: he was polling very poorly in this state, a surprise to most of us.

the very few voters who had been strongly affiliated with him, who knows where they will go. his endorsement of former speaker gingrich was interesting because he said gingrich claimed to be a conservative, so maybe that would shore up some support for the former speaker who might otherwise would have gone to former senator santorum. in light of the events yesterday, it's not clear p has any impact at all. that story is being drowned out about the stories about governor romney's tax situation and his income. and then there is speaker gingrich's personal life. host: here are some statistics about south carolina and their voters. an independent caller from florida, go ahead. caller: what mechanism is in place in states like south carolina that would prevent in

this election with the democrats are allowed to vote, what is to prevent them from flooding the polls and picking the weakest republican candidate and backing them and allowing that decision to run against president in the final? guest: there is nothing in the principle that keeps democrats from doing that, but in practice, going to vote just to do some schip is not something that most people are inclined to do, i think. it does not happen very much here. certainly tomorrow, it is hard to imagine what a democrat would do if they were so inclined. who would they vote for? would they vote for the "not stephen colbert?" it's a stretch. host: it's been endorsed by herman cain, who is guessing

that people make pull the lever for him to reflect that since he is still on the ballot in south carolina. is that correct? >> yes. host: call-up from a republican in south carolina. good morning. have you made a decision for saturday yet? caller: yes. i firmly support ron paul. host: do you have a question? caller: i would like to know what you think the public's opinion is on ron paul is stance on the reform of marijuana laws in the elimination of the war on drugs? i have a concern about a young man doing a 20-year sentence for a first-time offense for possession of drugs when their lives could easily be turned around. what do think the public's opinion on his dances? host: -- guest: there are a couple of issues there.

his stance on drug laws has been popular among young voters. the public is obviously ambivalent about the current treatment of drug offenses, and the caller raises an important point. we have a lot of people who have been sent to prison in the cost of this prison terms are very high, but for the government and the cost to imprison people in the personal cost to those imprisoned. many think there are probably a better way to do that. nonetheless, it is an issue that only motivates a relatively small number of voters. precisely because so many people are ambivalent. it seems like it's an important consideration and many military voters are ambivalent to

democrats. we have several military bases here, lots of retired military in the state and some candidates have taken a position, for example on the situation in iraq or afghanistan but would not be pleasing to military voters, like congressman paul who comes to mind. they want someone who takes a stronger role in national defense and what we would do going forward. it is unclear who they would go for in that. the distinctions among former speaker gingrich and former senator santorum, as well as former governor romney, are unclear. my hunch is that it would not make a big difference. host: next from louisville, ky. caller: i have a question for you about south carolina voters. it requires a bit of a set up.

on the xl pipeline, it cuts across the biggest aqua for in the world -- aquifer in the world and it provides 80% of the water for all the plains states. the pipeline cuts right across it. transcanada already has a pipeline that goes around it but because -- it cuts east across canada. they will not let them because they have had too many spills. the people against this are farmers. there is no way to clean it. but in south carolina, the question was to build a 36 inch pipeline 100 yards from the beach would they tar and

feather, stone, or hang them? guest: [laughter] i'm not sure what they would do. but i think the caller raises some interesting points. the pipeline issue obviously raises some interesting things symbolically. we heard rick santorum of the republican response. people are torn between those two symbols as much as they are well informed about the

specifics. i think the caller is right that most folks would night -- would not like the pipeline in their backyard. but we gotta put it in someone's backyard. host: the next call is from dave. hi, dave. caller: hello. i do not know if this is up to date, but romney already spend 56. the rest of them will be super packs. if he gets elected, is he going to have no power over the people and the government and everybody telling them anything? also, i believe we have the

best government money can buy, and it has been bought. we, as americans, are addicted to oil and we should start a support group. you people are wasting it all the time and now it is just more and more. i do not think that is the answer. and braun paul has a good idea to bring the military home, have a strong military here, and also to build a lot of stuff with the money we are wasting policing the world. that is all i have to say. also, one more thing. romney put money in the cayman islands. there are plenty of banks here. he does not have to put it in the cayman islands. there is something fishy there. host: thanks so much. guest: four different things

going there. i'm sure my friends in the television and media business would have been happy if $55 million would have been spent here in the states. i believe it may be some fraction of that -- you may have a better idea than i do. my understanding is more than -- that is more like $5 million or $10 million. the assumption is that we set up and as long ass they do not directly coordinate, they can do what they want to do. mitt romney's super pak is free as long as they talk to him about what they want to do. i think we can do better.

host: let me jump in with the numbers on that. the "washington post" reporting this morning that the presidential campaign ads spelling -- spending just $12 million in south carolina. guest: that is a lot of money in our market, after all. we have been watching the ads and most of them are not uplifting. there is a sense in which the process could be improved dramatically if we could figure out how to deal with the super pac issue and the citizens united issue. >> time is short. -- host: time is short. let me take a call from knoxville, tennessee. chris, you moron. guest: basic -- caller: basically, what i'm calling about is i am your typical southern voter. i fall into that evangelical, social republican category. i'm 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 flocking to santorum or grit -- or gingrich. but i do not necessarily see this here in my area of east tennessee. a big reason was -- it is mainly over the war issue. as a christian, i worship the prince of peace. and christ led through example. non-violent resistance, you know, teachings and basically that we did not have to inflict violence on others. then on fox news monday night, to see the south carolina audience who are supposedly evangelical christians between the golden rule -- booing the golden rule and then cheering newt gingrich when he got up in

such a savage manner st. "kill them all." andrew jackson was a big killer. anyone who knows anything about the american history knows that he was a traitor to the americans, despite being president. there is a risk in my area of the south in tennessee between evangelicals who are willing to put their government and the wars the government fights above their religion. host: i think we understand just an hour time is running out. mark tomkins? guest: some complicated issues there. the concerns over faith and family that motivate many evangelical christians stands in some measure apart from our concern about foreign policy and our role in the world. evangelicals are obviously a diverse group of people and folks among that community have

different views on our activities in afghanistan and iraq. i think your caller illustrates that diversity. host: as we close, let me point out some numbers that we have. 2573 voters turned out in the primary. there has been a 15% increase in population in the state since 2000. what are we anticipating for voter turnout for saturday? guest: my expectation is that turnout will be other big down from 2008 because there is little less clarity to this race, and each of the candidates is in some ways flawed for their own constituents. the lack of enthusiasm may diminish the turnout just a bit. on the other hand, there are several choices, and that may motivate folks. host: mark tomkins, thanks for giving as a snapshot of south carolina voters as primary date

nears. it is turning up to be important for the contenders, a shortened pack of contenders. >> c-span's road to the white house coverage shows you the events leading up to saturday's south carolina primary. >> the obama administration just came down with the policy that said in her program, she cannot teach abstinence as a preferable way of avoiding out of wedlock births. and she cannot talk about marriage. she cannot talk about marriage as any other than an alternative lifestyle as no better or worse than any other lifestyle. my question is, why? >> when the president adopts a stimulus package of hundreds of millions of dollars that nobody has read and that is a surprise

two years later as, he himself put it, that the schabel ready jobs were not schabel ready and the stimulus will leave us deeper in debt, at some point he has to take responsibility. it was his plan, his proposal, and it failed. >> as candidates meet with voters to get their message out. after the polls closed saturday evening, we will show you the results from south carolina, along with candidates speeches and phone calls. >> the conspirators planned was to have their -- the street lined with their guards, part of home would create a distraction so that any police escort would be drawn away and the rest would close in on abraham lincoln. >> and covering a possible plot

to kill the president elect. also this weekend, the origins of the cold war on lectures in history with college of the ozarks professor david dalton. and fdr's tichenor circle of military and diplomatic advisers on their role in fighting the world war. >> some would say we are reactionary. others would say we stand for socialism. there will be the inevitable ties. it is time for change and so on and so on. we're all those things and many more besides, but we will hear nothing that we have not heard before. >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 men who ran and lost.

>> let our opponents stand on the status quo while we seek to refresh the american spirit. >> led the opposition collect their $10 million in secret money. and let's find out 1 million ordinary americans who will contribute to this campaign, a million member club, with members who will not expect special favors for themselves, but a better land for us all. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. >> secretary clinton spent -- met with the german foreign minister and reporters. they discussed nato actions in

afghanistan and the debt issue in the european union. this is about 25 minutes. >> good afternoon, everyone. it is a great pleasure for me to welcome the foreign minister back once again to the state department. germany and the u.s. are steadfast allies and close partners on a range of issues. we're also good friends, and i was happy to see the minister shortly after he hit the 50 year mark, which is a very important milestone. are we going to do consecutive translation on both sides, or

just the german side >> consecutive. >> we will not do it unless we have a question that calls for it. in afghanistan, we are obviously very committed to a fast forward for a stable, peaceful afghanistan. we are deeply regretting the bad news about the four french soldiers killed earlier today in the second attack on french soldiers this month. that follows the death yesterday of six u.s. marines in a helicopter crash. let me express on behalf of all americans our deepest condolences to the met -- to the families of those soldiers and marines. we know what a loss that is and how important it is we work toward a goal of security and

long-term stability. thank you for hosting the conference last month when the end. -- thank you once again for hosting the conference last month. we're looking forward to our work in may in chicago at the nato summit where we will advance priorities. let me say clearly, the u.s. is fully committed to maintaining a force posture in europe that meets our enduring commitment to european security and our collective defense obligations to our nato allies. we are grateful to germany for hosting the u.s. military for many years and we will be maintaining a close relationship going forward. we recognize that the trans-

atlantic partnership is absolutely indispensable to our own security and well-being. we are also focused on economic security. we both recognize and appreciate greatly germany's leadership role in resolving the debt crisis facing europe. i can only imagine how challenging this is, and as i conveyed to the minister, the united states stand in support of germany. it leads the way for all of the countries to regain their economic -- all of the bureau's own countries to regain their economic footing and restore balance growth. we discussed at some length our nations shared concerns regarding iran, and the steps it has taken toward furthering its nuclear weapons ambitions. we are both firmly committed to

the dual track approach, pressure to bring about meaningful engagement by iran on its program. and we are closely coordinating as we implement sanctions. we talked about so many things. we talked about north africa, egypt, syria, the middle east, and so much more. as always, we have a very comprehensive agenda to cover. i appreciate your being here for us to continue the conversation. >> thank you so much, madame secretary. ladies and gentlemen, i would like to express my gratitude for the warm welcome here, and in this specific case, also for the the wonderful and delicious birthday cake we just had a few minutes before. do not be jealous. it was really delicious. [laughter] i would like to say that this

is, of course, not only an expression of our close collaboration, but also an expression of our wonderful and very personal relationship. the united states is our most important partner and ally beyond europe. close cooperation across the atlantic is essential, tied to global changes an enormous political challenges. we discussed the deeply worrying situation in syria. the regime of assad must be stopped urgently. we support the efforts of the arab league to stop the crisis, and we agreed the council must take a clear position to condemn the violence by the syrian regime. on iran, i informed my colleague, madam secretary, about discussions within the european union about new sanctions. the government at taron keeps violating its international obligations on the transparency

of its nuclear program. we have no choice but to pass tough new sanctions that address the financial sources of the nuclear program. one thing is clear. the door for serious dialogue remains open, but the option of nuclear weapons in iran is not acceptable to both of us. i want to repeat what i said to my colleague and friend. in the last hour before. i think it is important for all of us to see that a nuclear option is not acceptable in iran. this is not only to protect israel, but also a question of the balance in the region, and

it is also unacceptable if we look at the situation of non proliferation necessity for life. i think this is a serious situation. but we will stand united to give a common and clear and unfortunately, a tough answer. because a nuclear option for iran is not acceptable, not for the region, not for the world. we also discussed the situation in the transformation of the countries in the arab spring. enormous economic and political challenges and we have to support a successful transition. i explained our transformation partnership program, which we designed in germany and what was

introduced in our european policy. and i think is successful. but we all know we have to see the differences from country to country. i think this is necessary, that we do not think one answer fits all. it is necessary to give specified answers. we also discussed the preparation of the nato summit in chicago in may. of course, this is important for us. we both want a successful nato meeting in chicago. we're looking forward to this. once again, we're looking forward to the hospitality of the government of the united states of america. and of course, we want the summit to begin with success and we will work hard for this. one thing i want to underline because it is important, not only in the new discussions, but in tough times like europe, of

course, as you all know. we discussed the debt crisis in europe. i know that some in the u.s. paint a dark picture of a continent unable to solve its problems. let me first remark, we finished it socialism with the support of the united states 20 years ago. we know we have to show solidarity and this is our desire and our destiny as germans. it is also our life insurance in times of globalization. it is crystal clear that germany is committed to europe and to the bureau's own. we will show solidarity on the one hand, but on the other hand, we will also ask for structural reforms because both are the

answer to this present crisis. thank you so much for the hospitality. i also want to say a few words about the killings of the soldiers in afghanistan. i am shocked by the death of the french and american soldiers in afghanistan. i would like to express my sympathy, and my deepest condolences in the name of the republic of germany to all of the families and relatives. but also, it is clear tragic setbacks such as this must not stop our engagement for peace and reconciliation in afghanistan. thank you so much for the time and hospitality. >> a question on iran, if i may.

iran in recent days has expressed some willingness to return to talks on its nuclear program. just today, lady ashen released a letter she sent to the iranians in october in which she calls on them to take concrete steps toward confidence building. the first question would be, what exactly are those steps that you were looking for them to take? and second, do you take them at their word this time that they're going to fully engaged? madam secretary, a way of asking two questions. [laughter] you have made a decision not to testify on the keystone pipeline next week. could you explain why you do not want to do that? >> first, let me say that we're going to miss you. i am understand this may be the last i get two or three or four questions from you. [laughter] but we wish you well as, i think, you head off to moscow,

which will be an exciting assignment from all indications. with respect to iran, let me say that we have a very strong eu and wep with the yothe are expecting them to take additional steps to keep the pressure on iran in the coming days. i believe we are making it clear to iran, as the minister said, that its pursuit of nuclear weapons and its need this provocations, such as threats regarding the straits of hormuz, place it on a dangerous path. iran does have a choice to make. it can come back to the table. we have made this consistently clear to them, and addressed nuclear program concerns that the international community ready aspirin or they can face increasing -- community readily has. or they can face increasing

isolation. we strongly believe they can have a better future. the country can be reintegrated into the the global community and be able to share in the benefits when their government definitively turned away from pursuing nuclear weapons. last october on behalf of the member nations, of which both germany and the u.s. are two, representative action did send a letter to the iranians saying that we're open to negotiations if there were serious about leaving their nuclear program without preconditions. we stand by the letter. the european union did make it public earlier today and we await iran's response. it has been very important that the eu has kept this open

channel and we are all seeking clarity about the meaning behind their public statements that they are willing to engage. but we have to see a seriousness and a sincerity of purpose coming from them. with respect to what we expect of them, i think we have made the letter public. they know we want to see them coming to the table to seriously engage about the future of a program that is prohibited under their obligations, pursuant to the ntt and in light of the security council resolutions. we await their response. with respect to the keystone pipeline, as you know, on wednesday the department of state recommended and president obama agreed that the presidential permit for the proposed pipeline should be denied. that decision was based on the fact that the state department

did not have sufficient time to assess whether the project was in the national interest as a result of the limited time frame set forth by congress. as the president said yesterday, the announcement is not a judge it -- a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the state department from gathering the necessary information to approve the project, or to make other decisions with respect to it and protect the american people. the department's denial of the permit application does not preclude any subsequent permit application, or applications for similar projects. we are following our normal procedures and actually sending the official that actually knows something about this issue in great depth and has been leading

our efforts, assistant secretary for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs, keren ann jones, to the conference. >> [unintelligible] >> we will not know until we are serious about whether they are engaging with us. but you do not have anything in mind? >> yes, we do. they have to give up their nuclear program. they have to come to the table willing to do that. >> are there confidence-building measures? >> i will not go into any more detail. i appreciate your efforts to get me to do so, but what is important is that confidence will start with their conveying the seriousness of purpose to engage with us and our partners in the e3 plus 3 process. that will build confidence.

and the additional negotiations. >> i agree with this answer 100%. but i want to explain it with the german government. this letter is important because it underlines our dual track strategy. on the one hand, it is necessary to show the iranian government that we are united and that we do not accept any option for mcnatt -- for a nuclear weapon with the iranian government. on the other hand, it is also necessary to to show that we are right -- ready for dialogue, but serious dialogue. just to meet for show, that this meeting would be misused for propaganda is not what we want

to do. therefore, i think this letter is expressly expressing what our strategy is not only in europe, but together. >> thank you. >> he made it perfectly clear today that printing more money is not the answer. allow me a second question, out of fairness. [laughter] a follow up on afghanistan. mr. sarkozy is considering the withdrawal of his troops. is that the right answer? >> with respect to the second question, i am in great sympathy about what happened to the french soldiers. it was terrible.

i can certainly appreciate the strong feelings that are being expressed. we are in close contact with our french colleagues, and we have no reason to believe france will do anything other than continued to be part of the very carefully considered transition process, as we look at our accept as previously agreed upon and is meant. with respect -- enlistment. with respect to the euro zone debt crisis, it is not going to surprise you to hear me say, the united states cares deeply with what happens to this crisis. we have a great stake in the vitality of the european economic markets. european growth is essential for our growth. it is essential for global growth. we are -- we know from our own experience that is moving from

crisis to recovery depends on rebuilding confidence and getting the economy to start moving again, producing jobs. germany has been at the forefront of shaping the strategy is to move europe forward. as the minister said, there is a lot of hard work ahead. we will not stand over here on the other side of the atlantic and second-guess the tough questions you have to answer in europe. we think our european partners, led by germany, have laid a solid foundation on which to build a recovery. i know president obama and chancellor angela merkel speaks often about this. i know the minister met with secretary brightener earlier -- secretary tim geithner earlier today. we are encouraging german decision making, a german

company is building, and german leadership, because it is in the interest of the united states. >> for me, it is crucial and important that you understand our point of view. we think the debt crisis cannot be solved and answered by making it easier to take out new debts. we think it is necessary to of structural reform. for us, it is always a combination. we put on the table solidarity in the european union 200 billion euros. if i would compare this to the economy in the united states of america, this would be one trillion dollars. we have to compare the size of our economy. we have to compare the size of our country. this underlines its and makes it crystal clear that germany notes

their own responsibility. all of these programs have defaulted -- across all party lines. this is a clear signal. on the other hand, if we just put money on the table, and we would not ask for structural reform, we would not solve the crisis. structural reform, which increases the competitiveness in essential.'s, are we do not ask for anything more as germans then what we delivered in the last 10 years by our own structural reforms. this is why germany is so successful in the european union. it is a combination of both. we think it is a debt crisis, it

has morphed into a confidence crisis. we have to answer it with solidarity and structural reform. afghanistan, i just want to express one thing. of course, we all feel sympathy with the families, with the victim's. we understand is discussions very well. we should never forget why we are in afghanistan. afghanistan may never become a safe haven for terrorists worldwide again. this is the reason why we're there. we are full of sympathy and we want to express our deepest condolences, but we think we have to continue to protect our

own security and freedom and our way of life. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> saturday on "washington journal," the chairman of the south carolina republican party examines the 2012 field. a discussion on strategy is being used by progressives in the 2012 election. our guest is adam green. later a ,tom tarantino talks about high unemployment among the returning veterans. >> the south carolina primary is tomorrow and c-span will be

there for the results and a candidate speeches. follow the road to the white house to the florida primary, 10 days later. you can also follow c-span coverage online at c-span.org/ campaign2012. >> if you have a saudi prince who is part of the royal family of saudi arabia who has bought one of the largest news franchises in the world, you have to look at his motives. >> diana west to write about culture, politics, and the spread of islam in the western world. >> there is an argument that you should have to register as a foreign agent. >> more with former washington times editorial writer and syndicated columnist diana west, sunday night at 8:00.

>> we gather to nights in a dramatic and deeply promising time in our history and in the history of manners. from the past 12 months, the world has known changes of almost biblical proportions. even now, months after the failed coup that doomed to fail system, i am not sure we have absorbed the full impact, the full import of what happens. that communism died this year. >> a fine state of the union address is going back to 1952, at the c-span video library. watch president obama delivered this address tuesday night. it is washington, your way. >> the president will be spending the weekend working with the staff on the state of the union address. during today's white house briefing, jay carney did not go into depth on the speech's

contents. he says it will include new proposals. president obama will deliver the address tuesday. >> i apologize for the delay. welcome to the white house for your daily briefing. i do not have any announcements to make, so i will go straight to julie pace. >> thank you. a couple logistical questions on the state of the union. can you give us a sense of where the speech stands right now? is it written? is that something the president is going to be working on today and over the weekend? >> the president is working on the state of the union address. he is working with jon favreau, his chief speechwriter, as well as many others who are involved in the discussion about policy

issues and other things that will be a part of the speech. so that process is underway, and i'm sure he will continue to work on it through the next several days until he delivers it on tuesday night at 9 p.m. eastern standard time. i urge all americans to tune in. and if they don't tune in on their old-fashioned televisions, they should go to www.whitehouse.gov/sotu, where we will have enhanced -- essentially an enhanced version of the speech. it will be live-streamed, but there will be graphics and other details that are occurring live and appearing with the speech that will give viewers who watch it on whitehouse.gov even more information. after that, there will be a live-streamed discussion with -- a panel

discussion featuring senior administration officials, and a live audience taking questions from twitter, facebook and google+. so we're very excited about all the ways that we're trying to provide access to the president's state of the union address. it's a terrific opportunity for the president to describe his vision for where he believes this country needs to go, for its economy, as well as for its security. so he's looking forward to it, and working on his speech. >> radio is a good option, too. >> tune in -- >> and i know you haven't wanted to -- >> -- on the radio. >> i know you haven't wanted to preview the content of the speech, but should we be expecting to hear anything from the white house on the content over the weekend, or really any time before tuesday night? >> well, if the ap hears about it, can we -- >> can everybody else get a piece of that action? >> yes. >> honestly, we don't have a lot of plans right now to get into details of the speech before the speech is delivered.

that's been our approach of late in these major presidential addresses, that our preference is really for the news to be fresh when the president gives a speech. so how this process works, you can't always control all the information about something like this. but our hope is that when americans hear it -- many millions of americans hear it or watch it or read about it, they will be doing all of that for the first time and learning about what the president's ideas are, what his vision is, at least as regards the state of the union address for the first time. >> and then just on one other topic, the french have threatened to withdraw their troops from afghanistan early. how concerning is that to the administration? have the french communicated any details about what they're going to be looking at in terms of their troop levels in afghanistan to the u.s.?

>> well, first of all, our thoughts and prayers go out to the french people, and the families of those who lost loved ones in this tragic incident. as you know, four french soldiers perished in afghanistan. france is a valued member of the nato/isaf coalition, and their forces have served alongside ours with valor and honor. we are in regular consultation with all of our isaf coalition partners. i don't have anything specific to report to you about those communications with france, except to say that it's a very tight coalition and communication is regular and frequent. >> but is it concerning that a key u.s. ally in afghanistan would be discussing pulling its troops out early? >> the fact of the matter is, as i've said, france has been an excellent and valued member of the nato/isaf team.

i don't want to get ahead of any discussions or decision that france might make with regard to its presence as part of that coalition. we are -- we -- well, we believe the mission in afghanistan is very important. the coalition is very important. the president laid out an afghanistan strategy that he has been executing very deliberately and effectively, and we will continue to focus our efforts on executing that policy that brought a surge in forces that allowed us to focus our efforts on taking the fight to al qaeda with the goal of disrupting, dismantling and ultimately defeating al qaeda. with the other goal of stabilizing afghanistan to give the afghan government breathing room to help train up afghan security forces so that we could then draw down our forces as we have begun doing, and transfer

security lead to the afghans by the end of 2014. so that process is in place. it's a process that we obviously are significantly engaged in. but it includes all of our isaf partners. reuters. >> thank you, jay. two questions. first, on iran -- does the white house have any reaction to an ally of iran's supreme leader today calling on israel to be punished for killing a nuclear scientist? >> i have no reaction to that. i wasn't even aware of it, so i have nothing to say about that. >> second, on politics, did the president watch the debate last night? and does the president think that -- >> we were a little busy last night. >> i'm sure you were. that voters have a right to know about -- >> the president was -- we were -- he didn't watch the debate. as i think i've discussed with

you before, he doesn't -- tends not to -- not because of disinterest, necessarily, he just doesn't watch a lot of television, at least not news television. and i mean no disrespect. but he was -- he had events in new york last night, so -- i think when the debate was occurring. >> sorry, i wasn't even thinking about that. >> that's okay. >> the point of the question was not that. it's -- one of the issues that came up at the debate was about candidates' personal lives. and my question is, does the president think that voters have a right to know about candidates' personal lives -- for example, newt gingrich's -- the allegations by newt gingrich's former wife? >> jeff, i'm not going to wade into the gop primary contest and the debates and the issues. the president ran for this office four years ago. he put forward himself and his record and his vision. voters evaluated his record, who

he is and his positions and his vision and elected him to this office. and he's running again -- again, on his record and his vision. and voters make their decisions and weigh a lot of criteria, and it would not be for him or for us to tell voters what should matter and what shouldn't. but this president is focused on the job he's doing, the record that he's compiled, the vision he has for the future. he'll be speaking about that within the context of the state of the union address, the things that we need to do working with congress, the things that he can do using his executive authority to continue to recover from this terrible recession, to strengthen american security, and to build a foundation for america to, as

we've said in the past, win the future, win the 21st century. >> but he'll be up against one of those gentlemen on the stage later this year. should personal lives be on the agenda? >> again, i don't want to weigh into that. i think the president will run his campaign. he, because of the support he has within his own party, is fortunate enough not to face a primary contest. that is a good thing because he has so much work to do for the american people as president. he'll engage in the campaign, obviously, as the months pass here with more frequency. and certainly once the republican party chooses its nominee, that frequency will intensify. but right now he's focused on the things that he can do, the things that washington can do, congress working with the administration, the things we can do with the private sector.

those will be what he'll be talking about. those are the kinds of things that he'll be talking about in his state of the union address. and we'll let the campaign take care of itself for now. we'll let the republican primary process play itself out, and we'll look to you all to let us know through your reports how that's going. who's it going to be? mark. >> a follow-up on the debate. does the president feel at any time that these republicans have had 16 occasions to take their views to the american people -- does he feel left out of it? does he feel that, gee, i really would have liked to have responded to that comment there or another one? or is he content getting his message through the way he's doing it? >> well, he hadn't been invited to these debates. i think the president, president obama, understands

well what this process is like, how challenging it is, what it's like to engage in debate after debate after debate, as we've seen in the republican party process. and he recognizes that that's a process for each party to engage in as it allows folks across the country, in these states that are participating early on, to make key decisions about who should be that party's nominee. i certainly think he feels that he has ample opportunity to engage with the public to convey what his views are about what policies we should be pursuing, what his views are about the future of the country and his incredible confidence in america and its -- the role it's going to play as, again, the indispensable nation in the 21st century.

so there will be debates. he will be, i'm sure, engaged in debates with the republican nominee. and that will afford him the opportunity to discuss the issues in a point-counterpoint way. for now, he's going to focus on his job, which is to be president, to do the things he can do. because, as he's pointed out, american political, presidential campaigns take a long time, and we can judge whether that's a good thing or a bad thing. but we have 10 more months, almost, before election day. that's a lot of time, and it's -- and we should not use all of that time simply to campaign. we should -- this president believes very strongly that he will use that time, that he should use that time, and the american people expect him to

use that time, to govern, to try to move the ball down the field, if you will, in terms of growing our economy and creating jobs. that's going to be his primary focus in the months ahead. >> but he must be aware that everything he does is seen through a spectrum of politics in this year, right? >> well, certainly that is a part of this process, and it's partly because -- and this is not a judgment but an observation -- the media, because of the importance and the duration of the presidential campaign, tends to in an election year view everything that a president or members of congress does -- a member of congress does through the prism of politics. but he's going to focus what he does on the policy proposals that he can pursue, that he can

work with congress on. we need to, as has been discussed, extend this payroll tax cut to 160 million americans for the duration of the calendar year. we need to extend unemployment insurance. there are just many things -- and you'll hear more about them on tuesday night -- many things that we can and should and must do that aren't about an election campaign. so he looks forward to fulfilling those responsibilities. that's why you run, after all. that's why he's here. and that's why every individual who has found himself in the oval office sought that job to begin with -- to pursue a vision and policy goals. and nobody -- i don't think, and i certainly know this president didn't run for this office so that he could run again.

he ran for this office so he could be president and do the things he can do to help the country, to help the american people, to grow the economy. to, in the case that he found when he took office, to help stave off a great depression. to save an automobile industry that was on the brink of extinction in america. to pass historic health care reform -- a culmination of a 100-year effort to do that. to rebalance and refocus our foreign policy and national security policy so that we took the fight to the enemy that attacked the united states on september 11, 2001, so that -- to end the war in iraq, as he promised, in a way that's responsible. to reassert ourselves in the pacific region, because of the neglect that our foreign policy had experienced while it was preoccupied with iraq and other issues.

so that's why he ran -- the great opportunity the american people gave him to put his proposals and promises to the test, and that's what he's been doing. and he's going to continue to do that throughout this year. >> jay, can i follow on that, please? >> sure. >> thank you. you just said there that he's going to use this time, the american people want him to use this time to govern. and yet, last night, he had four fundraisers in new york, he had six i think last week, in d.c. and chicago. his first tv ad is a million- dollar ad buy; came out yesterday. so how can you continue to present this image that he's just focused on governing and the campaign is a small part when he's holding fundraisers left and right? >> well, ed, i never said he wasn't participating in -- i've been -- we've been very clear about -- we actually bring the

press into these fundraisers -- about the fact -- and these campaign events, virtually all; any event where there's remarks given. i mean, that's the nature of the campaign. but he has the good fortune of not facing a primary challenge, not having a primary contest. he is -- that allows him to spend even more of his time doing the job that he was elected to do. so the point is -- >> there's no disputing that he's governing. i'm not saying that. but can't you also admit that he's spending a significant amount of his time campaigning and raising money? >> i can -- ed, you seem to want to have a -- make an issue of the fact that we state forthrightly that he has campaign events. as a portion of his time, it is still relatively small. and that's in part because he has no primary contest. but it's also because that's what he was elected to do.

he was elected to be president. and there will certainly come a time, and it will increase gradually as the year goes on, where he engages in more campaign activity. but certainly, relative to the would-be nominees in the republican party right now, it's a very small portion of his time. and that's a good thing, because that means he can focus on being president and governing. but he is fully prepared and looking forward to the opportunity to presenting himself again before the american people, to taking -- presenting his vision for the country, his ideas for where we need to go, putting forward his record of rescuing us from a potential great depression, of saving the automobile industry; of passing health care reform, of taking the fight successfully to al qaeda, and all the other things that have been accomplished in these three years, and presenting it to the american people, and having a

debate about it with his opponent. but that time has not come. >> last thing -- on governing. republicans are having their house -- house republicans are having a retreat in baltimore, and one of the things they keep hounding is the keystone decision. we already know that. they're upset about it. but moving forward on the governing front, the republican line now seems to be that they want to bring it back up specifically in the payroll tax cut negotiations. is that a poison pill for this president, or will you negotiate that? >> well, ed, i don't want to get ahead of discussions and negotiations that are occurring and will occur with regards to extending the payroll tax cut. i think that we anticipate and hope that congress will, and republicans in congress in particular will approve this extension without drama, without arbitrary, ideological fights. it's hard to imagine that -- >> no, i'm not drawing lines

about what -- >> but you're calling it an arbitrary, partisan fight. it doesn't sound like you want it. >> well, it was an arbitrary inclusion in december, so i'm not making -- i'm not negotiating the payroll tax cut extension from here. let me be clear about that. what i am saying is that i think the american people who were watching this debate in december saw the approach that republicans took for what it was. and it wasn't about them, and that's unfortunate, because 160 million americans are depending on this tax cut. they've got it now. they got it for two months. it will mean -- it will do enormous harm to those millions of americans if it is not extended, and we fully expect that it will be. we fully expect that republicans and democrats will come together and pass that extension.

alexis, you moved. >> just trying to keep you on your toes. two quick questions to follow up on what you were just talking about with campaign events. the afternoon event today is closed in d.c. can you -- first, can you just describe what that event is and why it's closed and who's going to attend? >> i'll have to get details for you. but as is the case -- and i just mentioned this to ed -- that we provide i think pretty extraordinary access to the president's campaign events. when there are no formal remarks given i think that's when we -- the events are closed press. so that would be the case today. i don't have any details on the event. >> and the second question is, just recently there was an article that stated flatly that president obama is opposed to the pro-obama super pac that is working to raise money. and could you just clarify his feeling about a super pac being out there raising money to support his reelection? is he actually opposed? is that correct, he's opposed to it?

>> well, i'm not familiar with the article. i don't remember the article that you're referring to. i think our position on citizens united is pretty clear. the president's position on citizens united is very clear. and i would have to -- >> can you tell us what it is? >> we opposed the decision. we believe it's not healthy for the system. i think you know that. but thanks for asking. so i don't have any more details for you on it. i haven't had that discussion with him. but our views on the system that has created this situation are pretty clear. >> but just to follow up, has he ever suggested that he would prefer that that group -- and he knows them well -- >> i haven't had that conversation with him, so i haven't -- there is, as is the case by law, there's no coordination, there's no -- but i haven't had that discussion with him. dan. >> thanks. just to follow on ed's question. do you folks not see the optics

of -- >> you guys get that you're totally obsessed with campaign politics now, right, even though he doesn't have a primary contest? >> well, i wouldn't call it an obsession, but do you not understand the optics of it -- >> well, why not? >> no, i get it. i did it. it's fun to cover the campaign, sure. >> do you not understand the optics when the president -- the economy event -- he was on the ground in orlando for, i believe, less than three hours, yet he spent roughly seven hours at these four different campaign events. i mean, the way that this is viewed, you hear from republicans -- >> dan, i would challenge you to look at what the president does on any given week, including this week and many weeks going backward, and not come to the conclusion that he spends a relatively small amount of time at this stage on campaign events. that's a simple fact. i mean, his would-be challengers are spending all of their time. some of them have been spending many years exclusively on this while he's been here governing.

and that's the way the system works. that's fine. but it's just a fact that, yes, he had a number of events last night in new york, but -- >> and not just last night, i mean, there are other times when he goes on the road. it's the same kind of thing. >> i get that. but again, i challenge you to look at the president's schedule and not come to the conclusion, the factual conclusion, that at this point in the campaign he is -- partly because he doesn't have a primary contest -- obviously, if he did, he would be out more and engaging in that primary contest as previous incumbent presidents have had to do -- because of his broad support within his own party, he doesn't have that. so he is making the appropriate use of the extra time that affords him, which is to focus on governing; to focus on engaging with congress to do things to grow the economy and create jobs; focusing on the things he can do independently like the announcements he made yesterday about the executive order and initiatives to significantly expand tourism, a

vital industry in this country. that's what he was doing yesterday in florida. he's going to keep doing that, because that's the right thing to do, it's what he believes is important, and at this stage in the campaign he can do it. >> can you give us a status update on same-sex marriage, where the president is on that evolving process? and what is he doing to assist that evolution? does he meet with people? does he read books? what is he doing? >> dan, i appreciate the question. i don't have an update for you on that. i think it is important in this, as part of my answer here, to just remind you about the president's record on these issues -- ending "don't ask, don't tell," and on marriage in particular having the federal government stand down from -- or his administration stand down from defending doma,

believing that it's unconstitutional and working to have it repealed. the president's personal views i will leave for him to describe. but this administration, his administration's record on these issues that are very important i think are pretty clear. >> so no movement at this time? >> again, i will leave it to him to describe. it's the same answer i have given in the past to chris, for example, who has his hand raised. and i think you've deprived him of the opportunity to ask it today. >> actually, i have a follow-up question to that. can i jump in? >> sure. chris, how are you? >> i'm doing good. how are you? >> very well. >> a number of state legislatures in the coming weeks, including those in washington state, new jersey and maryland are going to try to push for same-sex marriage legislation in the coming weeks. i know you said you don't want to talk specifics about the state of the union address. i'm just wondering if you could rule out the possibility of the president completing his evolution and endorsing marriage equality next week. >> again, i will not rule anything in or out.

i'm just not going to talk about, beyond pointing at his words, his personal views on this. i think his administration's policies on related issues are there for people to judge. >> i did watch the debate last night. >> how was that? >> they painted a picture of america -- >> i heard it was pretty entertaining. >> at times. >> i followed it a bit on twitter in between events, as a casual observer. >> so one could, after watching that debate, have a view of america. what is the state of the union today? >> well, i think you should stay tuned to hear the president deliver an address to the nation from congress at 9 p.m. on tuesday evening. look, the president believes

that this country suffered an economic body blow the likes of which it had not encountered -- suffered from since the great depression. i think that's indisputable. the facts make that clear, and i think that any discussion with any american who's been affected by the great recession would reaffirm that. what is also true is that because of who we are as a country -- the fact that we always get up when we're knocked down, because we have the best workers, the smartest workers in the world, and because of the measures that this president, working with congress, took to halt an economic collapse and to reverse it, this country is stronger now than it was when he took office, both economically and in terms of its national security. >> on national security. the president said last night -- you used it again today -- that he has restored the united

states as the "sole indispensable power in the world." the united states was not that four years ago? >> what i think is indisputable -- and i would refer you to the reports that you and your colleagues made regularly at the time -- is that the united states, prior to president obama taking office, was viewed very differently than it is now, by allies and partners around the world. i think, as i've noted, iran is a very good example of an approach that this -- an issue to which this president's approach has changed that dynamic in a way that has allowed the united states to lead, not just unilaterally, but to lead other nations towards historic and unprecedented sanctions and pressure on iran, so that it is now clear to the world that the issue is not -- the problem here is not the united states, it is iran and iranian behavior.

and that was not the way the world, unfortunately, viewed it back in 2008. he has, through ending torture, i believe, he believes, done something that was absolutely the right thing to do, and improved the way the united states is viewed around the world. because we are not only strong, but we have incredibly strong values, and we conduct ourselves accordingly. so i think that's the context in which he was speaking. he looks forward, as i think he said in a recent interview, to having a debate about foreign policy as well as domestic policy when the time comes. i was looking to ed, but he's

stepped away. and he'll have that debate. kristen. >> thanks, jay. going back to the topic of national security, yesterday, as you know, you just commented on the president announced that he wants to speed up the tourist visa process in certain countries, as well as expand the global entry program. what kinds of measures are in place to make sure that this process doesn't compromise national security in any way? >> well, i think we provided a lot of information about that yesterday, kristen. and what absolutely remains as true today as it was prior to this week and this announcement by the president, is that our security remains our number-one priority. what the president directed through the initiatives that he announced yesterday was for various agencies to take steps to streamline the visa applications in certain cases, in certain countries; to take

other measures to make it easier for tourists to visit the united states and enjoy what this great country has to offer; and to, by doing so, help create american jobs. but all of that is done with an absolute eye to the paramount concern, which is security. and i would refer you for details to the departments of state and homeland security. >> and jay, on syria, one activist in syria was quoted in a newspaper saying, "until now, there's not a civil war, but if the international community continues like this, just watching and doing nothing, there will be." what's your reaction to those words? and does this steady drumbeat of people calling for a libya-like intervention, is that making the administration reassess its stance right now?

>> well, i would make two points. one, the international community is not standing by. the international community has, with american leadership, taken action to pressure and isolate syria, and that is having an obvious effect as the assad regime loses control of the country. >> but it's not the same type of intervention that we had in libya. >> well, it's not the same situation. as we've said all along, each country affected by the so- called arab spring is different, and circumstances are different in each country, and circumstances are different with regards to how the region views these developments. so there is not a one-size-fits- all approach here. what i can tell you is that assad's fall is inevitable. it is clear that his regime is no longer, as i said, in full control of the country, and that it is only taking syria toward a dangerous end.

there have been defections of senior military officials and a parliamentary representative recently. and those are just additional data points that demonstrate the momentum and how it continues against assad and his regime. we stand with the syrians who want to have a transition in their country so that syria can be democratic and prosperous. and we will continue to work with our international partners to enhance the pressure on assad to do the right thing and step aside. >> if i could try just one more on the state of the union. i know you can't preview specifically what's going to be in it. but to what extent will it include different ideas or themes than those that we heard during the president's speech in osawatomie, kansas? >> well, i think there will be thematic consistency between not just what the president said in osawatomie, but what he has been saying since he began his

campaign for this office back in 2007. but there will be news in the speech. there will be new ideas. and going to i think julie's question to start off the briefing, we are hoping that those will be -- the newness of those ideas will be preserved for him to announce them. >> how about some kind of framework? >> the president is focused on doing everything he can to ensure that every american gets a fair shake and a fair shot. that we rebuild this economy in a way that ensures everyone

plays by the same rules so that opportunity is available to everyone. that wall street plays by the same rules as main street. and that the crow as a nation together. we expand access to the middle class and expand security for those who are already in the middle class. that dynamic that has existed now for, by some measures, 30 years and in certain -- and intensely for the decade before this president took office, has to be broken. the middle class has been under intense pressure in that decade prior to president obama taking office. middle-class incomes stagnated or declined. and at the same time, the wealthiest 1 or 2% of the country saw their incomes

expand greatly, and their share of the nation's wealth sure greatly. the president's view on this is as -- it's about we need to, the country, to ensure that we are the most powerful economy, the most innovative and sophisticated, the job-creating engine that this economy needs to be. we need to make some very important investment in education, in infrastructure, and research and development. and in order to do that, we need to make sure that everyone pays their fair share. that goes to the point about the of the president's speech. roger. >> thank you, new jersey. online pirate -- thank you, jay.

online piracy built up on the hill were put off and votes for postpone today until there can be some consensus. [inaudible] what does the white house think of holding a summit on online piracy? >> i think we made our principles clear about these issues over the weekend and this week. we believe that all mine piracy is an important issue and a problem that needs to be addressed. and we believe there is a legislative solution to that that congress can find. and it is important for both sides on this issue to come together and work out that solution that both deals with online piracy and continues to ensure a free and open ended

that. we think that is possible. -- and free and open internet. we think that is possible. the stakeholders in this issue have, on all sides, a very legitimate concerns work together to find a legislative compromise. everybody has to be in on it for it to work and get through congress. >> [inaudible] >> we have laid out our principles, which we hope will be looked at as a guide for that process. this is a legislative process that folks on the hill can take up, working with those with strong opinions on both sides of the issue. >> can you talk about the

reports about brennan helping look for a place outside of yemen for saleh? >> i am not aware of that. our view of this issue has not changed. we remain focused on achieving a peaceful political transition. most of the questions i did about this are in terms of saleh's visa application. there have been no changes in that. >> you mentioned before use of executive authority in the context of the state of the union speech next week. last year, it was his first

speaking to a partially republican congress. he cannot be expecting much in the way of legislation. >> i appreciate that question because i think that we disagree with that premise that we cannot get anything done just because it is an election year. i do not think the american people want that to be true or would be happy if that were true. americans of all political persuasions are going to want their elected representatives here in washington to work together, whether it is an even year or an odd year. they want progress. they did not want to -- they do not want members of either party to throw up their hands and say,

we can do it. and they don't want to hear from one party declared that the year is all about challenging the president instead of getting things done. we believe there is an opportunity, and there could be more opportunities this year to achieve things with congress, republicans and democrats working together in a bipartisan way. i think there are historic examples that actually contradict the assumption that you cannot get anything done in a presidential election year. 1996 comes to mind. this president will try, he will put forward ideas both in the state of the union address and continue to press ideas that he put forward last fall. the kinds of ideas, referring to those provisions of the american

jobs act that have not yet passed, on their face are bipartisan in nature. their pedigree is bipartisan in nature. they should enjoy bipartisan support. and he will continue to press for that. and there is reason to hope that members in congress will do things a little differently this year. not just because passing those provisions would be good for the country, but may be good for them politically. is that a win-win-win situation? hopefully that will happen. >> [inaudible] >> i do not want to pretty

specifics. he has been talking about the fact that he would use executive authority to advance the priorities of the american people, and he has been doing that. he will continue to do that. it is true that the context here is often, we cannot wait for congress to act. and that will be through -- and that will be truth about the year. but where congress will act, he will eagerly joined with them to get the people's business done. >> [inaudible] a blueprint for the middle class, specifics on how to create jobs. is that the present approach, to lay out a blueprint for the middle class? >> i'm not sure that all that specific. his whole agenda has been a blueprint for the middle class.

the american jobs act is an economic proposal designed to help the middle class, give it more economic security, return teachers to the classroom and construction workers to infrastructure projects, give 160 million americans a tax cut for the entire calendar year, provide unemployment insurance to those hard working americans who are unemployed, but looking for work and you need that assistance to help themselves and their families. and that money itself then provides a boost to the economy. you will hear more ideas about him -- from him about how to assist the middle class. that is vitally a important to him. >> how many drafts has gone

through? >> i do not have specifics on drafts. there is a speech that is being worked on. the president is very engaged in that process, as he always is. stageot think we're at a dead or he is practicing. he is pretty good at giving speeches, so when it comes together, i think he will be ready to deliver it. >> thank you. >> i will take one more. >> [inaudible] a question about israel. they passed unanimously a resolution that says peace can be afforded to the region, referring to israel, only through a united is roh government under one law for all people. do you see this as a clear

departure from a two-state solution that has had bipartisan support up until now? >> i am afraid i am not familiar with that, so i would not want to venture too far into analyzing what it means within the context of an approach that both sides in the middle east peace process believe is the right approach to the middle east peace process. this president position, in keeping with his predecessors, the way to achieve a two-state solution, which both parties month, it is through face-to- face negotiations. we commend the jordanians, the king of jordan for overseeing the resumption of talks. this is a very challenging issue. if it were not, it would have been resolved a long time ago. this president is committed to continuing to work on it. he certainly believes it is

profoundly in the interest of both the palestinians and israelis to achieve that to-date solution that gives palestinians sovereignty and gives israel the secure jewish state they need and deserve. that is the purpose of pursuing a two-state solution. >> on the classified coalition reports on the animosity between the afghan soldiers and u.s. soldiers and coalition soldiers, there have been 26 attacks by afghan soldiers on coalition forces and the last four years. it says these are not isolated incidents. >> i'm not sure what you are reading. i do not know what you are reading for. i can tell you there is no indication that these incidents

are linked or part of any larger coordinated effort. isaf is closely examining -- examining the incident and has taken steps to improve the process. i think isaf has more details. but you opened up by saying this was a classified report, and i'm not familiar with the quote you gave. thank you very much. schedule for the week -- my response to your question and to that article is what i just said. the schedule for the week of january 23, 2012, it is as follows.

on monday, the president will attend meetings at the white house. tuesday evening, the president will deliver his state of the union address at 9:00 eastern standard time. following the president's state of the union address, he will begin a five-state, three-day swing across the country. on wednesday, he began his trip in the cedar rapids area, followed by an event in the phoenix area. he will then travel to las vegas, where he will spend the night. on thursday, he will hold the event and the las vegas area and the denver area before traveling to detroit. on friday, the president will hold an event and the detroit area before returning to washington, d.c. that is your week ahead. thank you very much. i hope you'll join us next week.