detained by customs or border patrol personnel, that they will be allowed into the country. they will not. >> back to russia, earlier this morning on the conference call with senior administration officials, they described potential sanctions that could sectoral, bute rather something more along the lines of a scalpel, the weight is described during that conference call. the that mean administration is now backing away from that? >> sectoral sanctions are made on the table. this is something that the administration is working in cooperative fashion with our partners and allies in europe to present a united front. more, that russia plays a destabilizing role in ukraine,

the more isolated they will become. that thelready seen sanctions have been put in place so far in a cooperative fashion with our allies in europe have had an impact on the russian economy and an impact in isolating them in the international financial markets. >> will that be deterring their behavior? sure that is a fair thing to say. wet we are seeing, i think are seeing a lot of mixed signals from russia right now, what their intentions are, that is evidenced by the fact that we have seen some troop movement on the border, some away from the border and some toward the border. in those situations where russia has made a decision to withdraw their troops, we welcome to the evidence of that. but we are concerned about this latest evidence that indicates

new troops are being deployed to the border. on the auspices of a border security policy or exercise, as it does not seem to be underway. what the president will continue to do is work with our partners in europe that will maximize the impact of any sanctions that are implemented. what we are going to do is give russia the opportunity to pursue a policy de-escalation, to play a constructive role in bringing some stability to the situation in ukraine. >> on iraq, yesterday, senator chris murphy said that if more than 300 assets on the ground are deployed to iraq, that the administration would need to go through congress for authorization. is the president ok with that? >> what this president has said, and there is pretty widespread agreement about this, maybe even ostensibly from mr. murphy, is that the actions the president has taken so far does not require additional congressional authorization. you have seen the administration continue to consult the

the president hosted a meeting with the four leaders of congress in the oval office. over the weekend, as administration officials were assessing the situation in iraq, there were a number of phone calls from senior members of the national security team to leaders in congress. both those in the congressional leadership and those leaders on the committees. that congressional consultation will continue, and we certainly welcome the interest and support of american policy in iraq. >> when you heard the senate majority leader say that he does not want to see any u.s. forces returning to iraq, and must have dawned on all of you hear that there is a real reluctance inside the democratic party when it comes to getting reengaged in iraq. i mean, that sort of goes without saying. how do you deal with that? >> i think that anytime you're talking about the risks to our

security that are posed by iraq, the memory of the iraq war is fresh in the mind of everybody in this country. that this country made great sacrifices in pursuit of trying to create an opportunity for the iraqi people to enjoy democracy and determine the future of their own country. but the fact is that there are some very brave americans who served in our military and sacrificed even more than others. that is fresh in the mind of every policymaker in the same way that it is fresh in the mind of every american. that said, it is clear what our priorities are. indulge me for a minute and i will repeat them. the first is that our top priority is to protect the u.s. personnel that is currently in iraq. that is why there is movement over the weekend to employee

-- deploy additional security resources to safeguard the embassy. there has been intelligence resources in the region, and there is now around the clock visibility in iraq with particular attention to those areas where isil is operating. there has also been an increased support for iraqi security forces. there has been an enduring military-to-military relationship between the u.s. and iraq, and we're going to ramp up that support through training, through the provision of equipment. and in the context of advisors, the president talked about that yesterday. the president has military assets, and there have been announcements from the department of defense about where those assets are located. finally, there has been a stepped-up diplomatic engagement. you all have been on the receiving end of a number of readouts from phone calls between the president and maliki. secretary kerry will be traveling to the region to meet

with his counterparts, all of whom have vested interests in this stabilization. >> yesterday, one of the senior administration officials on the conference call did not rule out airstrikes on isis targets or isil targets in syria, and that was on a conference call. is that a possibility? >> let me tell you about the president's resolve. the president is resolved to take the action necessary to protect the united states of america, the homeland, certainly our american men and women in uniform, and our allies around the globe. he has demonstrated a willingness to go into other countries where necessary to protect our national and homeland security. you guys often report about actions that are taken in yemen to neutralize those groups or individuals that are seeking to do harm to the united states. >> is authorization needed?

>> there are similar actions that were taken in somalia under similar circumstances. last weekend, we saw use of military and law enforcement action in libya to ensure that one of the perpetrators of the attack on the benghazi diplomatic post is brought to justice. so there is a willingness by this president that has been demonstrated to act, where necessary, to safeguard the national security interests of the united states. that applies in this situation, too. >> thank you, and congratulations. is the president in touch with his allies? great britain, france, germany, on a coordinated response to isil, and can you give us any information on any conversations?

>> i am not in a position to read out any phone calls at this point. but there is strong concern about what is happening in iraq, both that we have seen exhibited by countries in the region, those countries that neighbor syria and iraq are concerned about the rapid progress that isil was able to make there. there is also concern that has been expressed by countries who worked closely with the united states over the years in iraq to try to stabilize the security situation and give the iraqi people the opportunity to determine their own future. there are a lot of people who are concerned about this. my colleagues at the state department, department of defense, and other places have been in touch with their counterparts as we pursue a coordinated approach to dealing with the challenges that are posed right extremists like -- by extremists like isil, who are operating to freely in iraq.

-- too freely in iraq. >> the president signed a memorandum on the first ever federal pollinator initiative. [inaudible] can you talk about with that initiative is and how it is that the president became a part of that? >> well, you know -- [laughs] when i walked out here today, i knew i would be handling a range of different issues, but i did not know i would be talking about the birds and the bees. >> oh. >> that is pretty good, right? i have been thinking about this one all morning. drones, huh? you think it would get a better crowd on my first day. no. i have got to get my story straight. ok, let's get back to it. despite my lame attempt at humor, this actually is a serious issue.

the pollinators that are covered by this presidential memorandum actually have an impact of about $24 billion a year on the u.s. economy. they are vital to keeping fruits, nuts, and vegetables in our diet. over the past few decades, we have seen a significant decline in pollinators from our budget -- i am sorry, from our environment. so what the president will conclude in his 2015 budget are -- include in his 2015 budget are some commonsense steps and strategies that we can take to try to respond to this challenge. everything from directing federal government research in land management that would better facilitate a habitat for pollinators, and we can also work with states and tribal leaders and even private landowners in some circumstances to try to make sure that we are protecting the environment for pollinator habitats.

again, there is a clear economic incentive for us to continue to do so. we're going to continue to work in a collaborative fashion with industry, with states, local leaders, private landowners to address this one. thank you for the question, i appreciate it. >> i want to clarify something. the white house is opposed to a special prosecutor, right? >> yes, for the wide range of reasons i recited earlier. >> on the investigation of the e-mails, what did the white house counsel look at in e-mails between the white house and the chief of staff or other aides? >> are you asking about e-mails that would have been exchanged from --

>> from the white house to lerner's chief of staff or other aides. >> i guess i was not aware that that was a specific request. did they ask for that? >> i do not know. i am asking you. [laughter] >> it turns out that there have been 13 months of multiple congressional investigations, including 14 congressional hearings, interviews with irs employees, 750,000 pages of documents. all of that has done nothing to substantiate false republican claims of a broader political conspiracy. i do not know if you are floating another conspiracy or if this is a request from a republican floating a conspiracy or what exactly the question is, -- suggestion is, but we have cooperated extensively. despite that cooperation, we have seen continued allegations of republican conspiracy theories that just never pan out. >> on that point, we understand -- i think what he is trying to

get that is what i asked a couple days ago. we understand you turned over tens of thousands of e-mails, but when two years of e-mails during this amount of time that was investigated when tea party groups were allegedly targeted, and we do not know all the facts, how can you say there has been extensive cooperation when two years of e-mails are just missing? you do not seem to be taking that point seriously. >> i guess what i would say is i think it is fair that you -- we recognize the software moves in, and archiving is not as easy as it might look great those are not just my comments, but those are the comments of congressman darrell issa in february 2008. his suggestion that somehow there is a political conspiracy going on here is not consistent with that. >> if the e-mails are there, you can show that there is no conspiracy. i understand you want to keep saying things about republicans. >> there was a computer crash,

and what we have seen is a demonstrated effort by this administration, by the irs, to cooperate with legitimate questions posed by the committee. so we turned over 64,000 different e-mails. we have also gone back and tried to -- we meaning the irs, has gone back and looked for e-mails that may have been sent or received by colleagues at the irs so they can try to build in a structure to give people a sense about what those e-mails were and what they indicated. that constitutes 24,000 e-mails, additional e-mails. 67,000 e-mails have been provided to congress. 24,000 come from this time during which the hard drive crashed and the e-mails were lost. there has been an effort to reconstruct that path. i think that is a clear demonstration of the administration's willingness to

cooperate and give oversight which is just as important for people to understand. despite all of the data provided to congress, there is not a shred of evidence to substantiate the republican conspiracy theories. >> on immigration, you said that this is not a ticket into this country. but it is a ticket into this country for some illegal immigrants. will you take the statistics in front of you and then take the question by the end of the day and give us numbers about how many people promise to go to court and actually go to court? >> i cannot commit to giving them to you, but i will take a look. >> how do you explain republicans who are saying what we're seeing play out in iraq could happen in afghanistan when our troops leave? i understand we're leaving at least a small residual force behind, unlike iraq. but we can see the same

situation where the taliban or other terrorists moved in. >> we are certainly concerned about making sure that we leave behind a stable self-governing and self-securing afghanistan when our troops come home. that is an important part of this mission, to turn over a stable afghanistan to the afghan people so they can pursue the kind of future that is best for their country. i guess what i would say to republicans who are worried about this is -- what is the alternative? is the alternative a commitment of american service personnel indefinitely in countries like afghanistan and iraq? they are welcome to make that case. the president does not believe that that is in the national security interests of the united states of america. >> the president had a phone call with president opinion you

tell -- with president nieto. can you give us details? >> i do not have details of the conversation, but i can take a look at that. >> regarding the unaccompanied minors, two questions. house speaker john boehner is calling for the national guard to be sent to the border to help the situation. does the white house have any reaction to that? >> i have heard about the letter. i have not read it myself. what i can tell you is that there is the view that there are already significant enforcement resources that have been deployed to the border. there has been a commitment by this administration to ensure that there are boots on the ground along our border. the fact is the commonsense immigration reform proposal that passed through the senate a year

ago actually includes a significant additional investment in resources to securing our border. the fact is, last year, 360,000 individuals were attempting to cross the border and were detained and removed from this country by existing resources. what that indicates is that there is already a robust effort on the border to secure this country and to enforce our immigration laws. it is also an indication that the president is going to enforce that law strictly, but those who are interested in additional resources being deployed to the border should support the commonsense bipartisan immigration reform proposal that passed in the senate and right now is being blocked by house republicans. >> he is not going to send in the national guard? >> there is no plan right now to do that. >> there is no plan to do that.

there has been a demonstrated record of enforcing our immigration laws at the border. the enforcement of those laws will continue. if there are those who believe there should be additional resources placed to secure our border, i would strongly encourage them to consider supporting the bipartisan immigration reform proposal that passed in the senate last year. >> could you give more detail about the hope of the tens of millions of dollars being sent to central american countries to presumably help relieve situations there causing people to want to come here? >> these are programs, some funded through usaid. others are part of security programs we have or the

continuation of security programs we have of these countries. i would refer you to my colleagues at the department of state to provide more details on those programs. the gentleman in the back? >> this is a question about president obama and the president of mexico. did he make requests like controlling the border better to prevent the crossing of minors? also, there is to be special permissions to analyze the situation with members of the u.s. cabinet like homeland security? >> i don't have additional details about that phone call to tell you about. but i will say the united states and obama administration believe there is an opportunity for us to work cooperatively to address the problem. that means cooperating with the government of mexico and the government of guatemala and other nations in the region. if we can address this problem before individuals show up on the border, that would be good.

and clearly in the best interests of those who are risking their lives to come to this country. >> maybe you're asking the governments to start campaigns to inform the people about the lies of the smugglers and make them aware? >> we are very interested in making sure we use every available resource to correct the record and counter the coordinated misinformation campaign being spread by criminal syndicates throughout central america. there is no doubt about that. there is a range of things done about that. we are working with the governments of those countries to make sure that message gets out. in terms of what you referenced in the first question about the efforts of the president's cabinet to address the problem, a couple of weeks ago, the president directed the federal emergency management agency to take a hands-on role in coordinating the government response to the influx of immigrants we are seeing at the border. they have played a leading role in working with dhs to open additional facilities and make

sure we are following the law in terms of detaining individuals, but also making sure we are doing it in a humanitarian fashion. it is our hope the announcement today of additional resources to process the asylum requests and cases through the immigration courts more efficiently will also ensure those individuals who are here are treated more humanely. >> is there any emphasis on more security on the border of mexico? >> i would refer you to the mexican government to provide updates on that. >> there have been some implications it is possible the drug cartels are doing this as a moneymaking operation. do you have evidence of this? you are identifying it as a criminal syndicate perpetuating this misinformation.

what more do you guys know? >> i think there is a concern there are criminal elements like narco gangs and human traffickers involved in this who are taking advantage of vulnerable populations to try to make money. we remain concerned about this. for more details, i would refer you to dhs who is working the criminal element of this more aggressively. >> would the fbi be involved? who would be involved to get at these criminal elements? >> there is a role for dhs to play. the president talked quite a bit about human trafficking and the threat this poses to our national security and the humanitarian problem it presents. we will have to work closely with the mexican government to

address this problem. i think that was mentioned in the readout. >> on the border control issue speaker boehner brought up, are you convinced border patrol is not overburdened by this? >> what is being overburdened is the immigration courts. that is where we are seeing the backlog. >> the border control can still do the regular job in addition to this? >> i would say our most acute concern right now is the immigration courts and the backlog building up because of the surge we have seen along the border. that is why we are surging resources to address that. >> as the democratic chairman of the foreign relations committee said, he is concerned about you trying to find more detention camps for children, that there is a more humanitarian way to do this that guarantees these children make their court dates. are you guys looking into alternatives other than putting them into camps or detention camps? >> there are a couple of things

we're looking at. what we announced today is detention facilities that could accommodate adults who traveled here with their children. there are also alternatives to detention programs like ankle bracelets being deployed to address this problem. >> for children? will you be putting ankle bracelets on the kids or adults? >> in terms of way the policies are implemented, i would refer you to dhs for that. we are looking for a variety of ways to handle what we see that root is a humanitarian problem, but in a way that makes clear this administration's commitment to enforcing the law. that is why it is so important for people to understand what that law is. when they show up here, that law will be enforced. >> the law says the united states has to keep them for some time, does it not? >> each situation is different and handled on a case-by-case basis. that is why we want to make sure we have immigration judges and others who can make sure these cases are processed efficiently. when those cases call for the removal of individuals back to their home country, that is something that can be executed

efficiently and effectively. what we think needs to be changed and reformed is the legal immigration system. we are concerned there are a lot of people who want to follow the law and come to this country but can't because the law is so -- >> that is immigration law. this has to do with -- this is not about mexican immigration. this is a separate law. >> the inefficiency of our legal immigration system is not irrelevant here. if we did have a better functioning legal immigration system, as is contemplated by the current immigration reform proposal, that would contribute to solving this problem. it probably would not solve it entirely. but there is more that can be done.

one important step that would mitigate this problem a little bit would be passing comprehensive immigration reform. let's move around. alexis? >> i am still confused. you said the administration is concerned criminal syndicates are responsible for this surge. a few minutes before that, your quote was deliberate misinformation campaign by criminal syndicates in central america, which made it seem there was more affirmative evidence. can you sort out -- ? >> i think you may be parsing me too much. i was trying to say we are concerned there are individuals, criminals in central america, preying upon individuals, vulnerable individuals, spreading misinformation and trying to capitalize on their vulnerable position. we are concerned about that. we would like to see it put to an end.

there are a variety of ways to do that working with host governments and by communicating clearly to the american people and everybody in central american countries what the law actually is and our commitment to enforcing it. >> here is what i am trying to ask. obviously, dhs and border security officials and ice are debriefing the youngsters and all these folks. what i'm trying to get at is, are they saying this is how i came? what information do you have to build this case, so we are saying this is what we are seeing? >> in terms of the results of debriefing, i would refer you to dhs. >> you have not been given -- ? >> i don't have insight into those kinds of interviews or the

information revealed. >> one more question on iraq. on the context of dealing with congress, what kind of budgetary implications with the president's policy announcement yesterday have as we head to the end of the fiscal year? do you know the cost? >> i will see if i can get you more information about that. major? >> when does the president expect the first teams of green berets to arrive in iraq? >> for operational questions, i would refer you to the department of defense. >> we have no expectation it will happen soon? >> i'm saying i don't know the answer. he did order it. the department of defense is responsible for carrying out the order. they will be able to provide more details on the timeframe in which the order will be carried out. >> let me turn the maliki question around. what if he goes or stays? what if he strong-arms his way into power and remains?

he did win the elections. will the u.s. have to reassess what it has done or what it might be contemplating in continuing relations with iraq? >> i don't want to dive too deeply into a hypothetical about if he stays. >> about an inclusive government and things that take on a more inclusive and less divisive chain of events than we have seen from the maliki regime so far. >> what i think i would say about that is simply it is the view of the united states that there is not a military solution to the challenges posed to the iraqi government right now. there may be an opportunity, and it may be necessary for the iraqi security forces to take steps to stabilize the security situation in the short term. but that is only a short-term solution.

to get at the root of the enduring problems will require a political effort that is much more inclusive, that gives -- that demonstrates to every iraqi citizen they have a stake in that country's future. that will require the pursuit of an inclusive political agenda. >> in that process, will the united states have to reassess its relationship? >> i think the united states is always assessing our relationship with iraq and, most importantly, what the president said yesterday, the national security implications of ongoing instability there. there are serious concerns raised by the advances made by isil. those are concerns that have attracted the attention of the united states and other countries in the region, particularly iraq's neighbors. there is an opportunity to work

with the international community to try to address this problem. i think there is widespread agreement that a military solution is not a long-term one and it will require, as the president has said, the leaders of iraq to pursue an inclusive political agenda. that is an effort we can work with the iraqis to develop. it is one we have been encouraging them to pursue. there is an opportunity for other countries to play a constructive role encouraging the leaders of iraq to pursue that inclusive agenda. >> it sounds as if what you are trying to say, among many things you're tried to articulate about what the administration is now doing, is that the presumption will be that these children and their single mothers will not qualify as political refugees or refugees under any definition

under u.s. law, and once processed, they will be sent home. that is why it is misinformation to suggest, as you have identified these criminal actors telling them they can. is that a fair interpretation of what you're saying about the likely outcome of the processing of these unaccompanied children and single mothers is likely to be? >> i don't think it is quite right. i think it is the other way around. i think the misinformation being spread is everybody who shows up on the southern border will be allowed to stay. what i am saying is that is not true. >> they will be allowed? >> i'm saying every person who shows up at the border will go through the immigration process. some of them may have legitimate asylum claims. they will go through the asylum process. but the vast majority will be detained and removed. that is according to the laws of this country. that is not the interpretation of the laws being shared by

these individuals that have very bad intentions. >> the overall goal of these beefed-up procedural facilities, judges, attorneys, advisers, is to run the people through the process and get them back home? >> that is right, and to make sure justice is administered swiftly and efficiently. >> there was another transition this week. that was the president's first headlining of a super pac fundraiser. what is he doing to limit unlimited spending on campaign financing all around the country? >> the president's support for campaign financial reform is well-known. unfortunately, that is support not broadly shared on the other side of the aisle. that is something the president will continue to push for, but we have not seen a willing partner on the other side of the aisle at this point.

>> will there be some action on campaign finance reform? is there anything the president can do? there are so many things you say he cannot do, so what can he do? >> i don't know the answer to that. but if there is and it is when the president decides to choose to pursue, you will be among the first to know. >> doesn't it appear he is striding confidently in the other direction when he is headlining a fundraiser for unlimited donations? >> i think it shows this president is committed to supporting those who share his political agenda in the upcoming election. one of the ways he can help those who support his agenda of expanding economic opportunity for the middle class is to help them raise money. that is what the president is doing. it does not in any way affect his continued and unwavering support for campaign finance

reform that would reduce the influence of special interest money in politics and give more citizens a louder voice in the political process. mike, i'm giving you the last one. >> syria has told the u.n. security council it will consider humanitarian deliveries into rebel areas as an attack. is the administration of where of this and does it have a reaction? >> i'm sure the administration is aware of it. i am personally not. we will see if we can get you an

answer. it may be worth checking with the ambassador's office at the united nations. they may be able to provide a more detailed outline on that. the week ahead? we have a note here? it is going to be a while before i try to tell a joke from here again, i will tell you that. i have got that going for me. i think i'm going to do the week ahead. monday, the president will participate in a summit on working families to focus on creating a 21st-century first workplace that works for all americans. this will be at the omni hotel in washington, d.c. the first lady and joe biden will participate. on tuesday, he will host the 2013 president's cups teams at the white house. wednesday, the president will have lunch with israeli president shimon peres at the white house. after, he will welcome jimmie johnson to honor him for his 2013 nascar sprint cup series championship. dallas cowboys fans will have to wait another day for that. on thursday, the president will travel to minneapolis. the white house chief of staff is very excited about that trip. on friday, we will have more

detail about the schedule on friday later. we are still working out details on friday. >> [indiscernible] >> that is still the plan. all right? that is still the plan. thanks, everybody. have a great weekend. we will see you monday. >> irs commissioner testified before the house ways and means committee today about the investigation into the irs alleged targeting of political groups. arms of the committee asked about the missing e-mails of lois lerner, who headed the irs office on tax-exempt groups. the hearing is tonight at 8:00 eastern tonight on c-span. right now, an exchange between the commissioner and a republican congressman.

>> why did you tell, why did the irs and form the executive branch agencies, the white house, the administration, but kept it secret from the congress was conducting an investigation? >> we are not keeping it a secret. attempt toeen no keep the secret. my position has been that when we provide information, we should provide completely if we provide you incomplete information, people sometimes try to lead to the wrong conclusion not based on facts. without important to give it a full description. >> is ok for them to lead to a conclusion. is, heatheralso been discussions within the irs about when to reveal this information to congress? >> certainly. >> certainly -- obviously, these discussions included the treasury. >> no. >> how did they find out about it? cannot answer the question

and make the record straight? >> and think you're giving me an answer. i want to move on to another topic. your letter ascribed the e-mails is being unrecoverable. -- >> correct. i'm advised the actual hard drive after it determined it was was recycled and destroyed in the normal process. >> was a physically destroyed? was it melted down? >> i have no idea what the recycler does with it. this is three years ago. >> is a irs have systems for tracking items? >> we have tracked items. i'm sure we track some items. >> does someone there have a serial number for that hard drive?

>> i don't know if they do or do not. case, 1 hard drive fails, e-mails cannot be reconstructed heard it is turned over to recyclers. >> if it was recycled, the government property would have been tracked. i assume there is a tracking system for the disposal of government property. >> there is a tracking system for computers. it is my understanding that a computer continue to function within new hard drive. i am not sure whether hard drives have identifiers. >> could we get this serial of the hard drive and those of all employees whose e-mails have been lost? i want that hard drive and the hard drive of every computer that crashed during that time. i think this calls into question

every document that is been given. the only way i can hope to confidence is to establish a special prosecutor. for the sake of the agency and to restore the trust of the american people, would you support employment of a special ? osecutor ya >> i do. >> i'm asking a question i can have a simple yes or no answer. i think department of a special prosecutor after the six investigations ongoing and the ig investigation into this matter ongoing would be a monumental waste of taxpayer funds. >> is a yes or a no. ? >> that is no.

>> this weekend, american history tv is live from the gettysburg college civil war institute. saturday morning starting at 8:45 eastern, you will hear historian peter carmichael on robert e lee, followed by arizona state university professor brooks simpson on ulysses s. grant, and later, historian megan cate nelson on the burning of chambersburg, this weekend on american history tv on c-span three. speakers today at the annual faith and freedom coalition conference including new jersey governor chris christie and paul ryan, kevin mccarthy, and this next figure, kentucky republican senator rand paul. this is just over 15 minutes.

>> i want to thank ralph for inviting me again this year. it is good to be back at faint and freedom -- at faith and freedom. i think both are essential. without virtue, freedom casts about and chaos beckons. freedom needs virtue and virtue needs freedom. the soothing voices they seek to reassure us, saying everything is ok, everything is just fine, all is not, but well. america is not just experiencing growing pains, it is in a full-blown spiritual crisis. is not's challenge

wolves at the door, but termites in the floor. our foundation is cracking. it is not that we have chosen the wrong politicians, although that is a debatable question. it is more fundamental than that . it requires a deeper introspection. we should pray for our country and our leaders. we need those prayers to face a great challenge, a great challenge of our time. we have arrived at that day of reckoning. will we falter or will we thrive and rediscover our greatness? america has much greatness left in her. if we believe in ourselves and leave in our founding documents, that believe in the system is made as the richest, freest and most humanitarian nation ever. america will thrive when we realized that freedom requires faith to sustain it.

guinness gets it right when he writes in his book that the only proper restraint to freedom is self-restraint. what does that mean? it means that those of us who love freedom must realize that freedom is not a license to do as you please, freedom can only be realized when citizens no self-restraint, or put another way, virtue. this parallels what george washington talked about when he said that democracy requires a virtuous people. laws alone are not enough to civilize a nation. what america needs is not just another politician or more promises. what america needs is a revival. [applause] now that i've been to washington for a couple of years and i have seen what goes on up here, i have seen the belly of the beast , i can tell you without exaggeration that i have met the

enemy and the enemy is too often us. the enemy is a bipartisan looting of the treasury, the bipartisan destruction of our currency, the bipartisan sprint away from a republic limited by a constitution. they passed thousand page bills that no one has read. republicans and democrats ignore their own rules to publish bills , to vote on them that haven't even been published in advance. i say it must end. no bill should ever pass that is not been read. -- that has not been read. [applause] proposal, i say make them wait one day for every 20 pages. that will keep them busy for a while. lawsess routinely passes that they exempt themselves from . i say congress should pass no law that exempts themselves. [applause]

over time, many politicians distancedtant and from their constituents, from doing real work, from knowing what it is like to work for ofcheck, to do something value. that is why i believe it is absolutely essential, and it is the right time for term limits. to find our way back to the traditions of our founders, we need to understand how freedom and tradition are intertwined. , freedom needsts tradition for law, order and inspiration. but tradition needs freedom to escape stagnation, coercion and decline. the great achievement of the

constitution's framers was in providing a means for synthesizing freedom and tradition. america needs to revive tradition, or america needs to revive virtue. or as billy graham might say, america needs to revive the hope that springs eternal from the transcended teachings of a humble carpenter. government can supply bread, but it can't mend a broken spirit. mother theresa was once raised for social work in india. we are not -- she said we are not social workers, we do this for jesus. no government social worker can claim the same motivation. citizenship and good government required the involvement of a virtuous people. your faith and church are and should be part of the public arena. don't let anyone tell you otherwise. reject any politician who claims that faith can't be part of a

public life. reed likes toalph say, the first amendment is not about keeping religious people out of government, is about keeping government out of religion. [applause] you have tothink choose one thing or the other, either liberty or virtue. i think they've got it wrong areas liberty is absolutely essential to virtue. it is our freedom to make individual choices that allows .s to be virtuous it does mean that government cannot or should not reflect our values, in fact, it must. separate religious liberty from economic liberty. some seek to say our values have no place in public policy. that is not the way it should be. hobby lobby is owned by a christian family. government is time to force him to buy insurance a cover

something that they find morally objectionable. the lawyer describes the situation. he says obamacare forces us to abandon our faith to stay in business or abandon our business to stay true to our faith. that is wrong. no government should force anyone to choose between their faith and pursuing their livelihood [applause] . [applause] reagan understood the unity of this message when he wrote, we do not have a separate social agenda, a separate economic agenda and a separate foreign agenda, we have one agenda. just as surely as we seek to put our financial house in order, rebuild our nation's defenses, so to we seek to protect the unborn, two and the manipulation of schoolchildren by utopian -- and admit an acknowledgment of a supreme being in our classrooms. [applause]

another way we as christians should stand up to the current status quo is in foreign policy. reagan said the record of history is clear. citizens of the u.s. resort to force reluctantly and only when we must. eisenhower, the great general, expressed it similarly. he said our foreign policy is not difficult to state. we are for peace first, last and always. reagan believed in strength, but he also believed in peace. : as for the enemies of freedom, they will be reminded that peace is the highest aspiration of the american are reluctance for conflict should not be misjudged as a failure of will. when action is required to reserve our national security, we will act. reagan spoke often of peace through strength.

i fear that some in our nation and some in our party have forgotten the first part of the sentence, that peace should be our goal, even as we build our strength. party have distorted his believe in peace through strength into a misguided believe that we should project strength through war. even when we have tried through good intentions to make the world better place, our actions have often backfired. jesus reminds us what our goals should be when he proclaims blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of god. we won't not mean defend ourselves, if attacked, it is our duty to defend our family and country and freedom. think ofe iraq war, what happened. one quarter of a million iraqi christians let iraq. they feared the shiite government that is there now, that we helped put in place after saddam. he fled in droves, but hundreds of thousands. where did they go?

they headed mostly for syria, joining over one million syrians who have lived since christian -- who have lived as christian since the time of christ. armingesident obama is islamic rebels in syria. the vast majority of christians in syria are on the opposite side of the war. we are arming islamic rebels that are intent on killing christians. one recent massacre stands out from others. in 2013, islamic marauders invaded the little town of werela, an ancient city they still speak aramaic, the language that jesus spoke. you -- as islamic rebels swarmed into town, they demand that everyone convert to islam or die. a brave young man stood up and answered them and said i am a christian and if you must kill me, do it.

those were his last words. elsewhere in syria, islamic rebels have filmed beheadings of their captives. to christian bishops have been kidnapped in one priest killed. there is an irony that is impossible to escape. our tax dollars are funding islamic rebels who are killing christians. oh, we are supporting moderate rebels. i defy them to tell me they can tell the certainty who they are giving weapons to. in pakistan, it him and sits on -- a woman sits on death row because she is a christian. she is a christian. she has been there five years. suffers in prison because he is a christian. american tax dollars are often flowing to countries that are doing this. pakistan has gotten billions of dollars while persecuting christians. war on christianity going on and sometimes you are being asked to pay for it.

i say not one penny to any country that persecutes christians. [applause] recently, we discovered that the presentls obama's arming have been provided with antitank weapons. they made an announcement two weeks ago that they are now intent on attacking israel with assad. you're saying they're going after the golan heights in israel is on the target list and we have given them sophisticated antitank weapons. these are the moderate rebels you are giving weapons to? mobsuntry after country, burned the american flag and chant death to america. 's response? sent more money to haters of christianity. they say we are broke and need

money. maybe americans will give us money. two they renounce anything they say? they are not renouncing one iota of what they stand for. your money is going to hamas soon. i say not one penny to nations that led violence to israel. [applause] it is time to stop this madness. oureed to re-examine foreign policy, halt this aid to islamic rebels in egypt and elsewhere and take a good long hard look at what our foreign policy has done. back here at home, we have a war being waged. it takes over a million lives each year. it is a war against the unborn. this must end. and pope john paul ii spoke about a culture of death, he talked about a war of the powerful against the week. as christians, we know we must always stand with the most defenseless. i believe that no nation, no

civilization, can long endure that does not respect life from those that are not yet born to life's last breath. [applause] to protect life, i have introduced in the senate a federal conception act. oftendays, christians are unified in our defense of life, but too many are still not taking action or voting their beliefs. we must change this. last year, i stood in the garden of gethsemane. awed, stood there, we sang how great thou art. it was a great experience and i will never forget it. when our message bursts for

th with the passage -- with the passion of patrick henry, full of compassion, full of enduring truth, then and only then will freedom reign. [applause] when i was home recently, i was going through some old letters that my great great grandmother had written about the turn of the last century. i would like to close with a blessing that my great grandmother wrote to her son in 1903 when he was away working a few hours away in youngstown, ohio. she wrote to him, and said our sabbath was lovely, which i spent at home as usual. the jury lord willing, i hope i can go back to his house again. anyway, his grace is sufficient for me. there's a song in my soul today, a blessed sunshine that no circumstances can take away.

the lord is a son and a shield to all the trust in him. may he always be your guide. thank you, and god bless america. [applause] >> next, house hearing on the investigation of the irs alleged targeting it a complete -- of conservative groups. senate armed services committee chair carl levin talking to reporters about u.s. military options in iraq after that. the irs commissioner testified before the house ways and means