republicans and democrats, i am to defend our constitution and stand up for the rule of law in the state of texas. [applause] to all of you who work here at heritage or at national review, for republican leaders across the way. you have for 5.5 years been among the leading voices of the opposition. every bit as much as william f buckley and ed fuller and the whole conservative movement of another era, you have carried the flag when it wasn't easy. for conservatives across america, you have kept the supplies coming. you have been there with reasoned arguments, principled criticisms, in a spirited debate. you have been there to show optimism and camaraderie, and that is the mark of every good cause from my perspective. you have been holding the ground as best you can, and more than that, pointing away back for a new conservative majority. we have 29 months left in the presidency of barack obama. that is the bad news. the good news is, he's got exactly 136 days left until the

next congress convenes with a republican house and a republican senate. [applause] he will get a little taste. you will get a little taste of checks and balances. he has an appointment, if you will, come january 3, with constitutional limits. the election of 2014 is america's last chance to pass judgment on the obama presidency. and something tells me he's not going to like it. you know, how different it is, as we look back now, when you think about how his presidency began. he came in the crying the smallness, the pettiness of washington and washington politics. he was the constitutional lawyer that was going to govern a different way, uniting the country and building respect across party lines. and maybe you remember the part about improving america's standing in the world. there were all kinds of offenses for us to atone for. our reputation, we were told, needed some polishing, and he was the right guy for the job. the constitutional law background is worked out in a rather interesting way, when you think about it. 20 times, unanimously, the supreme court has had to set him straight on the limits of executive power. and when an american president

is constantly exceeding his lawful authority, it doesn't exactly do much for bipartisan goodwill either. he has taken to saying, if congress won't act, i will. which certainly stirs up a certain element of our society out there. the problem is, we've still got two elected branches of government in this country. and yet, for all of those inconveniences, we still like to do things democratically. we are seeing this misuse of presidential power right now. and one of the issues that brings us here today, and that is, the integrity of our nations nation's security, our nation's border. we have a crisis on our nation's border that is entirely under the president's authority to deal with under the law, but he will not fully and consistently enforce the laws as they are written. that is, requiring the protection of our borders against unlawful entry. and he wants to establish new laws, such as the amnesty of 2012 without the consent of congress. on the one hand, we are seeing a willful neglect of clear, presidential responsibility. on the other hand, we are seeing an aggressive overreach into the powers that do not belong to the president at all.

when laws are treated this way, what usually follows are chaos and grief, and that is exactly what we've got right now. there is no briefing from far away that can capture the scenes along our border. not long ago, i invited the president to come with me and have a look for himself. he happened to be in dallas anyway on a very vital presidential trip to help the texas democrats, so why not chopper down to the border and take a look for yourself to see what is going on? he turned me down. and to this day, the president has yet to see the facts on the ground on our southern border. even though they are the direct consequences of his foreign policies. children, 1000 miles from their parents, vulnerable and afraid. they are drawn here by rumors of amnesty. there are these coyotes, these smugglers, these gang members and lowlifes and other forms who are exploiting these children. and mind you, the unaccompanied children you are reading about are just 20% of those illegally crossing the border. many are adults. some are working for the cartels, or involved in other serious criminal activity. over the years, many thousands

of violent crimes in the united states trace directly back to our porous border. these are thefts and assaults and murders that should never have happened, because the thieves and the assailant and the murderers should never have been in the country to begin with. on our side, we have some very fine, dedicated people on the border patrol. doing their level best under difficult circumstances. this summer, we began deploying up to 1000 of our national guardsmen. they are doing all they can come along with all of the public safety officers that i have directed to deal with criminal aliens. the entire nation is benefiting from that, but the resources, the initiative, and the will all

come from the people of the state of texas, the people that i have sworn to defend, to serve. if the federal government showed half that kind of resolve, the border of the united states of america would be secure. here's what it comes down to. defending the border is not a political option. it is a constitutional obligation. and until the federal government meets that duty and secures that border, all talk of immigration reform is pointless, because washington has no credibility on the matter. you earn credibility when you enforce the law, and you lose it when you don't. chaos is not the right condition for discussing long-term immigration policy.

to those who wait on comprehensive immigration reform, here is my answer.

how about we start with comprehensive border enforcement?

[applause]

border security, after all, is the nearest front of national security. and i'm sorry to relate that this front is today, largely undefended. so many people come across the border without us ever knowing about it. from a certain angle, the cartels, as vicious and brutal as they are, they might be the least of our worries. what other bad actors are coming here?

or for that matter, have arrived already? where have they come from? what have they brought with them? behind all of the political opportunism that has marked this debate is a profound sense of false security.

after all, we are watching this crisis and our border at the very moment that other crises far away demand our concentrated attention. just consider the events in syria and iraq, and other places in the middle east, they should have us thinking about the possibility of another terrorist attack in this country. we have been put on notice lately by the jihadist army that is right now charging across the country, we were told, was secure and stable. and the astonishing seizure of territory these past few months, if that is any indication, then

we have every reason to take these individuals at their word. alertness is everything. here, too, presidential leadership requires the most candid assessment of the facts on the ground, because the most fundamental interests of our nation ride in the balance. and here, too, we have to understand the consequences of doing nothing. all of us, republicans and

democrats, have a duty to put no concern of politics before the security of america. we have to take things as they are in the world today, not as we wish things were. that, certainly, is the way you approach things here at heritage. let me allow just a few things i would share with you on this unfolding crisis. one third of iraq is under the control of islamist terrorism. nearly as much of syria is dominated by the same jihadists. the group itself, the islamic state of iraq and syria, or isis. when this year started, most of us had never even heard of that group.

they had been advancing and captured american vehicles, dealing with captured american weapons and ammunition, taking it is that american troops bob and i to liberate. all of this and more has happened just since june. and as the terrorists see it, they have had a triumphant summer. complete with this long-awaited caliphate. from far and wide, recruits are flooding into joining in the offensive. we are talking about a movement that is bigger and better financed than al qaeda ever was. and it's got nothing to learn from al qaeda about ruthless

butchery either. isis has been executing nonbelievers, otherwise known as innocent victims. the poor souls that did not get away have met the worst of fate, beheadings, rape, enslavement, crucifixions. that is the character of this enemy. and in case we missed the point, they actually take pictures of their atrocities and post them online, calling it a preview of what we can expect in america. we have all seen the sorrowful images of the innocent photojournalist, james foley, forced to kneel and await a savage execution. the merciless killer was apparently british. in this case, we were seeing a radicalized british subject behead an american citizen in iraq. among other questions that come to mind, how many other jihadists out there are carrying western passports? what mission might isis have for them? the danger of isis for the united states and other western nations may still strike some people as a little remote.

but for many americans, of course, just about the last thing we want to think about is more conflict in iraq and what that might involve. but we better get on top of this crisis by every means necessary, because event are moving fast and the price is only going to go up from here. we have come to one of those moments when american action will be decisive, and inaction will be consequential. there used to be a bipartisan tradition in american foreign policy, a basic willingness to unite in fundamental matters of security. if anything is left of that old spirit, we need to draw on it in a big way and right now. sure, it is tempting to revisit and reargue the old decisions that have already been made. many on the left will say that a fatal mistake was made when we went into iraq in the first place. many republicans would argue that the 2011 withdrawal from iraq left some hard-won gains at risk. the pullout seemed to be driven by political calculations and not strategic ones.

still others take the view that no matter what comes next in iraq is no concern of ours. their attitude is, we gave it our best effort, but now we are done. and then there is the sense of regret and tragedy that still hangs over the failure to help syrian rebels at a crucial point when it could have made all the difference. they could well have gained the upper hand against the assad regime. syria could have been spared a lot of violence and other trouble, instead of becoming the isis stronghold that it is today. we heard from the white house that assad must go. that was an opinion, not a policy. so it all came to nothing. just now, however these and

other questions also just they need to wait for another day. we can talk about all of causes and the contributing factors all day long and it will get us nowhere. what matters in the here and now are the outcomes that are still within our power to influence. we know what the jihadist objectives are in iraq and syria. let's be clear and unequivocal about our own. erbil, a strategically crucial city in the north of iraq must not be allowed to fall. the momentum in the fight must be reversed, so the cities overrun by isis can be taken back by iraqi troops. and in syria, as well as in iraq, this terrorist army must be confronted with overwhelming force. in recent weeks, president obama, his response has included limited airstrikes in hopes of finally slowing the isis offensive in the kurdish north. he also sent 1000 or so of our american military advisers and special operators. he provided humanitarian relief and aid. the people there were able to escape and get into the mountains. the administration wishes, and for that matter, who doesn't, that this was just a humanitarian crisis. and when they talk about limited airstrikes, they place a great emphasis on the word limited. yet clearly, more airstrikes are necessary. nothing less than a sustained campaign to destroy isis forces are required. the iraqi people are up against a terrorist blitzkrieg and it went practically unhindered for many weeks.

and even though they have seen glimpses of our superior power and technology, they need to see a lot more of it. and as for the many iraqis who are trying to defend themselves and their country, they need to see more help from us. air power is a major part of it. but it is also going to take more special operations, intelligence, and advisory support than we have offered so far. one more potent force for the good. the peshmerga in the kurdish region. they are a well-trained and disciplined militia. by every account, they have the ability and the will to fight back against the terrorists. what is missing are the heavy weapons they need. to stop isis, counter the maneuverability, put it on the defensive. the united states and allies, if they are willing, should launch an immediate airlift and deliver those assets to the kurdish forces. peshmerga fighters, aided by american airstrikes in mid-august, have already pushed back isis in cities that looked to be lost just a few weeks ago. peshmerga is a fierce and ready force on the ground, and right

now, they are in the best position to confront, overpower, and in time, defeat this enemy. in all of this, our allies are essential to the effort. and i might add, to the credit of the british and the french and the germans, they have begun to act already. people in those countries, as in america, have been stirred to action in these last weeks by these chilling news reviews of the savagery of the islamic state. these nations, if they do nothing else, are in the business of preventing the worst from happening. and we know the worst when we see it. the atrocities of isis would command our attention even if we had no security interest, although we clearly do. and the list of countries with a big stake in defeating isis doesn't end with just western powers. because it is so very extreme, even by local standards. the islamic state has clarified some very common interests in the region. isis has designs on jordan, for example. and a serious threat to the stability of that country would not be a welcome development for other powers in the region. even iran is in this complicated position. for years, they saw to undermine our efforts in iraq, and yet today, they oppose isis. we shouldn't assume that the people today terrorizing iraq

and syria have powerful support across the region. they do not. and where they are operating now, they are, of course, universally feared and despised. yet, there are chronic problems and divisions within the iraqi government itself. and these have hindered the country's ability to act when united action is needed. but the basic situation is this. iraq is a democratic nation of 32 million people who are horrified by the danger that is around them. and with everything on the line, if we help them, iraq can protect and defend themselves. in the weeks and months to come, we need for these and other military measures in iraq to become more obvious and urgent. president obama is going to hear warnings from his party. he is going to hear the word mission creep. and that is also a very valid concern. how can we not be mindful of that after what we have seen occur? and yet, in this case, it seems

to me that we would be very wise to remember the isis version of mission creep. that is when they start following through on the threats they have been making by sending their recruits into this country. it may be a team of terrorists arriving with their passports and papers all in order, just like before, or it may be when one or more of them slips across our unsecured border. but what rational observer doubts that such an attack is not part of their plan? and who thinks it is a good idea to wait and to give them more time, instead of eliminating this menace right now? we have a viable stake here, reluctant as we might be to face 12 years of war in iraq. and three years after we are told that war was over, it is no one's idea of where this nation hoped we would be in the summer of 2014. it's a long way from what we expected, but it's where we are. and our strength and our resolve today can steer us clear of far graver problems ahead. the demands of national security always require dealing with the threats as they come. better still, we deal with them before they come in the faithful

and vigilant protection of the united states. thank you.

and three years after we are told that war was over, it is no one's idea of where this nation hoped we would be in the summer of 2014. it's a long way from what we expected, but it's where we are. and our strength and our resolve today can steer us clear of far

graver problems ahead. the demands of national security always require dealing with the threats as they come. better still, we deal with them before they come in the faithful and vigilant protection of the united states. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. >> you are in charge. >> i love hearing that. governor perry put me in charge. we have time for just one question. [laughter] and i saw his hand go up first. we have the microphone. please state your name and affiliation. >> thank you. i am with the border security committee. listening to your statements, is

there a concern isis may be coming through the southern border into the united states? >> certainly, there is i think great concern that the border between the united states and mexico is unsecure, and we do not know who is using that. what i will share with you that we have seen, historically high levels of individuals from countries with terrorist ties over the course of the last months. i will give you one anecdotal picture of what is happening. three ukrainian individuals were apprehended in far west texas within the last 60 days. so i think there is the obvious great concern that the condition of the border, not being secure, us not knowing who is penetrating across, that individuals from isis or other

terror states could be, and it is a very real possibility that they may have already used that. we have no clear evidence of that, but your common sense tells you. we have seen the number of criminal activities that have occurred. i'm talking about the assault, rapes, murders by individuals who have come into this country illegally over the last five years. the idea that they would not be looking at and managing any of those attacks from that region is not a good place to be. we need to have clear and compelling forces, both law enforcement and otherwise, on our southern border to send a message.

the border can be secured. it requires boots on the ground, the aviation assets, one of the reasons we asked the faa for the use of drones to look down 24/seven through all weather, night and day, and identify activity occurring on the border.

we have yet to have that approval. obviously strategic fencing in the metropolitan areas is helpful as well. we have a serious issue facing this country. the security of our citizens. we need to be very vigilant. we need to be using every authority that we have. the president needs to be engaged and using his presidential authority. and congress needs to engage in securing this country. as i said in my remarks, intel the border is secure, there will be no conversation in this country about any immigration reform. americans do not trust washington to deal with comprehensive immigration reform until that border is secure. thank you. [applause] >> we actually have time for one more question. so we will come right here. >> thanks for taking the time. i have one political and one policy question for you. casey hunt with nbc news. politically, you discussed -- i am wondering why you view this indictment as political if the judge in this case was appointed by a republican and the prosecutor served in a republican presidential admission.

on isis, you have called for more aggressive measures from this administration but stopped short of saying traditional combat should be used on the ground. i wonder if you think we should send combat troops back to iraq? >> when david axelrod, lanny davis, alan dershowitz, jonathan chad all say this is sketchy, outrageous, totalitarian, mccarthyite, i agree with them. [applause] and that is just on the democrat side of the aisle. all your options have to be open from the standpoint of dealing with this terror, this force in that country. i think signaling to your enemy what you are not going to put on the table is very bad, both strategically and tactically. we need to have all options open. it is too important to jordan, to israel, to the interest of the west in that part of the world, to not stop isis.

they are not going to stop in that region of the world. they need to be eliminated. they need to be eliminated now. thank you all. [applause] two weeks with this family. he delivered statements on iraq,

and what has been happening in ferguson, missouri, after the shooting of an unarmed teen, michael brown. michael brown's funeral is tomorrow and three obama administration officials are scheduled to attend, including broderick johnson, along with marlon marshall, a st. louis native who attended high school with brown's mother. works with who marshall in the white house office of public engagement. brown was shot six times by a ferguson police officer. missouri governor jay nixon says he expects the funeral to be safe and respectful. he also weighed in on two investigations underway by federal officials and the county prosecuting attorney. i am confident with the dual investigations that ultimately

justice will be served here. i believe everybody has a duty here. all of those around appreciate fully the pressure and the watch that is going on here. and i am hopeful that everyone is going to live up to those duties and do a good job moving forward. >> i cannot get you to say you are absolutely confident robert mcculloch can do that question mark -- that? has experience. you do not want to prejudge any of this. he is working hard. the justice department is involved, investigators involved, a lot of folks working on the street to make sure they get this right. attention, i think they will move this case forward. more from allr the sunday morning talk shows on c-span radio, which re-airs the

broadcast every sunday beginning at noon eastern. earlier this year, general motors recalled more than one million cars because of faulty ignition switches. it led to 213 desks -- deaths and 54 crashes. oversight officials testified on capitol hill. this afternoon, we will take a special look at the gm recall issue beginning with general motors ceo mary barra, testifying at a house hearing. that is followed by a news conference of those who died as a result of the ignition switch problem. later, a look at the federal response to gm recalls, the acting administrator of the national highway safety administration. the gm compensation advisor kenneth feinberg. ceopril, a general motors testified before a house energy and commerce fed committee where she apologized to the victims families for deaths caused by

admission is ignition switches. as part of the hearing is about 50 minutes. part of the hearing is about 50 minutes. >> do you swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> you are now under oath. give a five minute summary of your written statement. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman and committee -- please pull the microphone close to your mouth. >> thank you, mr. president and committee members. my name is mary barra and i'm the chief executive officer of general motors. i appreciate the opportunity to be here today. more than a decade ago, gm embarked on a small car program.