from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over two decades, the sharpest

on the road again ♪ ♪ i just can't wait to be on the road again ♪ >> you've got to sends a message to washington that it's

time for the games to stop. it's time to put country first. >> president obama this week took the white house to the u.s. mid west, minnesa, iowa, illinois. >> we are in danger of not having a recovery that's fast enough to deal with what is a genuine unemployment crisis. >> president announced that he would unveil a major plan to create jobs and lower the nation's unemployment rate, which now stands at 9.1%. announced until september. question, president obama's midwest bus tour was deemed official business by the white house. was that a smart call or a dumb call? >> i think he could have done without the bus tour, john. but probably better off if he hadn't flown from there up to martha's vineyard. the president's in deep trouble and so is the country, john. there's a deficit debt crisis which appears to call for real austerity on one side, he

mentioned the employment crisis, the jobs. that seems to call for a massive stimulus of some kind, tax cuts, or spending. and the two contradict each over. and we've had the biggest stimulus package in history with three straight deficits every 1.5 trillion. we've had the lowest taxes in a long time. and nothing seems to be working for him or for the country. >> you think he knows what to do? >> no, i don't think hi knows what to do and i don't think many others know what to do earser either. >> this is a good interim for him to go up to martha's vineyard, tack a vacation and -- fine out what three think. >> he's up there with the northeastern cultural elite on martha's vineyard, which is the wrong place to be! >> eleanor? >> he does have access to communications, so he can get in touch with real americans every so often. democrats do bus tours so that's what he did. he didn't have much to say, and i'm glad he is going to ground and all his advisors because they are going to come back and unveil something in the early

september. and supposedly there's a battle in the how, do you go big and bold or more incremental with the hope of picking up some republican support? i think that the republicans are not going to go along with anything he does, so i think it's time for him to confront the republicans, so i would be for big and bold. and put some things out there that republicans have historically liked. the infrastructure, they like payroll tax cuts. so stick that in there and so if they -- if they are the ones that block this, then at least everyone knows where the obstruction is. >> you're knocking him for going to martha's vineyard? how much -- >> no. >> how much did he pay for that house? >> $50,000 a week. >> a week? >> yes, he pays for it times? out of his own money. [everyone talking at once] >> if you want to start comparing president reagan -- >> you ocked him. i heard your language, eleanor. i'm not knocking him.

>> how am i knocking him? >> you burlesqued martha's vineyard. >> i think martha's vineyard is fine! i wish i were there! >> martha's vineyard is perfectly and fine. what is not fine iswoman is keeping trying the same old thinks. he thinks he'll throw things at certain industries, more stimulus for infrastructure. he throws money at industries and thinks government is going to pull things out of it. he never has the idea of let's get government out. of the way and let the market work. he's a corporatist, giving money to big nice think he should have kwon to newport, rhode island? that's old wealth there. >> i think he should have gone to the distant suburbs of boston with working class people and show he really cares for those people. >> in a sense, the whole thing is so manifestly political. i just don't see that this is -- >> what is political about going to martha's vineyard? >> because when you're sitting there -- >> to a ranch. >> 25 million people are

unemployed or underemployed and you're spending $50,000 -- don't think you'll have a chance to identify what the needs of these people. and that's being part of problem. looks look it's an elitist administration because they haven't been ability able to connect with what is happening on the street. >> administration, why did vice president joe biden allegedly call tea as they claim he did? [audio not understandable] >> question, why is president obama playing dodgeball when he could have hit a home run using this as a teachable moment

about civility? eleanor? >> i don't think there's a lot of civility right now in american politics. and i don't think that was much of a teachable moment. i thought he did very well in trying to engage with his gentleman and point out that the word terrorist was used apparently in a meeting that the vice president had with democrats, and biden sort of nodded and just moved on. and so now they're trying to hang this around his neck. i think the more appropriate sound bite is rick perry -- excuse me! rick perry basically saying then bernanke is treasonnist. >> why is treason a worst charge to throw out than being a terrorist? i don't mind if joe biden thinks that i'm a terrorist or tea party guys are terrorists. he can say it. if rick perry says something, over the top. >> biden didn't say it. ! >> you have no -- we have few sources who are in the meet hog said he said it. and one guy said he didn't. the fact of the matter is tough

talk happens but liberals freak out when it comes from the right. >> what is political -- >> politico is a capitol hill publication. [everyone talking at once] >> let me agree with eleanor. >> exit question -- [everyone talking at once] should the obama re-election campaign dip into its vaulted billion dollar war chest and fully reimburse the treasury for the coast of his midwest "listening tour" bus trip? yes or no? >> no. he is the president of the united states. that's what he chose to do. it was a foolish thing to do but i do agree in dealing with those people, barack obama is fundamentally a gracious individual in confrontations and he is not a confrontationist. >> should he pick up the tab? >> no. >> then he is taking three weeks out to campaign. so he can't do that.

so he is hemmed in with a dilemma. >> he should pay the 50,000 nor the house up there in martha's vineyard for -- >> don't you think he is? >> i'm sure he is. >> don't you think the dnc is picking that up? >> i doubt it, john. >> you mean they don't want him to run for re-election? >> no, no. that's not something they should be paying form it's a vacation. >> i think we're going around the horn here. >> the horn starts there and finishes there. [audio not understandable] >> taxpayers should -- taxpayers should not have to pay for that when bush had ace re-election bus tour, his campaign paid for it. it was in states that didn't even have high unemployment. iowa, 6%. >> if he says that he's admitting he is taking time out to campaign. it's a political act. [everyone talking at once] >> maybe he's going to repay the government. >> back into the same government. >> here's the good news, john.

when somebody goes around the horn you pay for the horn! it's entirely reasonable. >> and he doesn't overpay either. >> i think he should have picked up the tab and said, this is kind of a doubtless situation, i'm going to pay for it anyway. and you'll see how i handle a lot of questions put to me that issuron paul's revolution now at hand? ♪ ♪ you say you want a refer lewis, well, you know, ♪ ♪ >> my views are quite different than the other candidates, so they would just as soon not get coverage the others are geting. >> well, as it turns out, congressman ron paul of texas is getting more coverage and more votes for his libertarian views than are the establishment republicans. paul finished a close second in

last week's ames iowa straw poll. paul was less than 200 votes shy of beating out the straw poll winner, iowa native and minnesota congresswoman michele bachmann. that's a difference of 152 votes outs of a total of roughly 17,000 votes cast. congressman paul had already won the conservative political action conference straw poll in february, the largest conservative gathering of the year. paul also won the southern republican leadership conference straw poll in april. why is paul gaining traction? he says it's the rise of libertarianism. >> time has come around to the point where the people are agreeing with much of what i've been saying for 30 years. so i think the time is right. >> congressman paul may be right. if you define libertarianism as minimal government and political, social and economic affairs. a recent poll shows that 63%, practically a consensus of

americans, believe that the federal government interferes too much with individuals and too much with businesses. the national debt is now more than $14 trillion. question, is ron paul right, are americans too focused on individual autonomy and too little on the nanny states? >> i think ron paul is right about a lot of things, and the nanny state is a big part of it. and such is the nanny stated where new regulations telling us, for instance, we have to buy health insurance or on the local level all the nanny states. so it's also the -- government that's way too big, the taxes are way too high and the policy too aggressive and the poll numbers showed a lot of americans are agreeing with him and that obama and most of the republicans are on the wrong side of those questions. >> i read your column on him and i didn't think you particularly like him. you called him a -- >> that's a great word, a word of praise. big horses are a democratic party, and the republican party and they need a gadfly?

>> you think he's a gadfly? >> in a way he is. but ron paul is a honorable guy in his time basically has come for his ideas. two of them, he is the guy that put the federal reserve and monetary policy on the table that rick perry is picking up and secondly, the whole idea of interventionism, bring the troops home and cut the defense budget -- anti-war conservative and he's making hey. >> do you think rick perry stole the oxygen outs of the room and left kind of ron paul out there just hanging there? >> ron paul is a libertarian, and a significant portion of the republican party that holds libertarian views. he could not get elected nationally. he would have run on the libertarian ticket. i agree with some of the things he has brought forward. >> like what? >> like his anti-war attitudes. but. >> how about his immigration policy? >> i'm not sure what his immigration policy is. >> i don't think it's your policy. >> okay. he's not my candidate.

but he is a welcome addition in the debating a civil debater, and he brings some interesting ideas. but he's not going to go to the distance and the media are basically ignoring him. >> is ron paul's time come? >> well, i think in this sense it has come. i think he's always argued against intervention of government. and we have had three or four years now in which we've had a massive increase in the intervention of the government in our economy and our medical system. and it hasn't worked. if it worked there may be a different reaction but the sense and it hasn't worked and therefore his arguments have much more traction than in a long time. >> do you think the size of our national debt is an indication of our overreliance on the central government and less on -- principles of at least of capitalism? >> the sounds prince had a lot of problems. it's taken the 1930s, the producing a depression. the government's role to

intervene and certain parts of economy. >> lets me ask you very constructive. the question is, is it appropriate now and to the degrees that it has been done? was it properly done. >> i don't believe it was. >> is washington too big? >> yes, i think it is. >> much too big? >> much too big, whatever you want to call it, yes. >> you think the founding fathers end that, granted a couple hundred years ago, but do you think they envision anything like washington being as big as it now is? >> i don't think they envisioned anything like that. >> the regulatory agencies. >> no, no, john. >> i'm talking about the white house and the power of the congress. >> we have totally different conditions. the government has to address some of them. the question is, how intelligently and competently do they do it? frankly, it hasn't been done. >> do you think the government is too big? >> of course, john. it's enormous! it's not just a new deal but the great society. >> is that identified by the size of the national debt? >> it's a welfare, warfare state. both are coming down! >> the defense of government

patted wouldn't give up a seasoning. benefits he gets and most people feel the same way. >> i don't agree with that. >> like what, social security? medicare? medicaid? don't you think those are the third rails? >> don't you think it's a shame i'm paying for pallet's social security and medicare? >> that's the founding fathers did not -- the right to be sick and go bananupt. the health care intervention on the part of the government is a positive thing because the unfettered capitalist system wasn't working. icu! >> this was a landmark piece of legislation, the health care bill we passed was not perfect. >> president obama's $1 trillion health care law may not only be imperfect, but illegal, illegal becae unconstitutional. why? because of the individual mandate. under this mandate, which means

obligatory procedure, a command, individuals are commanded to buy health insurance. if a citizen does not purchase health coverage, that person will have to pay a fine, as high as $700 for individuals and $2100 per family. but late last week, a federal appeals court in the 11th circuit, atlanta, ruled that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. citing u.s. history, the court said this the court struck down the individual mandate as

unconstitutional. the decision was a major win for the 26 state attorneys general who filed against obama care on the same grounds. >> this is the most significant case that's been brought to date, primarily because it involves more than half the states suing the federal government. >> the friday ruling was the second decision on obama care from a federal appellate court. first federal appellate court ruled the individual mandate was constitutional. that means a final answer will likely be -- 40% want to keep it. question, please pay attention -- can obama care survive

without the individual mandate? mort? >> absolutely not. without that, the whole thing becomes completely unfeasible. and in fact politically in my judgment i always thought it was a mistake because the country wanted the government to focus on getting health care costs under control. not to extend its coverage. so this just adds something to it because it has become one -- the single most unpopular piece of legislation this time. >> do you agree with the atlanta circuit that it's unconstitutional? >> well, i read that opinion, and i thought that opinion was persuasive but i tend to follow the dictates of the supreme court. so as they determine -- >> we'll get to that with the exit question. eleanor? >> i disagree with mort. i think even if the mandate is ruled unconstitutional, the rest of the bill can stay in place and candidate barack obama actually opposed the mandate. his argument boeing that with the insurance companies getting all these new customers, they can a afford to have affordable

premiums, and people and don't have insurance, they will then pay a penalty. so there will be a built-in penalty that is mandated so i think -- plus the fact states are enacting all the machinery for this health care plan is being put in place. >> it's a three legged sword. >> why is a three -- >> because the bill mandates that heal insurance companies cannot say no to people who apply. it limits the degree to which it can charge higher rates to older people and younger -- lower rates to younger people. so if you don't force young people into it, then young people won't buy the health insurance. then the rates will go up even more. so then more young people will pull out. if you don't -- you have to force young healthy people into it. >> two legged stool? >> they're pulling -- >> falls over? >> yes. >> if you said three legged stool. that's a stable stool.

>> one being the mandate. you pull out the mandate. >> pay attention to this question. with the likelihood of politicalization and even political intimidation, should the justices of the supreme court take up the individual mandate next year or should they defer until after the presidential election? >> they should take it up in a normal course. >> the decision may come down during the year! >> that's so, john, they should not be influenceeds by politics, okay. the individual mandate, if it goes, i think parts of obama care survive. if the republicans win, the first thing they'll do is repeal it. >> if the supreme court rules it unconstitutional, can you imagine where that would leave obama's campaign? >> john, they can't take that into consideration. where will it leave mitt romney's campaign because he has an individual mandate! >> i agree. the supreme court has to take it up under the general course of events next spring. >> almost out of time.

>> what pat said. issue four, cell censorship. >> when they're going to start clamping down on the people's free speech and voice, that's when i gets offended and realize i need come out and show my support for american free speech, which is the most important. >> san francisco has a subway system called bart, bay area trance rapid transit. bart shut down its cell phone service for three hours in four of its stations last week. the reason for the deprivation was to defeat plans protests. the planned protests were to be in response to a july shooting by a bart police officer of a homeless man who was wielding a 4" knife. bart shut down the cell phones they said to protect the bart customers' constitutional rights to safety. >> what we did was take a

narrow time frame, three hours, and four stations where they said prior to that protest they were going to try to disrupt and creates a huge safety problem, and we stopped service for mobile phone users. >> technology activists disagree forcefully. they compare bart's cell phone shutdown to the censorship conductein countries like egypt. "bart officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of egypt, hosni mubarak, who ordered the shutdown of cell phone service in the tahrir square in response to peaceful democratic protests this year." so says the electronic frontier foundation, an adds can i group m in the digital realm. question, what grounds did bart officials have to fear a disrupted protest that might have endangered public safety? mort? >> they had a previous experience in which there was an interference. there was a real public safety issue and i think this is what they were trying to prevent

some it's like saying you can't put a street blockades in order to prevent problems. i think this is not something that we like, but it's something that i think they did and in a reason and considered way. >> they shut down the utilization of cell phones for a period of time. >> in that area. >> in that area. they did not seize any cell phones. she shut down the availability. >> that's right. >> whose property is it? who owns the property? bart? >> the public transportation owns it. >> if they own the property, why should they be accountable for shutting down the cell usage on their property? into this is a public body and therefore they have certain obligations as a public body. but they have another obligagaon as a public body besides making it available to whatever the inspiration might be. >> to prevent a protest by -- >> to protect the security of the people there. that's -- >> protestsors might descend there and -- >> there's a huge difference between a public body, part is a public multi-jurisdictional

-- government entity basically. if pat boone wants to block cell phonak says in his house that's private property. government should not be doing this. free speech, free communication, we should be hard-core about. >> you think there are no limits of freedom on speech? what about yelling fire in a crowded movie theater? >> and to protect public safety to the degree that's necessary, you can do these restrictions. >> i disagree. none of these rights is without some limit, correct? >> exactly. if this is their property and their towers and they have the ability to do it, i think they have a perfect right to do that to prevent a massive disruption of trains they're running. >> but there was no indication the protests would be anything other than peaceful. earlier -- >> right! >> apparently disrupted service. they claim the facilities are for paying customers. if people just storm the station, they would have a -- every right to prevent. >> too late. >> just turn -- no! [every

forced prediction. moammar gaddafi the leader of libya will be gone by columbus day, which is october 10th. not the 12th. >> he'll be gone before the 12th. >> i agree with that. >> you do? >> he'll be gone. >> still no. he'll ststl be there. >> still there? >> yep.