>> still ahead tonight, what some women will do for a shopng pipr. 1x

let's go to berlin where some women there race to shop. let's take a look at the video here. in berlin yesterday 100 women raced down the street for a chance of winning a shopping spree worth thousands of dollars. a big crowd gathered to watch there. women had to wear heels. at least 2 1/2 inches high. then run 100 meters. one contestant said the secret is to make sure you there are moments in time

when the paths we take do determine our future. today we are communicating with each other as never before - and that requires a seamless network that is constantly growing better, smarter, and more secure. that's why our scientists and engineers in our labs, are taking the fastest technology in the world and making it mobile, better and faster -

to keep pushing the internet further than anyone dreamed. last year alone we invested more in building america's future than any other company - improving and expanding our network, to keep you in control. and behind the scenes, that takes work by our employees, who pride themselves knowing, that because they do it right, you might not even notice. if all of that, makes your connections, faster and more secure... well, that's our business. at&t... your world... delivered.

nbc-universal television this sunday, with the president on the world stage, his agenda is under fire back home. critics charge his stimulus plan is stuck, while the number of unemployed americans continues to climb. and democrats appear in disarray over the president's massive health care overhaul. meanwhile, the political world remains puzzled by palin. after her abrupt resignation, what's next for her and the gop?

with us, the man who put her on the political map by choosing her as his running mate during the 2008 presidential campaign, john mccain. then the view from the other side of the aisle. new york senator chuck schumer. finally, the take from our political roundtable. karen hughes, republican strategist and forme counselor to president george w. bush, bob sh ruk, democratic strategist and senior advisor to the gore and kerry presidential campaign, and andrea mitchell, nbc news chief foreign affairs, and roger simon, "politico" chief political columnist. first, senator john mccain. welcome back to "meet the press." always happy to have you here. want to start with breaking news this morning. the front story in "the "new york times"" is that former vice president dick cheney kept congress in the dark, his orders, to keep congress in the dark about a cia program.

it's a program that cia director pin eta has now shut down and briefed congress about it. what's your reaction to it? >> i am not on the intelligence committee. i don't know what the details of this are and the vice president, i think, should obviously be heard from if allegations are levelled in his direction. clearly, the republicans did not sign a letter apparently that was written alleging this, so i think it's frankly too early for us to reach a conclusion. >> it doesn't appear as if any lines were crossed in your judgment? >> i don't know, because, again, a lot of this is anonymous sources and this is -- if i know washington, this is the beginning of a pretty involved and detailed story, and i don't have enough information, but i think a lot more is to come on this. >> should there be an investigation, do you think?

>> i don't know if -- first of all, i would like to know the facts of the case before there should be, quote, an investigation. how long did the director of the cia know about this program, and when did he terminate it, and all of these things are going to -- are probably going to be heavily discussed in the weeks ahead. >> speaking about investigations, there's no word from "newsweek magazine" today that the attorney general is getting closer to investigating alleged torture during the bush administration. this is the reporting from daniel kliedman. for sources saying he is now thinking about appointing a prosecutor to investigatehe bush administration's brutal interrogation practices. would that be a good idea? >> no. i fought against waterboarding and said waterboarding was treatment. we passed the detainee treatment act which prohibited cruel and inhumane treatment. i have spoken out as forcefully as possible everywhere against

what went on and that we need -- it harms us so much around the world when photographs come out. we all know that bad things were done. we all know that the operatives who did it most likely were under orders to do so. for us to continue this and harm our image throughout the world, i agree with the president of the united states. it's time to move forward and not move back. >> where is the accountability? >> well, the accountability, obviously, is people's reputations have been harmed very badly. the question is do we want america's image harmed more by dragging this out further and further? what's going to be the positive result from airing out and ventilating details of what we already knew took place and should never have and we are committed to making sure never happens again? i do not excuse it. i'm just saying what's the

affect on america's image in the world. i don't mean to drag out my answer, but i did meet with a high ranking member of al qaeda in a prison in iraq who said his greatest recruiting tool was the pictures at abu grab. we don't want to give the terrorists and the radical islamisla islamic extremists more tools and help their recruiting in this ongoing struggle we're in. >> let me turn to policy. you must have been shocked to see governor sarah palin resign as governor. >> i wasn't shocked. obviously, i was a bit surprised, but i wasn't shocked. i understand that sarah made a decision where she can be most effective for alaska and for the country. i love and respect her and her family. i'm grateful that she agreed to run with me. i am confident she will be a majo factor in the national scene and in alaska as well zoosh but you say you were surprised a little bit.

why? >> well, because she had not called me. we discussed it since, and i better understand the reasons for her decision. >> what were they? >> well, how could she best serve? how could she most effectively see alaska and the country, and that was her -- >> but, senator, you have a reputation of personal and professional toughness and stick-to-it-tiveness. you sought the highest role in the land, president of the united states. you never quit. >> i don't think she quit. i think she changed -- >> she made a promise to voters to serve out her term, didn't she? >> i don't know if there was a "promise." i do know that she will be an effective player on the national stage, and i will say i have never seen a sustained personal family attacks that were made on sarah palin and her family in my life. carl canon has a very interesting piece about the media establishment and the attacks that were made on her,

and i'm sure that that had some impact. eth ethics charge after ethics charge. hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of legal fees. the fact is she is very popular with our republican base. she will be a strong voice. i chose her because she is a reformer, because she beat an incumbent governor, she was a popular republican of her own party. she ignited our base. she did a great job as my running mate, even under the most sustained personal attacks in certain recent american politics. >> you have sustained personal rture, personal attack, political attack, investigation. you have never resigned from anything. is it consistent with your qualities of leadership to resign an elected post like this? >> sure. >> it is? >> if you can be -- the question is how can you serve most

effectively? sarah and todd and her family made a decision that she can be most effective by stepping down, and she did. i respect that position and that decision, and i cannot tell you the appreciation i have for her. >> you think she's qualified to seek highest office in the land? >> i know she's qualified. >> had he is qualified? >> sure. >> no doubt about it? >> she has all the right instincts. she has all the right principles. she was a mayor. she was governor. she understands the challenges that families face. she has a great background, and i am confident that she will continue to play, as i say, an important role. >> if she seeks the presidency in 2012, you would endorse her? >> i think it's way too early for that kind of thing because she obviously has not made that decision yet, and traditionally, those of us who are the nominees have waited at least -- a long period of time before we got into that.

we got a lot of good, strong, young, attractive, articulate spokespersons for our party and our principles. >> can you understand how people would think it's strange. you vouched for her in front of the country, that she qualified for the highest position in the land. yet, you're not prepared to endorse her now? >> i mean, george bush -- ronald reagan didn't endorse george herber walker bush until the year of the election. i mean, it's just way too early. i'm confident she would make a fine president. the question is what's the whole political scenario? >> do you think she's run? >> i don't know. i know she will play a major role. i know she has the ability to ignite our party and to galvanize us and get us going again and give us a strong, positive message. >> one more on this. your trusted advisor mike murphy wrote this week something very pointed. he wrote that governor sarah palin is the political train wreck that keeps on giving. first she was an awful choice for last year's john mccain's are an mate.

an inexperienced governor of a small state, she lacked experience and brought nothing to the ticket. it was a centrality eejically awful choice. knowing everything you know now, would you pick her again? >> absolutely. in all due respect to those who like to kind of examine the entrails and look back washed, the fact is we were three points ahead on september 15th, and the stock market crashed, and we went seven points down. sarah palin ignited our party. we were winning, and we could have won, but i'm proud of the campaign, and i'm proud of the people around me. i'm grateful for their support. i love them. i am proud to have had the honor being the nominee of the party of abraham lincoln and theodore roosevelt and ronald reagan. i will remain so. >> is she ahead of the pack in terms of leaders of this party going forward? >> i don't know. recent poll i saw shows she and mitt romney and huckabee very

tight. it's way too early. you might remember in 2007 my campaign was dead. >> remember well. and you came back. let me switch gears and talk about the president of the united states currently and that's barack obama and his performance. look at the recent poll numbers that came out, and it shows declining support. his approval rating now 58%. back in january it was at 66%. what's your assessment of how he is performing? >> well, first of all, his numbers are still strong, so it's relative. second of all, i think americans understandably are becoming very, very concerned about the deep, deep political and economic debt that we are laying on future generations of americans. we are committing generational theft. just last week the estimate of the deficit was $1.1 trillion just for the first nine months. $1.8 trillion. that's by a factor of two. the highest in any time -- peace time in history.

we are spending and spending and spending. who five months ago thought we would own chrysler and general motors? who thought we would own aig? who thought we would own all these banks and institutions? it's the most massive movement from the free enterprise system to the government in the history of this country. >> the president says be patient. how much more patience do you have? >> well, i also think it was interesting. the president uses a very effective rhetorical ploy. he says -- he sets up the position of the -- like he said, there are those who said we wanted to do nothing. who was that? we wanted to have a stimulus package. we wanted one that would help small business. the generator of jobs in this country that would cut the corporate tax from 35 to 25 and help small businesses buy equipment and hire people and would have immediate shovel-ready projects, and we predicted that most of the stimulus package that was passed

through the senate in a partisan fashion would not have any real short-term effect, so, guess what, we're finding out only 10% much the money has been spent. a lot of it has been on ridiculous projects. i say with respect, we republicans had a positive alternative. it was under $4 billion. we had an alternative budget. we had an alternative to the omnibus spending bill. >> 40% of the stimulus package included tax cuts. >> it included tax cuts, but a lot of them are in the wrong direction. why not make sure we focused on small business and, also, on corporations whichow have the highest tax rates of any -- of any country in the world. >> here's what his top economic advisor said this week. people know that problems of this seriousness cannot be turned around in six months or nine months. "one of the president's strengths and s his extraordinary candor the

president has been honest with the american people about the enormity of the challenge and the amount of time it will take to turn things around. then the president yesterday in his radio address said this recovery act has worked as intended. is he leveling with the american people? >> well, i'm sure the president is doing everything that he can to try to help this economy. >> but is he leveling? is he being straight? >> well, he is either not leveling now or he wasn't leveling at the time of the passage of the stimulus package because they said the maximum unemployment would be at 8%. that's what they told us. it's 9.5%, going to 10%. they said most of these projects were shovel-ready, and the money would go out very quickly. we know now that has not happened, and even that 10% is a little deceiving because it hasn't been used. what they promised us would be the result of the stimulus in a short-term and has turd out not to be true. i'm not saying it's not leveling, but it's certainly not

factually correct because the said unemployment would be a maximum of 8% and probably closer to 7%. >> could you support a second stimulus plan if it comes down? >> i think that would be the biggest mistake we could ever make. why don't we focus on tax cuts, on small businesses? why don't we instead of saying we're going to increase taxes to pay for health care reform, why don't we say, look,et's ease this burden on the small businesses particularly, and i keep going back to that. who generates jobs in america? not general motors. not chrysler. people that generate jobs in america are small business people who all over, all over my hometown of phoenix, arizona, are shutting the storefront enterprises of theirs, and, yet, general motors is too big to fail and so is aig, but they're too small to save? there's something wrong with that picture, and that's why the american people are unhappy. >> you mentioned health care reform. this is what the president said back in march. he said this is critical to the

overall financial health of the country. listen. >> if we want to create jobs and rebuild our economy and get our federal budget under control, then we have to address the crushing cost of health care this year. >> do you agree? >> i agree that we need to reform health care and we need to make it affordable and available, but we are losing sight of the fact that the highest quality health care in the world is in the united states of america. that must be preserved. so the key, what we should be focussing on, is affordability and availability for all americans. i don't think that these proposals are doing that. i was in houston. people -- senator mcconnell and senator -- people from the 0 countries from all overtime world were there. the best, highest quality health care is in america. it's the cost that's the problem. >> are you prepared to support what the administration proposes on health care? >> well, the latest was by

cbo -- the congressional biological office after saying we're a trillion dollars short and only covered one-third of the people who are uninsured. now about half hour of them are uninsured under this plan. look, we got to give people the ability to go across state lines to get the health insurance of their choice. we've got to have -- we're in agreement on prevention, on wellness, on trying to have outcome-based health care. a whole lot of things we're in agreement on. he should be sitting down across the table not trying to do what they did with the stimulus package, with the budget, and with all the others, and that is pick off a couple republicans. let's sit down and have some real conversations, some real negotiations rather than the charade that we've been going through. >> the house says -- house democrats say we need to raise taxes. a tax surcharge in order to pay for it. does that kill this effort? >> i don't know if it kills the effort, but it killed our economy. i don't think there's any

rationale for raising taxes on anybody at this particular time and in the economic difficulties that we're in. look, malpractice reform is another thing that's been taken off the table. we need to havehat as well. that could save us tens of billions of dlashz dollars a year because of the practice of defensive medicine that doctors have to engage in. >> a couple of foreign policy notes. look at the striking statistic out of afghanistan released this week. the number of roadside bomb incidents, these are the ones that were successful that hurt or killed people back in june of 2007, june of 2009. up to 82. that's got to trouble you. >> it troubled me enormously, but we all knew that once we went into areas that have been controlled by the taliban, particularly in helmud province and the south, casualties would go up. we took a terrible blow this week with ten british soldiers killed in one day. this is going to be long and

hard and tough, and i want to work withhe president, but we've got to remember what worked in iraq, and that is it requires additional troops if necessary. listen to our military leaders. i saw on the front page of "the post" general mcchrystal says we need more troops. let's tell the american people how tough it is for us, tell them what's at stake, and i want to work with the president and make sure we win this thing, but let's not try to go back to the rumsfeld era of trying to just go out, kill people, leave, a try to get out of there. >> is that the risk of this administration now? >> that's the risk. that's the risk. >> you think we need more troops? >> i know that we should listen to general mcchrystal and leaders on the ground who, according to news reports, not my information, say we are going to need additional troops in order to really secure. we talk about economic, political, military. first you've got to provide a secure environment. we proved that time after time. >> in terms of iran, the president says by september they

abandoned the program, get into negotiationed or face consequences. what does this administration have to do now to get them to abandon a nuclear program? >> look, this is one of the toughest challenges we face. we all want to work with the president. meaningful sanctions need to be imposed, but also we need to tell the people of iran we're struggling for a free democracy in an open society and elections that are fair. i'm not talking about sending arms. i think the seminole event was the death of neda on the street that was broadcast all around the world. that will fundamentally change the future of iran because she was the symbol of an oppressive and repressive regime, and i think the winds of change will even blow through iran. now, whether it does quickly or not is hard to sa we didn't predict the collapse of the berlin wall, but it happened, and i believe that in iran something is afoot that

can't be stopped. >> before you go, are you prepared to support sonja sodomayor? >> i won't see the hearings, obviously. those are a very critical part. obviously, she's a great american success story, and we all respect and admire that. i just like to see the hearings and watch very closely starting on monday. >> all right. senator mccain, thank you. >> thanks for having me back on. up next, the other side of the debate, democratic senator chuck schumer joins us. plus, our political roundtable. only on "meet the press." we know why we're here. to build a new generation of airplanes to connect the world. airplanes that fly cleaner and farther on less fuel. and make nonstop travel possible to more places. announcer: around the globe, the people of boeing are working together-- to bring us together.

that's why we're here.

an eleven sixteenths wrench over here? here you go. eleven sixteenths... (announcer) from designing some of the world's cleanest and most fuel-efficient jet engines... to building more wind turbines than anyone in the country... the people of ge are working together... creating innovation today for america's tomorrow. thanks! no problem! tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 including who i trust to look after my money." tdd#: 1-800-345-2550

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 "the dust might be settling... tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 that's great, but i'm not." tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 "i guess i'm just done with doing nothing, you know?" tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 "oh, i'm not thinking about moving my money. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i am moving it."

we're back. joined by senator chuck schumer in new york. welcome back to "meet the press." this white house is on the defensive about the stimulus plan and the economy. over the course of the summer vice president biden has been out talking about the projections then and now. they said with the stimulus plan they would keep unemployment to 8%. here he was back in june on this program. >> this package was sold on the premise that it would, in fact, keep unemployment at 8%. it's exceeded that with the stimulus plan.

>> no, no, no. it wasn't sold on that. it was sold on it would create -- it said -- what happened was it would save or crea jobs. it's doing that. it is doing that. everyone guessed wrong at the time the estimate was madebout what the state of the economy was, at the momenthis was passed. >> everybody guessed wrong. this is what he said back on july 5th at abc. the truth is we and everyone else misred -- misread the economy. did you? >> you had a whole new world. i had never seen anything like this experience. i think none of us have. financial markets froze. just think, back in december and january, most people said there's a 25%, 50% chance we're going to be in the great depression, and the good thing that the president is doing is two-fold. one, he has strong medicine against it. second, he has a long-term time horizon. he is not going to be bounced around by what happens today on export numbers, which were good or what happens on consumer

confidence, which was bad. and then keep adjusting. so i think that, yes, the economy is very, very important. probably number one to the american people, but the president has their confidence. he is doing a good job, and it's going to work well. >> i asked you if you misread this. you are the senator from new york. you have your finger on the pulse of the financial center of this country. this is a list of economists and others who said that unemployment would be worse than the administration anticipated. do you agree that everyone got it wrong, or did the white house get it wrong? >> well, bottom line is i think the estimates were all over the place, and everyone said it's very hard to chart this out, because, again, we were in unchartered waters. >> there were certainly people who said unemployment would get worse, you need a much bigger stimulus, they have got the wrong medicine. >> there were many, mostly many on the republican side and elsewhere, who said we need a smaller stimulus, and we don't need this kind of thing. the president -- i mean, i remember larry somers and others saying we're trying to get the

number right, but erring on the side of having it higher because the down side is significant. >> so you put yourself in their lot? you misread it as well as they did? i wouldn't characterize them or me as misreading. you give the best estimate you can. i didn't make a projection as to what the number would be. we knew it was bad. we need we needed serious medicine. >> let's talk about the stimulus. in new york state this is what the gao, government acting office, by the new york post. new rk has spent only about 22% of the federal stimulus set aside for the state, and the gao report revealed that most of the money is being used just to keep governments afloat, rather than to create jobs. this is apparently happening all over the country. that was the stimulus designed to plug holes in government financing at a state level? >> it was designed to do many things. immediately, it had to get some money into the economy. if you remember -- you can quote all those economists -- the danger of going into what economists called a deflationary spiral, where prices go down, more jobs are lost, prices go

down further, was a nightmare because once you get into a deflationary spiral, no moderate, liberal, conservative, knows how to get out. you had to avoid that at all cost. getting money quickly into the economy, which ishat the government type spending did was the first stage. now we're in the second phase. money still continuing to go to the govement. >> but is it too slow look at the numbers out of new york. >> this is not a four-month plan or two-month plan. when you have such an awful situation, the worst economy that we've had in december, the president is hamstrung because the usual tools of getting out of recession was lowering interest rates, but interest rates were already at 1%. you need a strong long-term plan that has a number of stages. now you're going to see the second part of the stable, which is the job creation part really kick in. >> you're not disappointed with what's happening at the state level? >> i am not. i'm beginning to see projects inup state new york, new york

city, the new york city suburbs begin to get going. i see the people working. a lot of construction going on that i didn't see three months ago, and that money is going to start coursing into the veins of the economy. >> more broadly on the economy, back in april the president sounded fairly optimistic. this is what i said. >> there's no doubt that times are still tough. by no means are we out of e woods just yet. from where we stand, for the very first time we're beginning to see glimmers of hope. >> let's look at the numbers. first six weeks in office. unemployment up approximate 2%. job losses 3.4 million, and the deficit is up 50%. are those glimmers of hope? >> no, but there are glimmers of hope. that's the bad news, and there's lots of bad news. let me just say, look at where we were january 20th when the president got into office and today. there are some good things. the financial system hardly recovered, but is not frozen. i no longer hear day after day reports from small businesses, middle size businesses, they

can't get money anywhere and they're going under. that created a huge problem, created last fall and last summer. not dealt with. that has ramifications on into this economy. exports are up. parts of manufacturing is up. consumer spending, which was going down, is now flat. this is not dush know the good thing about barack obama, one of the many good things about our president, he has a long-term perspective, and he has an internal gyroscope. he is not going to get jarred by one month number or one month's polling data. he has his eye focused onhe goal. the economy will be better, gradually, but certainly, and he is going to get us there, and i think, by the way, i would say -- maybe i'm misreading it, but i don't think so -- the american people have confidence in the president getting out of this mess. >> let's talk about health care. his signature achievement that he wants domestically, will he get health care reform, a massive overhaul? >> we don't expect it to be signed into law then, but we expect the house and senate to

have passed bills,yes. >> do you think it's going to happen? >> i do. >> the big claim he is making is that it's neutral. it's not going to add to the debt. a trillion dollar program. the big question is how is it going to be paid for? a couple of opgs out there, and one is to offset the price the $300 billion and thaw tax some of the benefits. could you support that? >> i think what we've learned over the last week on both ses of the aisle, people do not want to tax the benefits. democrats and republicans and given what the house has done, given a majority of democrats are againsted taxing benefits, i don't think that's going to happen. >> do you think a tax surcharge of house democrats are going to propose on the wealthiest americans sshgs that the way to make up $550 billion? >> let me say a couple of things. first, the number one thing we have to do to pay for this trillion dollars is cut costs, and the president has wisely said the majority of this package -- a significant majority is going to be from cutting costs. the system is wasteful and

inefficient. number one. number two, we will have to find revenues to pay for the rest. the beginning of this week everyone said, well, we as you when we got specifics on the tax benefits that people weren't going for it. democrats and republicans. key republicans were negotiating with told chairman baucus forget it. now we're looking at other things. here's the good news, david wrshgs wednesday, thursday the finance committee, which is in charge of raising the money, we m met. wednesday, democrats. thursday, democrats and republicans. and laid out many different options. there are a whole lot of options. we emerged from that meeting on both sides of the aisle thinking this is doable. i believe that the chairman's goal to have a plan that pays for it set by the end of this week will happen. now, to get into the specifics -- i know you asked me about a specific. obviously, the surcharge has a benefit. it meets the president's goal of not taxing anybody below

$250,000, but i think to negotiate in public when there are many different options is not going to be very helpful, so i'm not going to do that. >> a couple of quick points, judge sodomayor, will she be approved? >> i think she'll get as many if not more votes than judge roberts got, which was 78. she has wowed people. people that meet her are impressed. not just with her story, but she's smart, but also practical. she's down to earth, and she makes a great impression. the very impression she's made onle the senators, she's going to make the millions of americans as they watch the hearings, she is going to be approved by a large margin. >> you heard senator mccain opposed to the idea of an investigation into the alleged torture during the bush administration. where do you come down? >> i generally believe that with the president and john mccain is looking forward not backwards, but when there are egrejs violations, you can't brush them under the rug. i think that the attorney general to look for egregious

violations, which is what he is doing now, is the right thing to do. >> is sarah palin, the future of the republican party? >> i guess i shouldn't judge and let them fight among themselves. >> what do you think? do you think she's qualified to be president? >> i think the american people saw her and they saw problems in terms of preparation and knowledge of things, but, you know, three and a half years away is a long time away, so i'm not -- >> you're hedging your bets, but you are very closely aligned. here it is from "field and stream" the political odd couple. there they are. senator schumer and governor palin, both heroes in "field and stream." you cannot walk away from how closely tied you two are. >> god bless america. >> thank you very much. up next, our political >> thank you very much. up next, our political roundtable ways in on all you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world?

these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience. i don't think you can live the american lifestyle without energy. we have all this energy here in the u.s. we have wind. we have solar, obviously. we have lots of oil. i think we need to do maybe some offshore drilling. i think we have the can do, we have the capability. we have the technology. the solutions are here. we just need to find them here at home. you have to have trust in the system so that when the investors come to the market and feel confident, they're willing to invest,

which then translates to business creation and job creation. that chain is very, very important and frankly in the crisis last september and october that chain was broken. a lot of the markets that got us into trouble in the crisis were not regulated, they were not transparent there was really no accountability. markets like ours are stable, reliable, transparent and highly regulated. we realize that we are going to enter a period of re-regulation that is necessary. and we find ourselves in a unique position to be part of the solution. so that people feel the resulting business environment is one that is able to instill trust going forward... and gets us back on the path we need to be on.

we're back with our roundtable, democratic strategist bob shrum, former counter to president bush, karen hughes, andrea mitchell of nbc news and roger simon of "the politico." karen is in from austin, texas. we appreciate having you here. a lot to talk about. roger simon, i want to start with sarah palin. i thought senator mccn was rather striking in his comments today. on the one hand he said he was surprised that she stepped down. how could he not be given his record as apolitician, as a senator, as a leader? is this the same person he chose to be on his ticket? >> i think it is the same person. if the republicans were choosing a nominee today, i believe they would choose sarah palin. the republican party has collapsed like a star going nova to its densest core of conservative voters. sarah palin speaks to that core.

now, the man darins, the elites don't like her. she's not of their ilk. she is the skunk at their garden party. they believe, as some in the media believe, that the highest form of political skill and authenticity today is to flawlessly read a speech from a teleprompter that somebody else has written for u. that's not sarah palin. look, she's not going to beat barack obama, but all she has to do is beat tim pawlenty, bobby jindel, mitt romney. are you saying she couldn't beat mitt romney? >> i am strongly for her. i endorse her for the republican nonation in 2012. i think she got a real problem with the republicans. they have a survival instinct, and she said yesterday that she was maybe going to campaign for conservative democrats. that's because a lot of renz don't want her to campaign for hem. that party ultimately, when you saw it with john mccain, you saw it with bob dole, they

nominate -- they take the next person in line. i think that's probably mitt romney. i agree with you. she's got a big base, and i think she might win the nomination. i hope she does. >> senator mccain just said he agree with her. he thinks it helps her standing. that's in the best interest of hers going forward. it's okay to resign. >> i my senator mccain is in a difficult position. he chose her as his nominee. he wants to support her and her family. i was surprised. i was puzzled. she sought that office. i remember when i worked for governor bush, and he decided run for re-election as governor of texas. even when he was being mentioned as presidential candidate, he felt it was important to have that seal of approval, that re-election from the voters. he was very honest with them and said i don't know whether i will or won't run for president. i want you to make that as a factor in your decision. i was surprised and somewhat puzzled. i think the weeks and months ahead are going to be very critical for sarah palin. she's got a lot of charm. i like her. she's feisty. she's a maverick. there's a fine line between maverick and quirky, and so i

think she has to be very careful that the next step she takes are very thoughtful and that she really thinks them through before she takes them. >> andrea, before we hear from you, we have to see -- this is andrea mitchell, live on the scene in atlanta. these are some of the still photos in your waders. most people don't know that you actually travel with fishing gear in your purse on assignment. look at this. look at the oshg strags on this small fishing village of governor palin to speak her peace and look at this media scrum there. here is a question that you answer about her future. watch. >> can you imagine yourself running for president? >> i don't know what the future holds. can't predict what the next fish run is going to look like, much less what's going to happen in a couple of years. my focus is on my state still, and it always will be, and my family and what is best for them. what is best for them is to not run for re-election and to avoid

a lame-duck, wasteful session in a final year of office. >> is that -- i mean, this is the question i posed to senator mccain, which is is shishging from those fights the way you demonstrate leadership in a republican party? >> i think that is her big flaw right now, because even in alaska, even in her hometown where people are enormously supportive of her, where people love her, they said we're really disappointed because she quit so, that quitter label ds attach to her. the other problem is, look, she's really warm. she was acting i think on behalf of her family, which were hurting and she needed to do something about that. she was very deeply unhappy. she's got enormous charm, and she's feisty. she is attractive. lord knows. she has to have a coherent world view to be the republican nominee, and the reason why she was so ram belling in that friday statement and didn't really fix it in her interviews

with many ofs is that she doesn't -- she's not deeply read. she hasn't thought through a lot of these things, and you have to do that as a national candidate. >> can a leader of the republican party chart a new course without real new ideas and a new direction for the party? in other words, does the republican party to get back to power need a fundamental overhaul in terms of core position? >> i think, obviously, any time a party is out of power, there's a lot of talk about the crisis in the party and new leaders and new voices will emerge, but i think the next -- as we move to the 2010 elections, as we move to 2012 that the leaders who emerge will have to have a vision. it will have to be an optimistic vision, and i think they have to make the case that ours is an inviting party, a welcoming party, that we want people to join us, that we believe that our philosophy of educating children, of providing health care in a fiscally sound way, of putting money back into people's pockets rather than this massive build-up of debt and spending that we're seeing under the obama administration will have to make the case that our

policies are, in fact, the best policies to take this country forward, and we have still a country that is largely center right and that is inclined want to hear from us. i think the important thing is that we have an optimistic and visionary messenger. >> i was going to say, which i never do, that i largely agreed with you until you got to that part about the country's largely center right. >> i said something wrong. >> no. you said the republican party needed a positive vision. i think that's the real problem right now. it is coming across as the party of no. look, if obama fails, if the stam lis fails, if the economy goes badly, republicans would benefit anyway. they don't have to get out there and cheerlead for failure, which is what they're doing right now, and if we see signs of recovery next year, in 2010 or 2012 are what actually matter. i think republicans will be punished badly for being sore losers and for looking almost like they were rooting for obama to fail, which means the economy -- >> i disagree with that, david. i think what we're seeing right now is that president obama's policies, unfortunately, are failing, and we're very

concerned about that. we've moved from -- >> that's like saying why didn't berlin fall the day after d-day? we're onlyt the beginning of this process. >> if we're looking at obama's general performance, first of all, look at the job approval numbers. politically sensitive ohio. approval in february 67%. the political and financial realities are that they have not met expectations that they set out for the stimulus plan. the president talked about glimmers of hope. we see anything but over the first six months. as a political matter and a financial matter, as senator mccain said, he is not leveling now or he wasn't leveling then. something is not adding up. >> the rock star has come to an intermission here. barack obama now owns the economy. it's his. the american people are holding him responsible. we passed a $780 billion economic recovery bill in nebraska, and as was pointed out, since then we've lost 2.4

million jobs. we have spent billions and billions of the recovery money, and people are wondering where are the jobs? barack obama says we've got two years. this is a two-year plan. chuck schumer said we've got two years. they don't have two years. the congressional elections are in november of 2010. they got to show progress before then. >> i think a big test will be whether they at least can get some agreement on health care before the recess on the house side. the senate is going to be more difficult. that is a huge problem, and now we've got a proposal from the house democrats and charlie rangel for an income tax -- a s surtax. even among lou dobbs democrats in the house it will be a tough sell. plus, the obama administration has scored this with the congressional budget office, and they've figured out that rather than just -- raise $500 billion towards the health care costs, the cost of insuring the

inunshiinu inunsu inunsured, but after ten years those numbers block sharply. in the out years unless there are major savings from health care reform, you know, out there, you are going to have a huge balloon of expenditures in ten years out, and that is going toy a big debate. >> the big lesson from 19 the 3's failure of health care reform is congress has to have a say. congress is having a say. unfortunately, it's in several different direction on how you pay for it and whether there will be a public plan. >> i'm fascinated by this. in the political and media class we want the instant gratificatio gratifications. we have a story about doom's day coming every other day. by the time -- when that deline come there will be a bill. they will come to an agreement. i believe that bill will pass, and i think he will sign it. we ought to be very, very careful. no. he said by october. i think we have to be very, very careful about these kinds of judgments. like the job loss. we were losing 700,000 jobs a

month in january. we're now losing half that number. obviously, it's going to take time to turn this around. we have 2,000 projects underway. 20,000 approved. the ark of the stimulus is only beginning to jolt the economy. the same thing is gng to happen with health care. we'll get it out there. by the way, the cost savings the cea calculates 1.5% a year it terms of lowering medical inflation and will raise gdp and lower the deficit. >> why shouldn't there be more patience? why shouldn't the republicans who spent a lot of time spending a lot of government money and under whose watch, the economy took the turn that it did? why shouldn't there be more patience from the republican aisle? >> this was sold to the american people as an immediate fix, and i ink bob is now trying -- let me quote larry somers. you'll see effect immediately. christina roamer, we'll start adding jobs, rather than ling them. house majority leader hoyer, there will be an immediate jolt. this will begin creating jobs immediately. instead, we've seen a loss of

2.6 million. >> there has been a decline in the rate of unemployment. that's the immediate fix. plus, you have seen a loosening up of credit. we weren the point of disaster. i think they can accurately argue that they have avoided catastrophe, but -- >> that was avoided last fall when president bush took the politically unpopular step of the rescue -- >> i think what george bush and gordon brown did in britain to save the world banking system probably prevented an overaul financial collapse, but in january we were headed into a potentially very deep recession or a dper and deeper recession, if not a depression, and what the administration did has cut the rate of job loss, and i think, you know, we ought to look at where it's going to be next september. in next september people think things are recovering, the republican party will pay a hefty price for its attitude. >> the president was warned that too much of the stimulus bl would not still lavsh, that it would not lead to jobs that, it

was typical pork barrel stuff that the congress wanted. we chose not to fight with congress. now, in fairss, he was trying to prevent a world economic collapse, but in taking this huge bill that had a lot of stuff that wasn't shovel-ready, he risked paying the price that he is paying for now. that the jobs aren't coming. >> we've gone from the euphoria of yes we can to the deep worry of can we afford this. >> reagan went through this in 1981, and, in fact, his approval rating, by the way, at this time was exactly the same as obama's is today. >> and unemployment went to 11 prz in 1982. >> republicans stayed with it. despite the difficulties in the midterm election, they got to 1983. the recovery came. so did morning in america and so did the confirmation of the reagan era. the real chal singe for democrats rsh are they going to stick with the president? are they going to get wobbly and afraid, because if they don't hang together, they'll hang separate. >> i want to show some of the pictures. the president was on the world stage this week while the debate

was intensifying. traveling in russia and then to ghana. the pictures from ghana are striking just from over the weekend. he visited a slave prison with his family. an emotional tour there. the response huge from the people of ghana to mesh's first african-american president. in terms of image abroad, karen hughes, as a former counselor to the president and as someone who was the head of public diplomacy at the state department as well. now we hear from the attorney general that he is leaning toward, according to "newsweek" putting an independent prosecutor in charge of investigating alleged torture during the bush administration. do you agree with that idea? >> i think it's potentially very harmful because everywhere i travelled, as i have tried to reach out to half o our country around the world, and i applaud president obama for trying to reach out. that's exactly what president bush asked me to do for two and a half years as the dersecretary of state for public diplomacy. at some point it's more a matter -- it's less a matter of

are you popular or your outreach as to are you effective. let's look at what happened this week. it was a great picture. absolutely in africa. a very powerful moment for the first african-american, american president to go to the continent of africa. some of the things that president obama said there sounded like echos of president bush, calling for more transparency and for leaders of the continent to invest this their people, invest in education and health. let's look at the results of this trip in russia. nice words were exchanged, much as they were when president putin and president bush back in their first meeting, and, yet, byhe end of the week the president of russia was basically warning our american president that there will be no cuts in weapons if he doesn't abandon the missile defense system. at the g8 summit they kicked the can down the road. they said we'll deal with climate change and the problem of a nuclear iran, and the u.n. -- >> is he doing anything right?