mail: comments@captioncolorado.com from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over two decades, the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. "the mclaughlin group" is brought to you by met life guarantees for the if in life. ♪ [music] ♪ i was asked no questions by anyone, including the president, about my on any specific legal issuep >> sonia sotomayor, president obama's nominee to the supreme court was grilled this week for four days during her senate

confirmation hearing. she was asked whether the white house had sought her legal views or had prepped her. judge sotomayor told senators that vetters in whowts never asked her views on any issue. but sotomayor got plenty of questions from the jushry committee senators on abortion and other sensitive issues including affirmative action and same-sex marriage. the judge also got a chance to address her now famous remarks from a 2001 speech to law students at the university of california at berkeley. >> you've said, i think six different times, "i would hope that a wise latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion." >> i also, as i explained, was using a rhetorical flourish that fell flat. it was bad. it left an impression that i believe that life experiences

commanded a result in a case, but that's clearly not what i do as a judge. >> two days later, the judge underlined the point. >> i regret that i have offended some people. >> question, did judge sotomayor clear the wise latina hurdle? >> no, she did not. she has said this six or seven times. i take the woman at her word. i believe her. i don't know why she didn't come out and defend. out of all of the experiences she had, she thought she would be an even better judge. instead, john, what she did is, she sat there and gave this rehearsed, robotic performance, you know, not being engaged. she was like a junior in college who just wants to get through the oral exams on a pass/fail basis. doesn't want to get high honors. that's what she did and quite frankly diminished herself as a figure. because she's a very

passionate, intense person. she does believe in race-based and ethnic-based promotion for purposes of diversity. she didn't come off that way. i think she came off as look, this is obama's choice as a justice, and if that's what you want, fine. here's a guy, obama, who voted against john roberts for the supreme court and appointed this lady who really does not look like she fits up to roberts' standards. >> on what level does she not fit up to roberts' standards? she's issued rulings in 3,000 cases, served in every level of the legal process. she sat through those four days showing amazing restraint as she was peppered with the same question over and orve again with brakes to check her blood sugar every two hours because she's a diabetic. i think maybe the members of the committee should be checking their blood sugar. maybe that's a good idea for some members of this panel as well. [ laughter ] >> check up on that, would you,

mort did she say blood sugar or pressure? >> maybe both. >> she was boring, which is the way these supreme court confirmations unfold because they don't want to set themselves up as a target for anybody, but i think she came across as likable, and she's gonna get a goodly number of republican votes. >> she could have ex egeted by the way, even her wise latina because if she were talking about this particular court where you have one woman and one black and all the rest are white men it would benefit by, achieve a greater benefit by having a latina woman. so is she -- so she's coming in on the track of gender and also race. >> which is why she was selected by this president. as a wise white woman with the richness of my experience, i

would come to a better view of this question than you, john. look, she was boring. eleanor says that confirmations like this are generally boring unless you have a republican nominee sitting there like robert bourque or clarence thomas and then the democrats hit with everything they have. i think the republicans behaved splendidly here. there was rigorous questioning. we essentially have a tale of two sonias. we have the sonia sotomayor who ruled on the new haven firefighters where it looks pretty clear that, in fact, she did use ethnicity and race as a basis to judge against the firefighters. and then the sonia sotomayor that we saw this week in the senate judiciary committee where she is basically alexander hamilton in drag. she loves the federalist paper, loves the constitution, fidelity to the law. so my question is, which will we see on the bench? >> mort? >> look, i think the way the sort of nominating process works, and it happened with john roberts, too, he gave the

most innocent answers to any conceivable question. you know when he said he's just an umpire, you know, following the rules of baseball, you know, this is the way it works. we have a system now where every, single word can get blown out of proportion and nobody's gonna play games with that kind of rule. so i have no problem with the way she handled herself. it was not interesting, it was boring. it's the way the system works, folks. and that's the way it is. >> exactly. in the ricci case, she was one of three that came to that decision and it was based on precedent. the supreme court ruling, which overturned them was a 5-4 decision. so these are closely divided issues. people look at affirmative action in very different ways as pat and i do. >> i think the republican $a good job in some cases. her whole life, i mean, she goes to princeton, first thing she does is send a letter to h.e.w., you don't have enough hispanic professors. they attacked the yale

administration. she denounces the baccie decision -- >> okay, pat. >> hold on. >> that's somebody wanting to bring others along with her. >> is she gonna rule that way in the supreme court? >> aspirational and inspirational when she speaks to other groups and wants to make sure others are promote as well. >> let me get this in. >> her rulings do not show gender or ethnic bies as. >> okay, no, sir. no, sir. >> sotomayor also broke with the man who nominated her to the benp, barack obama. she said that she did not agree with the president's philosophy on what goes into a judge's judgment. >> do you agree with him that the law only takes you the first 25 miles of the marathon and that that last mile has to be decided by what's in the judge's heart? >> no, sir. i don't -- wouldn't approach the issue of judging in the way the president does. it's not the heart that compels

conclusions in cases. it's the law. >> question. president obama says he would pick a supreme court with empathy. judge sotomayor says empathy is not a job requirement for the bench. what does she gain by this answer? mort? >> well, in the first place i'm going to guarantee you right now that the president will never again say i'm gonna pick judges on pt basis of empathy. that was during a campaign. what she gains is, she's gonna try to present herself someone who will operate within the boundaries of the law which is what they are looking for. if it were a have happened. >> she's never turning independent? >> she's demonstrating she doesn't want to get into a controversy over the nominating -- >> she comes off as sam alito's little sister, a strict constructionist. oh, yeah, i'm just law and order type. that is not why she was picked.

she is a passionate latina woman who is a -- >> staying strong on law and order does not necessarily conflict with being a passionate latina woman. when president clinton was looking for a supreme court nominee, he tried to get governor cuomo because he wanted someone who had experience in politics as opposed to getting everyone from the ivory tower. i mean, that's what this is about. this is bringing a diversity of experience. she really does have it in her personal background and in her legal training. >> john, you asked what she gains by answering the question that way. she gains senate confirmation to become a supreme court justice. look, she wasn't -- >> without controversy. >> without controversy. she wasn't gonna answer that question in any other way, but let's face it, when president obama made that statement about empathy, that was one of his criteria for a nominee. and look, frankly, i lack empathy for empathy on the bench. that's not what the law requires. >> too bad mario didn't make

the bench. exit question, is judge sotomayor a shoe-in, pat buchanan? >> 60 democratic votes and i think she'll get more than 10, i would guess around 15 republican votesp. >> so what does that come out with? >> that's a question. >> that's the definition of a shoe-in. >> confirmation with up to half of the republicans, the sensible republicans. >> what are we talking, between 70 and 80? >> absolutely. >> i agree. the republicans have said they are not gonna try to block the vote. the democrats have the votes. >> the republicans, they're collapsing. >> no, no, they shouldn't filibuster. >> they're not. >> they're holding her powder for the next nominee that could be a lot more liberal. >> i think she's going to get over 80 votes when some are really recognized and acknowledging that she is going to be an acceptable candidate. >> republicans -- >> 82? >> i'll say over 80.

>> she'll be good for republicans in this sense because i think she is really the other sotomayor and not the one we saw there. i think she's going to be passion nalt, intent, hard in favor of affirmative action. if you got a liberal judge on the corporate, let 'em be like wild bill douglas. >> liberals would hope that's the case. she would be just like the justice she's replacing, justice suitor, a reliable -- >> nobody is that boring. not even her in her hearings. >> reliable vote with the liberals on the court. no wild man. >> i don't think she's boring at all. >> she was here. >> i didn't say she was boring. [all talk agent once ] >> she was very charming. >> she was very likable. >> i'll say 83 votes. when we come back, where are the jobs, mr. president? when planning for retirement these days, the forecast is full of ifs. if i'm too exposed to downturns. if i'll go through my savings too fast.

to help you feel more confident consider putting a portion of your savings in a metlife variable annuity. when the market goes up, it gives your assets a potential to grow. while protecting you if the market goes down with a steady stream of income. let america's number one annuity provider help you stay on course with guarantees for the if in life. get answers about annuities at metlife.com. walmart was creating 30 thousand new jobs... all right here in thousandsamerica.ers...

save money. live better. lm..t.art. this is about a new, more efficient luxury hybrid continuing to produce 70% fewer smog-forming emissions while delivering greater power. a fact not lost on the world around us.

the all-new 2010 lexus rx hybrid. vo:have some type of proud to report thhealth coverage.ll-time and part-time associates the all-new 2010 but we won't be 100% satisfied until every american has quality affordable health coverage. save money. live better. walmart.

we'll see the recession coming to an end probably this year. we'll see recovery beginning next year. >> mortimer zuckerman thinks otherwise. zuckerman says, that may be your opinion, mr. chairman, but the statistics don't support it. the idea that the economic recececen has reached the bottom is contradicted by critical u.s. unemployment. mort notes in tuesday's "wall street journal" that job losses in june add up to 467,000 for june alone. almost half a million. the total number of jobs lost since the recession began 20 months ago in december 2007 is job losses may last well into 2010, he writes. to hit an unemployment peak close to 11%. that rate may be ose to 11%. that rate may be sustained for an extended period.

add those whose hours have been cut to those who cannot find a full-time job and the total unemployment rises to 16.5%, purting the number of involuntarily idle in th as paychecks shrink and disappear, consumers are more hesitant to spend and won't lead the economy out of the doldrums quickly enough. of the doldrums quickly enough. does that sum it all up? >> well, it certainly sums up a big piece of it, because i think unemployment is gonna be a critical factor as we go forward. even the federal reserve and president obama this week also acknowledged that unemployment is gonna continue to go up and it's gonna exceed 10%. i think it's gonna go higher than the 10% number, gonna approach 11%. that's a huge number on top of the people who are underemployed and on top of the people who have left the labor force. that's got to be a huge downward pressure on consumption, which is the obama administration

has poured $787 billion into the economy to stimulate it. mort's answer? for a start, too much of the money went to transfer payments such as medicaid, jobless benefits and the like that do nothing for jobs and growth. die ensp enthat creates new jobs is new spending particularly on infrastructure and infrastructure amounts to less the stimulus package today. >> question. what is infrastructure? >> roads, bridges, all of the shovel-ready projects that the democrats who supported the economic stimulus promised would put people to work. the problem here is only 7.7% of the $787 billion that was committed to this economic stimulus has actually gone out. virtually no shovel-ready projects are under way. have been ready, not a shovel in sight. so the problem here is that all of this money, and thank

goodness that the republicans had some immunity on thisp not a single republican voted for it in the house, only three in the senate because these knew it was a stinker. they knew this was a fork-fest extravaganza which would do nothing to stimulate the economy. guess what, it hasn't. unemployment is ticking up, even if president obama said if you pass it, we will -- >> you mean, the democrats wanted to take care of their own? >> of course. this was pure payback -- >> how about a little fairness from the other side here? first of all -- >> the stimulus is a lousy package. >> not enough of this money has gotten out, and the stimulus was the result of what the political process would bear. no republican support and a lot of democratic wish lists. unemployment is generally a lagging indicator, and i do think that the economy could recover by the end of this year, but the problem is that it looks leak a jobless recovery because we're caught between an economic downturn and a transformation in the economy where a lot of the jobs

as we've known them are disappearing, and the new green jobs of tomorrow have not kicked in yet. what's especially galling is that the folks on wall street, goldman and bank of america, they are suddenly if clover. they're doing fine, and it's main street that's paying the price. it's gonna be a political pat. come in after this. more mort. >> reporter: another 150 billion which was allocated to state coffers to continue programs like medicaid did not add new jobs. hundreds of billions were set aside for tax cuts and for new benefits for the poor and the unemployed, and they did not add new jobs. now state budgets are drowning in red ink as jobless claims me question. was joe biden telling the truth when he said that the obama team failed to grasp the seriousness of the global economic crisis, pat? >> i think he was telling the truth in a sense.

however, obama and them were saying it's the worst crisis since the great depression. nobody's ever inherited a worse situation and now he said we didn't know how bad it was. they got a credibility problem. let me say that john. this is a real problem for obama because the tide is going out on obama. his big major things, cap and trade and health insurance, they are just about teetering on the brink because people are looking they want jobs. what's all this spending doing? the deficit it's not working. the stimulus package, john -- >> lousy package? >> 7% is spent in the first six months? it's supposed to be a booster shot. >> not only did they underestimate how serious the economy was, they also overestimated the effects of this stimulus package. that's a big problem because they bet, in my judgment, their political careers on this thing. the whole program was supposed to be about jobs, jobs, jobs. that wasn't what it was about. a very small proportion of it was about jobs relative to what

the challenge was. >> also, you attack the proposition that or you make the point that there's not enough for consumer spending. consumer spending is key for the recovery. >> that's right. >> consumers are not spending. do you have any data on that? >> the savings rate has gone up from 0 to 7%. every dollar that is saved comes out of consumption. the savings rate estimate is up to 10%. that's 6, 700 billion dollars taken out of the consumer spending. and you add that to reduced investment spending and international trade. you have a trillion dollar holding. and they're putting in $50 billion to meet this next year. >> what's the remedial step in there is one or the next step that would be helpful? >> in my judgment, given the risks on the downside, they ought to prepare the shovel- ready infra structure. >> roads, bridges? >> mort, they said that's what it is. >> i don't disagree.

that is exactly the problem. >> where are they gonna get the shovel-ready projects if none were been? >> also, there were state delays as committee after committee -- >> john, they should have cut the social security tax, employer and employee in half for a bit that puts money right in consumers pockets -- >> tax holiday? how about a tax holiday? [all talk agent once ] >> the problem is, people are saving their taxes, not spending. people are wary of spending. >> and there are cross purposes with all of the state governments which are drowning. they've used a lot of the stimulus money simply to plug holes instead of creating -- >> statz are looking. >> they should have allocated the money specifically for job- created programs. >> they got what they could out of the political process. >> they did -- >> the president has not yet weighed in on this.

let's give him a chance before we declare all his legislation dead. >> does everybody agree that the first stimulus package was a disaster? >> failure. >> failure. >> complete failure. >> i don't go that far. it's only begun to kick in. it should have been faster, but the way government works -- >> it's such a small success that it's a failure. >> this was purely a political act. when biden goes out and says we misread how it was, they are setting the stage for another stimulus. we'll be right back with predictions. when planning for retirement these days,

the forecast is full of ifs. if i'm too exposed to downturns. if i'll go through my savings too fast. to help you feel more confident consider putting a portion of your savings in a metlife variable annuity. when the market goes up, it gives your assets a potential to grow. while protecting you if the market goes down with a steady stream of income. let america's number one annuity provider help you stay on course with guarantees for the if in life. get answers about annuities at metlife.com. 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.

if we don't act, medical bills will wipe out their savings. if we don't act, she'll be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. and he won't get the chemotherapy he needs. if we don't act, health care costs will rise 70%. and he'll have to cut benefits for his employees. but we can act. the president and congress have a plan to lower your costs and stop denials for pre-existing conditions. it's time to act. predictions, pat is this. >> the national health insurance will not get through both houses before the august recess, which means it is in

big trouble because the tide is going out on that legislation. >> eleanor? >> when the health care bill hits the floor of the house before the end of the year, more than eight republicans will support it. eight republicans voted fort cap and trade bill. >> monika? >> the democrat protests in iran have picked up. they will accelerate and will force president obama to back away from his ill-conceived plan to engage the iranian regime. >> mort? >> with the new supreme court justice next year, the supreme court will still support the right to bear arms under state completely changed. >> the honduras dilemma will be resolved by a shared authority between the two contenders for president. don't forget to follow us on twitter. twitter away, bye-bye.