presidential elections that cost the office its license and the always see chairman sees little hope mr bush angle can be talked into changing his mind but the lithuanian foreign minister drawn a sociable is optimistic about the fact economic sanctions can have a mains and he's also optimistic about the frozen conflict in trans am hoping something finally change for the better. minister welcome to the show thank you very much we'll spotlight my pleasure well. has assumed the chairmanship of the sea and one of the burning issues is the situation in neighboring neighboring to lithuania also of course to russia where the authorities have shut down the sea office what is your reaction to how we are going to act i doing to try to reopen the office of course it's our intention to the person. to reopen but we would like to. in this case the office would keep the same meaning for us but it will be this some content not just the creation but to be very frank i do not have very much hope despite of all countries including russia united states. minsk to close various office what next. step is just. to

what is significant is that it has been agreed at a committee that mr bush to study constitutional reform and that this committee has been given a deadline of one month in which to deliver its findings it has also been agreed that the state of emergency here will be lifted now on sunday the vice president almost sort of meant meet with various opposition groups and within those groups were representatives of secular parties were representatives of the muslim brotherhood were independent legal experts as well as a number of representatives for mohamed el baradei and he of course of the former head of the international atomic energy agency who has indicated that he will be prepared to head an interim government the muslim brotherhood really is the focus of the discussion and the debate here in egypt because before yesterday they said that they would not meet with the government if there was not agreement on the president hosni mubarak stepping down the brotherhood has been at pains to say that they have not changed their stance they have thought it through these kinds of discussions and not

it- mrs. bush repeated what you said then that helps. >> a question from one of my colleagues. i love this question. why did the democratic press operations have so much more trouble controlling the party's message compared with republicans? >> i will take a crack at that. if you scratch any professional democrats or people who worked in the party, they came up the 1960's and 1970's through movement politics. th were late -- they were union organizers, feminist, environmentalist. they worked in a movement politics and believe that the press was going to be on their side. they were in the business of speaking truth. republicans never had that fiction in mind. they started from a viewpoint that was more corporate, more fuel than public relations. it goes all the way back to nixon. it was more about mass communications. republicans were more adept at the skills, public relations from the beginning brayed decrats just mistakenly -- >> that is pretty plausible. bush had the advantage of wahing all the mistakes made in his father's administrations. there were a lot of powerful indivi

mr. bushrning that wikileaks founder, julian assange, had also been invited to attend. >>> and space shuttle "discovery" docks with the international space station for the final time this afternoon. the crew is delivering supplies and the first humanoid robot to fly in space. >>> and finally, the store that aspires to be the walmart of weed opens in sacramento, california today. the superstar sells supplies to help medical marijuana patients to grow pot. it will open up outlets in three other states. that's a quick look at the headlines. >>> now, to jackie meretsky and the weather. >> thanks a lot, ron. we have pictures coming out of nevada city, california. north and east of sacramento. 6 to 12 inches of snow fell. and this isn't way up in the mountains. this is a low-elevation town. the big story in california is, of course, the bitterly cold temperatures, as well as the low-elevation snow. it's not going to snow in downtown l.a. you don't need a parka if you're going to be on the red carpet

the mr. busha chance to weigh in on it. >> i like just san jose airport. >>> facebook dumping a popular app. the impact it could have on your love life. >> plus, using gps to track students. a california city's controversial idea to stop kids from cutting class. that and more when we come back. ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,, at purina one, we want your dog to be as healthy as possible. so we set out to discover the science in some of nature's best ingredients. we created purina one with smartblend. delicious shredded morsels and crunchy bites with real meat, wholesome grains and antioxidants for strong muscles, vital energy, a healthy immune system, and a real difference in your dog. purina one with smartblend. discover what one can do. [ female announcer ] new gold bond deep moisture, with 7 moisturizers and 3 vitamins. the body wash that moisturizes like a lotion. world war two. >>> a dispute in san francisco over a coca-cola ad that dates back to world war ii. the owner was rehabbing the place 20 years ago an

multiple chances in 1998 and 99 and the reason the war is going on in afghanistan today is because mr. bush didn't killed in london when the community had identified his presence at the port of borut in december of 2001. over the course of my career intelligence failures are generally the result of republican and democrat presidents failing to act on time on intelligence that they had. >> ruffini to move on. there is a gentleman right behind you and then we will go to this site. >> i thought your presentation was very courageous and intelligent. is there any way that -- i would like to go through it again. is that available? >> this one is all marked up. i can send a copy if he wants to put on the website or send it to people who request it i don't think that is a problem. >> this is being podcast as well you can download it probably within a week. >> you presented some very interesting points about alternative approaches to foreign policy and domestic policy. can you tell me what kind of following and what kind of support we might see in terms of congress or the executive branch with anyth

international human rights groups have been asking swiss authorities to prosecute mr. bush for torture. s he has been accused of using waterboarding during terrorists of some suspects. >>> on this super size sunday wir meeting a super size baby w born this week in massachusettst look at those cheeks! inches jonathan patrick rozzi was born thursday weighing -- get this -- 13 pounds. he's 22 inches long, and mom says she was shocked, i'd say. dad said he could be looking at? a future lineman and a big foody bill. can you believe -- look at those cheeks! it's>> he' unreal! >> forget the cheeks, did you see how angry that baby looked? look, he's like, oh, i am not happy about this one bit! wow! tamron, thank you for that big baby story. >> that's a big baby story.end. >> jen is here with a check of n the weatherot and we're watchin this from dallas and back. >> dallas had snow and ice over the weekend, and people, of course, were not quite happy about that for the super bowl, but it looksar like today, even though there is a storm system n in the area, >>> a look at the tempera

he was chosen by mr. bush to run the fed. that hearing begins at 10:00 a.m. this morning. president obama is reaching out to republicans with a luncheon for gop leaders. he will meet with john boehner, eric cantor, and the majority whip, kevin mccarthy. this is the first such meeting since republicans assumed control of the house in january. the meeting is expected to focus on the economy and spending. after comments by some officials were widely interpreted as diverging from the white house stan, the white house saw to dispel any notion it is loosening pressure on mubarak are backing off from supporting the protesters flooding cairo's square. demonstrators have been demonstrating a for 16 days. vice president omar suleiman said the protest movement does not enter negotiations, a coup could take place, causing greater chaos. the protests must stand. demonstrators continued to cite not until president mubarak leaves office. some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> this weekend, a voting discrimination in the south, and the kennedy administration's strategy to overco

i was in business for 17 years and mr. bush made sure that i had to go out of business. but that's beside the point. the only jobs you could get was like $10 an hour. and that equates to $400 is a week. and i really don't care whether taxes go up or whether growsries gow up or whether gas prices go up. once you take that money out of my pocket, i do not have expendable income to go and buy all the stuff that's being imported into this country until we go to making the merchandise that we are consuming and the people over to your left there in that building, the house of representatives and the senate, represent us and those jobs for what we consume are manufactured in this country, consumer confidence is never going to come up and we will see what happened in egypt and is going on in lybia now occur in this country. it's just a matter of time. i thank you for your time. host: robert in georgia. guest: well, he was saying that consumer confidence is never going to come up. again, these are indises, you can't completely rely on them, they're just indicators of what we have

it -- mrs. bush repeated what you said then that helps. >> a question from one of my colleagues.this question. why did the democratic press operations have so much more trouble controlling the party's message compared with republicans? >> i will take a crack at that. if you scratch any professional democrats or people who worked in the party, they came up the 1960's and 1970's through movement politics. they were late -- they were union organizers, feminist, environmentalist. they worked in a movement politics and believe that the press was going to be on their side. they were in the business of speaking truth. republicans never had that fiction in mind. they started from a viewpoint that was more corporate, more fuel than public relations. it goes all the way back to nixon. it was more about mass communications. republicans were more adept at the skills, public relations from the beginning brayed democrats just mistakenly -- >> that is pretty plausible. bush had the advantage of watching all the mistakes made in his father's administrations. there were a lot of powerful individu

it -- mrs. bush repeated what you said then that helps. >> a question from one of my colleagues. i love this question. why did the democratic press operations have so much more trouble controlling the party's message compared with republicans? >> i will take a crack at that. if you scratch any professional democrats or people who worked in the party, they came up the 1960's and 1970's through movement politics. they were late -- they were union organizers, feminist, environmentalist. they worked in a movement politics and believe that the press was going to be on their side. they were in the business of speaking truth. republicans never had that fiction in mind. they started from a viewpoint that was more corporate, more fuel than public relations. it goes all the way back to nixon. it was more about mass communications. republicans were more adept at the skills, public relations from the beginning brayed democrats just mistakenly -- >> that is pretty plausible. bush had the advantage of watching all the mistakes made in his father's administrations. there were a lot of powerful

it -- mrs. bush repeated what you said then that helps. >> a question from one of my colleagues. i love this question. why did the democratic press operations have so much more trouble controlling the party's message compared with republicans? >> i will take a crack at that. if you scratch any professional democrats or people who worked in the party, they came up the 1960's and 1970's through movement politics. they were late -- they were union organizers, feminist, environmentalist. they worked in a movement politics and believe that the press was going to be on their side. they were in the business of spking truth. republicans never had that fiction in mind. they started from a viewpoint that was more corporate, more fuel than public relations. it goes all the way back to nixon. it was more about mass communications. republicans were more adept at the skills, public relations from the beginning brayed democrats just mistakenly -- >> that is pretty plausible. bush had the advantage of watching all the mistakes made his father's administrations. there were a lot of powful individ

their reason he has some of spending because he is paying out summits unemployment thanks to mr. bush who killed 52 of the frigid 57,000 factories. they went out of business during his administration. furthermore, this person you have up here, i have not heard a thing about raising taxes. on the top 2%. if you raise taxes on the top 2%, they leave that money in their businesses and they build more business instead of taking it out and sticking it in some foreign swiss banks somewhere. if not paying little or no taxes on it. they would get things going again. host: let's hear from our guest. guest: the wealthy pay a disproportionate share of taxes. if you look to the top 20% of income, they'd play 40% of income taxes. that is disproportionate now. but even eat you did away with the bush tax cuts and assume and had no impact on the economy, he would still have an enormous budget deficit, about $700 billion. you really cannot tax our way out of it. to give you one number to show you that you can i get there by taxing the rich, our total unfunded obligations in this country both in terms

reagan and $1.1 trillion of deficit spending under mr. bush. we put legislation on this floor and said, we need to meet our fiscal respopsabilities. not -- responsibilities. not a single member, unfortunately, of the republican party voted for that legislation. but over the next eight years, we had a net surplus in this country. the only time in the lifetime of anybody in this body that that's happened. we did it working together. unfortunately, the last administration ran up $3.8 trillion of deficits. and we inherited a -- an economy that was in substantial free fall. the president said that, mr. bernanke said that, mr. paulson said that. so we adopted legislation that tried to stabilize that economy and the good news is, we have. we haven't gotten to where we want to be. we want to create more jobs. as the president says, we want to invest in growing our economy and bringing jobs bag. -- back. there will be some very tough decisions we'll have to make moving forward, and frankly as the chairman of the appropriations committee knows and as the

it -- mrs. bush repeated what you said then that helps. >> a question from one of my colleagues. question. why did the democratic press operations have so much more trouble controlling the party's message compared with republicans? >> i will take a crack at that. if you scratch any professional democrats or people who worked in the party, they came up the 1960's and 1970's through movement politics. they were late -- they were union organizers, feminist, environmentali. they worked in a movement politics and believe that the press was going to be on their side. they were in the business of speaking truth. republicans never had that fiction in mind. they started from a viewpoint that was more corporate, more fuel than public relations. it goes all the way back to nixon. it was more about mass communications. republicans were more adept at the skills, public relations from the beginning brayed democrats just mistakenly -- >> that is pretty plausible. bush had the advantage of watching all theistakes made in his father's administrations. there were a lot of powerful individuals that

mr. powell and president bush. >> was that quite difficult?>> i think so because i think you're aware the american view was that the war was contained which we accepted, and they were a bit complexed about why we thought it was desirable from the point of view of the politics. anyway, they were persuaded that it was. >> and that persuasion was down at the level of the prime minister and president as well? >> partly by me, but colin powell was easier to persuade than president bush. >> i just spoke with the department of foreign office two days ago. he said, "i'm not sure the american administration was ever formally committed to a second resolution. i think they were willing to let us have a go at trying to get it. they certainly didn't see a legal necessity for it, and i think they obviously feared it could only result in more complication of the u.n. security counsel." >> that was because of the downsize that it might expose divisions rather than resolve them. excuse me. i feel with the benefit of hindsight things it was worth attempting the

mr. hernandez' nomination. president bush nominated judge hernandez to the seat in the 110th congress. unfortunately, his nomination stalled in the judiciary committee, although he had the full support of every republican on the committee. after pending for over five months with no action, his nomination at that time was returned to the president. this vacancy has been designated a judicial emergency. therefore, i would have expected his nomination to have been made very early in the 111th congress. however, he was not sent to the senate until july of last year. because of that delayed nomination, the senate was unable to complete action on the nomination in that congress. so, at the close of the 111th congress, the nomination was again returned to the president. mr. hernandez has been rated qualified by the american bar association. he received his b.a. from western oregon state college and his j.d. from the university of washington school of law. after graduating from law school, he served as an attorney for oregon legal services where he represented migrant farm workers. he later jo

mr. blair said to president bush through the medium of that note and many conversations was part of a

mr. boehner president bush. and speaker boehner has said he won't bring the cr to the floor at the current levels, could house democrats work with him to adapt one that has somewhat lower levels so you could work out an ultimate deal on the spending package? >> i really don't know what mr. boehner and the speaker said he wasn't going to bring it to current levels. there isn't really a great deal of time. the senate cannot for days when we get back to do their bills, reconcile these two bills. there may be more time that is needed and we may have to have a continuation of the current cr. that's what i said earlier, we don't need any democrat -- republicans or democrats drawing lines in the hands about what will happen if oracle is to make something happen in the closing down of government. the mac could and should reach out and agree to something on a somewhat lower level? >> we have. the president's budget is a good marker for where that is. we're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars cut. we are talking

mr. powell and president bush. >> was that quite difficult? >> i think so because i think you're aware the american view was that the war was contained which we accepted, and they were a bit complexed about why we thought it was desirable from the point of view of the politics. anyway, they were persuaded that it was. >> and that persuasion was down at the level of the prime minister and president as well? >> partly by me, but colin powell was easier to persuade than president bush. >> i just spoke with the department of foreign office two days ago. he said, "i'm not sure the american administration was ever formally committed to a second resolution. i think they were willing to let us have a go at trying to get it. they certainly didn't see a legal necessity for it, and i think they obviously feared it could only result in more complication of the u.n. security counsel." >> that was because of the downsize that it might expose divisions rather than resolve them. excuse me. i feel with the benefit of hindsight things it was worth attempting th

mr. powell and president bush. >> was that quite difficult? >> i think so because i think you're aware the american view was that the war was contained which we accepted, and they were a bit complexed about why we thought it was desirable from the point of view of the politics. anyway, they were persuaded that it was. >> and that persuasion was down at the level of the prime minister and president as well? >> partly by me, but colin powell was easier to persuade than president bush. >> i just spoke with the departmentf foreign office two days ago. he said, "i'm not sure the american administration was ever formally committed to a second resolution. i think they were willing to let us have a go at trying to get it. they certainly didn't see a legal necessity for it, and i think they obviously feared it could only result in more complication of the u.n. security counsel." >> that was because of the downsize that it might expose divisions rather than resolve them. excuse me. i feel with the benefit of hindsight things it was worth attempting the

mr. blair said to president bush through the medium of that note in many conversations was part of a continuing process which had the good effects of persuading the americans in the late summer of 2002 to go down the u.n. route, which could easily -- that was my hope and everybody else has come easily have resulted in a full compliance by saddam hussein with these u.n. obligations at which point our involvement in the any military involvement would've been impossible. >> i like to come unto the u.n. route in a minute. what mr. blair said to us on the 21st of january was that this thing was going down a track to regime change. do you recollect these exchanges and this note and what he said to the president on the third of december is arguing for a strategy of regime change, arguing for building of a strategy, working towards regime change in iraq? >> i didn't see the british prime minister on his fourth regime change. that was not. >> the way to write a note about it? >> he give you evidence. you have to ask him that question. but what i've tried to do is to describe the context if i thought it

bush's presidency? eight years of disaster. what is his opinion about that? >> host: mr. tyrrell. >> guest: i don't think it was eight years of disaster. i do think towards the end, and i tried to tell the president this myself, that he was spending too much money. and i do think as don rumsfeld's written in his new book there was a different way that war should have been executed. and the immediate aftermath of the war, i think, was bungled. but as for the lovely complement from from that woman, i take the complement and the flattery and thank her very much for it. >> host: r.j. e-mails in to you about the conservative crack-up book. ultimately, this book is frustrated because it does not maintain a level of seriousness about what is behind the name calling on the right, an inability so far to reach agreement on what conservatives should stand for and fight for in the new world. should the right try heroically to return to the fight for smaller, less expensionive government, or should it aim at increasing revenues that would allow us to get the books right and fund what

mr. blair said to president bush through the medium of that note in many conversations was part of a continuing process which had the good effects of persuading the americans in the late summer of 2002 to go down the u.n. route, which could easily -- that was my hope and everybody else has come easily have resulted in a full compliance by saddam hussein with these u.n. obligations at which point our involvement in the any military involvement would've been impossible. >> i like to come unto the u.n. route in a minute. what mr. blair said to us on the 21st of january was that this thing was going down a track to regime change. do you recollect these exchanges and this note and what he said to the president on the third of december is arguing for a strategy of regime change, arguing for building of a strategy, working towards regime change in iraq? >> i didn't see the british prime minister on his fourth regime change. that was not. >> the way to write a note about it? >> he give you evidence. you have to ask him that question. but what i've tried to do is to describe the context if i thought it

he was just a mouth piece for vice president george bush and his top aid mr. hainie. and -- not haineafplt dick cheney. and i love him as a human being and he was a great actor and a great speaker. however, he did not know what he was doing. host: the house is set to extend the vote on the patriot act. long island, new york. you are next. cindy on our democrat's line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm calling to directly address your question. i do not think ronald reagan, who is a charming delightful man, a terrible president, i don't think he would approve of these, of today's republican party or at least the one whose have high jaked them. there are lots of good republicans. but ronald reagan for all the flaws that i know of him was a gentleman. can you imagine ronald reagan shouting at a guest speaker in our house of representatives shouting, you lie? these are just not people who are proper peeple. ronald reagan, for that man that called several calls ago from virginia, not the more recent one from west virginia, said well these democrats, they can't stand

mr. boehner and former president bush. speaker boehner said he won't bring a cr to the floor. an ultimate deal on the spending package? >> i really don't know what mr. baner said he wasn't going to bring at current levels. there isn't really a great deal of time. the senate has four days to do their bill, reconcile these two bills. there may be more time that's needed, and we may need a continuation of the current cr. that's why i said earlier, we don't need any democrats, republicans, or democrats drawing lines in the sand about what won't happen if our goal is to make something happen that prevents the closing down of government. >> to avoid a shut down, can't you reach out and agree? >> well, we have. the president's budget is a good marker for where that is. we're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars cut. we're talking about saving $1.1 trillion over 10 years. i think the fact that these two things are coming forth in the same week shows the sharp contrast, but the strong commitment for making cuts for reducing the deficit, and on our side to create jobs to help t

bush administration. thank you for joining us on the communicators. >> thank you for inviting me. >> nellis timothy karr, campaign director of the free press action fund. mr. karr, you heard that interview. what are your thoughts about this legislation that we've been discussing? >> well, i mean, i agree with karen's fundamental point, and that is yes, the we do need to bring clarity to these issues. we live in a new era where cyber threats are real, cyberattack have happened, and i agree that we need to get a better understanding of that and bring clarity to the issue. the problem is that this bill as a was written in 2010 doesn't do that. it's both vague and broad which is the problem and the way that at free press we interpret this is creating this open-ended authority for a cybersecurity director to take control over what i am sure is a substantial portion of our patients internet infrastructure. and the language itself doesn't permit an actual internet kill switch, or it doesn't create an actual internet kill switch, but it permits an executive branch authority to mandate the private sector, internet service providers to respond to in order to turn t

that's one of the great successes of the bush-obama administration -- mrs. emerson: will the gentleman yield? mr. frank: not at this point. i would tell the gentlewoman, if would you work it out with the gentleman from texas and come up with a joint answer, i've yielded several times, one of the czars they are complaining about presided over a bush-obama transition in policy that kept general motors and chrysler alive. we have auto industries flourishing in america and suppliers today. that was partly because of this position that is that's now vacant that they want to get rid of retroactively. i will yield and please explain to me what it means when you say you are going to deny the funds for the special master for tarp. i'll yield to whoever wants me to yield. the gentleman from kentucky? the gentlewoman from missouri? mrs. emerson: i would just like to tell my friend that the office of financial stability, which does -- in the department of treasurey, which does oversee all of this still remains and -- mr. frank: i take it back. i take back my time. now t

against him so we're wondering what bush would tweet and we thought it's a new i should of launch a preemptive war against that would see country sorry but it looks like you mr chance now in the meantime that's it for tonight's show and thanks for tuning in come back tomorrow and it is paranoia back and we'll take a look at donald rumsfeld you renoir so don't forget to become a fan of the lower show on facebook and follow us on twitter and if you missed any of tonight's show or any other night you can always catch all the you tube dot com slash the launch to post the interviews as well as the show its entirety coming up next is the news of the latest headlines from the u.s. . news today. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. showing corporations rule the day. they faced it this is not a provocation but warned. the forces that we should use just everybody assured us a pretty tree should be so they had no idea about the hardships to face. plate one it was this is it all of them to new things for any army life whether you see them is the most precious thing in the world. years of self-sacrifice and heroism with those who und

mr. campanella, the state of florida had about your program under gov. jeb bush. wondering whether you woulde able to comment on your thoughts on how it went here in florida. i am a hungarian-american who is a prodt of both public and private schools. my mothers a retired schoolteacher from new jersey. i would also like to ask you one other point, then i will hang up and listen to your response, and that is in reference to a topic that was a thorny one with someone like myself, a simi retired educator and small- business owners -- semi-retired educator and small business owner. i would likeo possibly comment a bit about stafford loan fra, which is relative to the budget issue that mr. goozner and our host discussed earlier. i think that is a topic that is a vital and that the american public is not aware of. there is a great deal of stafford loan fraud. we have a program which was attending to investigate as a journalist, where there was undue loan fraud perpetrated. i will let you respond. guest: thank you for your call. your mother was a former schoolteacher in

mr. obama is suggesting some tax hikes, including an end to both the bush era tax cuts for the healthy and for mortgage breaks now given to the top two brackets. the cuts to trim the 3.7 trillion dollar budget don't end there. they includes a maybe department initiative that trains older workers and subtracting 300 million from urban development grants and increasing health care premiums for military retirees and their families and cutting infrastructure improvement for low income neighborhoods. the poll finds people believe it's important to cut back on spending and 49% expect to feel some pain by cutting programs that directly affect them. but the president's proposal isn't all about cuts. he does call for some additional spending. 4.3 billion to improve teacher quality. 2.2 billion to be restored to the food stamp program. and $500,000 on green energy research. republicans dismiss the president's budget as worse than useless, claiming it doesn't go far enough to reduce the deficit. >> it would be better doing nothing than if we would actually pass this budget for the sake of our economy

shortly after that, just before president bush ordered an invasion of iraq, we had the c.i.a. director say mr slam dunk, saddam hussein has weapons of mass destruction. shortly after that the president awarded that c.i.a. director the presidential medal of freedom. what did the congress do? did they bring back a church committee to find out how and what went wrong with the c.i.a.? no they went on their way funding it just as they always did and say wonderful things like you two gentlemen are doing this morning. host: he provides a great jumping off point for how you want to run the committee. guest: first of all, let me go back to the church committee got us into trouble in the sense that it scaled down and really canceled a lot of very important programs in the intelligence world that cost us valuable information going into the 9/11 event. in the 1990's they so cut the intelligence agencies and budgets and personnel by tens of thousands of people that we had whole sections of the world that we had no eyes and ears in. we didn't know what was going on. i argue that was a huge, huge mistake fo

mr. reagan, about $1.1 trillion for the first president bush, and $3.6 trillion for the second president bush. as contrasted with the $62.9 billion surplus under the clinton administration. time and again republicans have used the rhetoric of spending cuts as a cover for massive borrowing. for record surplus to turn into record deficits, $5.6 trillion projected surplus in 2001 turned into about a $5 trillion projected deficit in the following eight years. under president bush and for budgets that year after year did far more fiscal damage than they promised, this time unfortunately it's no different. but let's look at the actual cuts proposed in this spending bill. they're short-sighted and indiscriminant. even as they failed to change our long-term fiscal picture for the better, these cuts recklessly damage programs essential to america's competitive edge. i agree that reducing spending is and must be a part of the fiscal solution. but let's reduce spending wisely instead of doing it in such a way that costs america jobs. when we talk about cutting investments in education, in innovatio

bush and the iraqi government. we will abide by the agreement unless the iraqis asked us to have additional people there. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. secretary, and admiral mollen, thank you for your fourth right and compelling arguments. i want to compliment you on going green. the navy is doing extraordinary things as are the other forces. i hope you continue that. i encourage you to do so and many of us will do everything we can to support that effort. my question goes to the afghanistan war and pakistan. does our war in afghanistan destabilize pakistan? if so, what should we be doing about that problem in pakistan? the war't believe that in afghanistan is destabilizing the pakistan. what is destabilizing to pakistan among other things is a group of terrorist, several terrorist organizations and the western -- northwestern part of pakistan that are intent on destabilizing pakistan and overthrowing its government. our ever combined with the pakistani efforts on both sides of the border in fact help reduce the terrorist risk to the pakistaniis. extreme economic problems are huge factor in pakistan. i don't think our

bush. this monday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> "abraham lincoln," and unique contemporary perspective on mr. lincoln from $56, a journalist, and writers. from his earlier years as all lawyer to his presidency during one of our nation's most troubled times in his

we know that peru passed during the bush administration, the free trade agreement, after the agreement made in may 10 by mr. rangel and mr. levin with the president and ustr and that administration. you are about to tackle something in chile and i hope you don't weaken the things that were agreed possible in that may -- upon in that may 10 agreement that made possible the peru agreement, thrick the access to educations. i think that's one of the issues that kind of gets slipped under the table. we talk about labor but sometimes the access to medication provision in there gets lost and i hope that will be a part of what you table on monday when you get to chile. >> if can you respond briefly. time has expired. >> i don't know that we are to that point we are tabling on access. i would say for us the value of our administration, the may 10 agreement represents a good sound bipartisan agreement among democrats and republicans and that's certainly something we are going to reach for in every one of our agreements. we have the opportunity from what we have learned over the last seven years that there are some a

when president bush came in, he converted back into a study. it had been before mrs. edy , and that is the president's office in the house. that is where he works, he does have meetings there. it has been an office since president george h.w. bush. >> you can not help but feel the connection and. behind you is a portrait of mckinley watching a treaty being signed on the very best. -- that very desk. there is a connection with president mckinley. there is a portrait of a grant. you read the book and you realize, several pieces of furniture were used by grant. the picture is called "the peacemaker." that is really my favorite painting. instructing his generals and admiral -- this was his instructions to make sure his great dream of the united states prevail after the civil war. >> i consider its to be a source of strength to us. anything which dramatizes the great story of the united states is worthy couple the closest attention and respect by the americans who live here and visit here. that is why i am glad that jackie is making the efforts she is making. i know other f

mr. campanella, the state of florida had about your program under gov. jeb bush. i was wondering whether you would be able to comment on your thoughts on how it went here in florida. i am a hungarian-american who is a product of both public and private schools. my mother is a retired schoolteacher from new jersey. i would also like to ask you one other point, then i will hang up and listen to your response, and that is in reference to a topic that was a thorny one with someone like myself, a simi retired educator and small- business owners -- semi-retired educator and small business owner. i would like to possibly comment a bit about stafford loan fraud, which is relative to the budget issue that mr. goozner and our host discussed earlier. i think that is a topic that is a vital and that the american public is not aware of. there is a great deal of stafford loan fraud. we have a program which was attending to investigate as a journalist, where there was undue loan fraud perpetrated. i will let you respond. guest: thank you for your call. your mother was a former s

mr. tyrrell for your service, and my question pertains to an article, david brooks for the "new york times" wrote prior to the presidential-vice presidential election in which he expressed his concern that george w. bush, sarah palin, and now, michelle bachmann are very much trying to tap into the governing from the gut motif rather than governing from the mind motif and one of the things that i admire about you, mr. tyrrell and about mr. buckley, is that -- and george will is another name that comes to mind is there is an active engagement of the life of the mind that does not alienate the intelligentsia and please comments on the tea party movement with the focus from governing from the gut is in danger of moving conservatism away from the life of the the mind, to more of an instinct tiive reaction to current events. >> that is thoughtful, and, putting me in company withbuckl is very kind of you and it is difficult to say what the tea party movement is, aside from fervor and it is fervor on hoof behalf of the constitution, we are starting a column in "the american spectator" by a tea party person, ned ryan and we will be covering the movement, we will be covering the intelligent people in the moveme

when president bush came in, he converted back into a study. it had been before mrs.nedy that is the president's office in the house. that is where he works, he does have meetings there. >> you can not help but feel the connection and. behind you is a portrait of mckinley watching a treaty being signed on the very best. there is a connection with president mckinley. there is a portrait of a grant. you read the book and you realize, several pieces of furniture were used by grant. that is really my favorite painting. instructing his generals and admiral -- this was his instructions to make sure his great dream of the united states prevail after the civil war. >> i consider its to be a source of strength to us. anything which dramatizes the great story of the united states is worthy couple the closest attention and respect by the americans who live here and visit here. that is why i am glad that jackie is making the efforts she is making. i know other first ladies have done its. i know that those who come after us will continue to try. " the wonderful thing about what th

president bush tried to eliminate the program, and with the help of his secretary of hud, mr., we saved it. so this, this is not the first time. so, but this, i think, is -- >> serious. >> more serious and more critical than ever what we're living with right now. >> anyone else? yes. >> one of the criticisms of the program is that it's difficult to measure its -- >> [inaudible] >> and that's not the republicans saying that, that's what the president says in his budget. what's your response to his criticisms? >> well, it's very interesting that -- because it is a flexible program, and we always want to ask the question and we have asked the question, where do you start the measure? because we can talk about, mayor fox can tell you about the 3,000 children underneath the bridge. and if we can get those 3,000 children. that's today. what about next year when we have to look at something? it's very organic. so we're -- and it's a flexible program, and we need to make sure that we have, we address these issues. and did i hear you, mayor warren? >> we have to account for every dime,

mr. boehner to halt the steep fall that our financial institutions were about to take. we did not want to do it. the democrats did not create the problem. it was the president bush solution very republicans did not want to vote for it and we cooperated with president bush. the idea of cooperation in a bipartisan way to do the right thing for our country is one that we have to keep uppermost in our minds. as we see this flood of amendments that every idea anyone could ever think of, it is interesting but it is not what needs to happen. what needs to happen is we need to establish priorities. it is not everything you can think of. it is those things that must be done for the american people and their top priority is the creation of jobs. we must have a continuing resolution that does just that -- make it a priority for job creation, deficit reduction, and strengthening the middle-class. no i am pleased to yield to the distinguished democratic whip, steny hoyer. >> can thank you very much, madam later. we have as the speaker indicated been here for two months. we have been here for two months and we have that taken a single action to create jobs in america. we have

mr. block's point, the way you phrase the question, i am happy to defend both president bush and president obama, which is not a position i am usually in. in fairness to president bush, all times are not critical. president bush came to office the second president bush, came to office having watched president clinton make the perot effort, devoted himself to a degree that no american president had devoted himself to reserving -- to resolving the palestinian-israeli conflict and it was eventually a failure. president bush, i think, russell concluded, you know what? i will not continue that fiasco. -- i think, rightfully concluded, you know what? i will not continue that fiasco. i have other things to do. an intern-fata is not a time that you can pursue a resolution or a treaty. it is not apples to apples. bush was presented with an entirely different equation. ultimately, from american's perspective, 9/11 took away our focus and took away our perspective. it is not fair to issue a great deal of criticism relative to president hussein that he had all this opportunity to make wonderful initia

shortly after that, just before president bush ordered an invasion of iraq, we had the c.i.a. director say mr. president, it is a slam dunk, saddam hussein has weapons of mass destruction. shortly after that the president awarded that c.i.a. director the presidential medal of freedom. what did the congress do? did they bring back a church committee to find out how and what went wrong with the c.i.a.? no they went on their way funding it just as they always did and say wonderful things like you two gentlemen are doing this morning. host: he provides a great jumping off point for how you want to run the committee. guest: first of all, let me go back to the church committee got us into trouble in the sense that it scaled down and really canceled a lot of very important programs in the intelligence world that cost us valuable information going into the 9/11 event. in the 1990's they so cut the intelligence agencies and budgets and personnel by tens of thousands of people that we had whole sections of the world that we had no eyes and ears in. we didn't know what was going on. i argue that was a h