i was involved in campaigning against senator jesse helms when i was in college. when i came out here i was not initially involved politically. i was involved in community work, helping to build the lgbt community center, doing neighborhood work, and i eventually started doing campaigns and gradually got more involved in democratic party politics. ultimately, in 2004, i ran for the democratic county central committee and ended up chairing the committee. it was a gradual process for me. by the time i started thinking about running for supervisor, it made sense because of my involvement in the community and the politics. i knock on about $15,000 -- i knocked on about 15,000 doors and a huge amount of people. the best way to learn about the city and what people want and what people's concerns are. i feel like i know so much more than before i started campaigning. i am a good liberal democrat. in the san francisco, miniature spectrum, i am considered pretty middle of the road. one thing about me is i am very independent when it comes to the issues, and i do not vote o

>> kind of the host of jesse helms. state has always been divided, but what tipped the balance was this outpouring of political money. not all in the traditional campaign donations, a lot of it going to these new think tanks. this soft money that has just been dumped into north carolina, and that's one of the implications of citizens united on these smaller races, big money can make a big difference. >> michael: yeah, and that's where they are putting that big money on those small races. you in your recent article you list all of the parties and events that lobbyists have been putting on for the governor and the republican legislators. is that different than it has ever been? or it is just business as usual. >> lobbyist always sort of party. but in the last six months alone there have been over $100,000 spent on these parties going to nice clubs, really just showering these newly elected lawmakers and the governor with all sorts of gifts as they are implementing these very probusiness policies. >> michael: republicans h

bob mcdonnell does not want to be seen as the new jesse helms, the new rick santorum, the new alma matter, pat robertson. i mean, he wanted to govern in that vain, the forced ultrasound bill and the bill that would close the state's abortion clinics. he wanted to honor the brave confederate fighters in virginia. he wanted to govern that way, but he's not wanted to be seen that way. and the bright shiny distraction that's made bob mcdonnell not seem that way, not seem as out there as he is and always has been, is the states attorney general who got elected alongside bob mcdonnell. ken kuchenelli, known as the kuch. dogged the attorney general at his public appearances to try to draw attention to whatever new radical thing the cooch is doing now. he wrote to state universities as soon as he and bob mcdonnell took office to tell state schools that they had to resinned their nondiscrimination policies that included sexual orientation. he told the state schools of virginia, you're not allowed to ban discrimination against gay people by order of the state. he's the guy who changed the state sea

in a meeting with barry goldwater with president carter and that is when there was a leak out of jesse helms' operation and the brothers being drug dealers. there was a sealed indictment. barry goldwater, he was supportive of the president. i said senator, he said, bob, remember something, we conservatives hate leaks like this and what he threated to do was go on the floor of the senate and say he was for the panama canal treaty. and i was absolutely struck. >> i think rand paul will have a problem with eventually is that, for example, the question of should we be a country that is more isolationist? should we mind our own business? we have nukes, so it's okay if others. i think that's a bridge too far on foreign policy that they would say we're not able to go there. >> we are the size of a phone booth. go ahead. >> libertarians and isolationism are two different things. libertarians will only go someplace if there is a clear and present danger to the united states. >> that is actually where i support them. i think that's right. that's where they have the strongest argument. people are tired

senator jesse helms made a point of order that this was improper.under senate precedent, a person could not use a nondebatable motion to specify the business he wanted to conduct on the executive calendar. the presiding officer sustained snosh helms' point of order as being correct under senate rules and precedents. in a party-line vote, senator byrd overturned the ruling on appeal and because of this change inrecedent, it effectively is no longer possible to filibuster the motion to proceed to a nominee. so, mr. president, where are we? there are other examples where our distinguished colleague used the senate's authority to reform its procedures by a simple majority vote. we on this side of the aisle may have to employ the same procedure in order to restore the practice of affording judicial nominees an up-or-down vote. we did not cavalierly decide to use the constitutional option. like senator byrd in 1979, we arrived at this point after recent bitter experience, to quote senator byrd. and only aft numerous attempts to resolve this problem throug