he said the court just accepted the government's general assertion. the first amendment puts a very heavy burden on the government. it's what we call strict scrutiny to show that it has a compelling interest. he accepted that national security is a compelling interest but also to show that the means the government chooses, the material support law, is narrowly tailored to reach that compelling interest. he felt it did not. >> brown: an interesting side light before i let you go. this was a case argued for the obama administration by elena kagan. now it looks like it was the more liberal justices who voted against it. >> that's right. what made the difference here really i think it didn't make a difference in terms of vote count but what's interesting is that justice stevens joined the majority. he is considered the most liberal member. i think what it show s is that he felt that the court did find a line to narrow the opinion. and also did make the government justify the law under the first amendment 's toughest scrutiny. >> brown: marcia coyle, thank

i cannot commit to a one way or another whether a fund would assert that. >> so that is and know its this point. >> i cannot comment yes or no. >> why not? the buck stops there. >> what we have said is that we will honor all legitimate claims. the full company stands behind that. >> have you asked the feeeral government for any help that you have not received? >> not that i know of. >> what grade would you give the administration in its effort to stop the spill? >> we have been cooperating in every way we know how. i cannot give a grade. this has been a unified command that we have participated in with many government gencies and industries. we have 150 companies working on this. i cannot comment on a great of individual components of that. >> of your counterparts at the table, have any of them -- are you working with any of them to try to stop the leak? >> yes, all of these companies have been tremendously supportive in helping us. >> a question for all of you. you drill across the world. which countty has the toughest regulations that enforce those regulations, and if that country

i further rebut our colleague from texas' inaccurate assertion that the program is not paid for. the gentleman knows full well it is fully paid for and that according to the c.b.o. the government will earn a profit. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman has yielded back. the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i concede to the gentleman that none of this money is coming from the tarp program. it probably should have because it's a tarp program. i want to just remind the gentleman that the special inspector general who oversees tarp said in terms of its basic design its participants, application process from an oversight perspective the small business lending fund would essentially be an extension of tarp's capital purchase program. from elizabeth warren, the prospects are far from certain. the sblf also raises questions in light of the capital purchase programs poor performance in improving credit access, any capital infusion for the program can successfully jump-start small business lending. everybody but the democrats understand this is a tarp program. why did we want sig

we need to know what level of control the government intends to assert. we are all acutely aware that for some reason, general motors, who had primarily funded the objection to the so-called endangerment filing on carbon, if you will, leading to cap and trade, did a 180 after the government owned them. that is a subject of considerable interest, because when it came to making cars, it was not in mayor best interests to mmke a 180 even if ultimately they intended to make cleaner cars. >> i agree with the gentleman. that deserves investigation, but it doesn't affect his amendment. it reinforces my view that it is a shot at a ppactice that is a serious problem, but ought to be pursued through the investigation and not through this amendment. i won't have anymore to add. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i thank the gentleman from california for both allowing me to speak on my own time now. i believe that the gentleman from california's amendment deserves very serious consideration, and it does raise some serious issues. i listened closely to the chairperson, a

people asserted i had some clues about it. i agree with that. that does not mean the cia and white house did not screw up. >> there is a larger point here. once the war startedo go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency by a good number of reporters, partly by bob but reportg by thenew york times" and oer news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presidency, was an awful lot of mendacity. a real dislike for the press. it is almost everything we know for about theush psidency is we know from the press. we do not note from congressional hearings. we do not know from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it fr the press. i think the reporting on the bush presidency after the first six months of the war is a pretty hon. history of washington reporting. >> you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model. i am wondering what your thoughts are on what that might be. " how old are you? >> 22. >> i am 67. you figure it out. [laughter] its ur job. [applau

an official independent and a new dealer, frankfurter asserted at stone's republican credentials werean asset. is the entry into world war ii seemed a near certainty, frankfurter advised roosevelt that a bipartisan pick for chief justice would serve the president and the court well in the days ahead. fdr advice to jackson that he could inform stone of his approval. stone's nomination met with unanimous acclaim. harlan stone urns another word -- earns another award. in the three documented illustrations of his suggestions, he recommended a democrat, cardoza, to a republican, hoover. an independent, frankfurter, to a democrat, fdr. and republican tt democrat, president harry truman. chief justice stone added his support for burton, but leaving his senate experience it would serve the court well. -- believing his senate experience would serve the court well. stricken by as a regal hemorrhage while preserving -- presiding over the accord, chief justice stone was replaced by fred vinson. he supported the tom clark, president truman's attorney general in 1949. i am pleased and privileged to

people asserted i had some clues about it. i agree with that. house did not screw up. >> there is a larger point here. once the war started to go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency by a good number of reporters, partly by bob but reporting by the "new york times" and other news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presidency, was an awful lot of mendacity. a real dislike for the press. it is almost everything we know for about the bush presidency is we know from the press. we do not note from congressional hearings. we do not know from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it from the press. i think the reporting on the bush presidency after the first six months of the war is a pretty hon. history of washington reporting. >> you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model. i am wondering what your thoughts are on what that might be. " how old are you? >> 22. >> i am 67. you figure it out. [laughter] it is your job. [applause] >> seriously. t

so today, will you assert before this subcommittee that all decisions by bp employees related to the deep water horizon reflected your priority, your priority of safety first. mr. chairman, the disaster in the gulf of mexico shows a series of unchecked bad decisions, we in congress and the federal government must also be mindful of the consequences of bad decision making. the subcommittee heard some of the administration's decisions are threatening the livelihoods of workers and families who depend upon the energy industry. we have killed half of their fishing with the deep water horizon spill and it looks like we're going to kill the other half of their commtee with our moratorium. our hearing today looks at the consequences of bad decisions and the lessons learned, may we have the wisdom and humility to take some of those lessons and apply them to ourselves? and i yooeltd yield back the balance of my time. >> i would like to turn to chairman of the energy and environment subcommittee and chairman of the subcommittee on climate mr. markey, five minutes for an opening statement. >> t

that is an assertion by the vice-president.that is what concerns us. >> the secretary of defense said, "no way." when you have two leaders of the ministration saying two different things that is difficult. >> are we looking at insubordination on the part of anyone involved? when you say it is time to start over, is a time for eikenberry to go? >> this is a pivotal moment. the karzai government is in place. it is the government of afghanistan with all its imperfections. from my observations, not just from the article, there is a lot of tension on the civilian side that makes it very hard to move forward in a coherent fashion when it comes to why the president had to act, the statements of the general, not only were outside the norm, they really put in question military subordination to civilian control. to have "rolling stone"follow you around for a month as a judgment question. [laughter] >> to these officers who were on named -- understand lawyers have been shot at and you are brave and but you let your army down. the cavalier

. >> i've heard some assert that it was lax oversight of the previous administration that led to this accident. well, if that's the case, why did this not happen during the last decade ? >> lehrer: meantime, admiralled thad allen talked on progress of drilling relief wells to stop the oil flow. he stop at the capitol. >> british petroleum has what they call a depth to day ratio. what depth should they be at by a certain rate. they're slightly ahead of that. that's promising. but given the technical difficulties we run into in putting the containment cap on and given the great depths they're working at. i don't think we ought to be assuming this will happen any time sooner than the first two weeks of august. >> lehrer: that's nearly two months away. and with august also comes the fifth anniversary of hurricane katrina. some on the gulf coast say that disaster could pale in comparison once the final damage from oil is assessed. >> it was a lot worse than katrina was because he we was ae to come back from katrina. if this comes back, i don't know... if this comes here, i don't know where

had a airport thadid the right thin relied upon tsa assertions if you upgrade next genetion security facilities during the middle of remoling effort that makes goodusins sense and then when they came to get reimbursed those dollars hav't been there so i look forward to hearing the same kind of response, as well. d this is probably one of imagine i got colleags on the her side of the ais that have this same issue. let me also reassert what i think t chairman has mentioned and i think all of our colleagues believe. your number one job to me sure that your tsa employees ensure the safety of the holand, thsafety of our traveling public, both domtic and foreign, and clearly my conversations with you in reviewing your background, you've got tt expertise. >> thank you, setor. >> but do believe there's another piece and raised it yesterda i want to take another moment it, and that is you've got cse to --ou'll have close to 50,000 employees and in many ways this is the -- these employees are the first impression. >> right. >> that visitors coming t our country teract with. it's also a requid

which arguably poses the sharpest conflict between the congress legislating fisa and the president asserting article ii powers. the federal court in detroit found the terror surveillance program unconstitutional. the sixth circuit duck it had 2-1 with a very strong dissent on standing grounds which is traditionally a way of avoiding a case and the supreme court denied cert. congress has the authority to tell the court what cases to take. we've legislated givingou discretionary authority, but in cases, many cases, illustratively the flack burning case and mccain/feingold and federal labor standards act, we directed the court to -- to hear the case, so i think it's fair to ask if what you would have done, not how you would decide that case, but whether you would take the case. had you been on the supreme court, would you have granted to grant cert in the terror surveillance program case? >> senator specter, justify might to your first point which was the point about the court's declining docket, i do generally agree with that. i clerked on the court in 1987 which w pretty much at the high poin

to employ a three-prong test from the bumadi; n case in which kennedy expressed himself rather assertively regarding these elements, there could be even a majority decision. the best i believe we can hope for in the defense of freedom is to have a majority decision that clarifies and brings certainty to the arena so when the military of the united states encounters and seeks to detain individuals, last matrix in which decision making can be made with confidence and which does not in some way undermine either the moral high ground the united states deserves or the decision making capacity that the united states must have in order to defend itself. as i indicated earlier, freedom is the value worth defending. it deserves an aggressive defense. its defense must be undertaken not only aggressively but in accordance with the law and principles. i believe there's an opportunity in the case which will now appear before the united states supreme court which was only announced by the court of appeals on may 21 of this last couple of weeks there will be an opportunity for clarification of the approp

he has been making these assertions. the police chief wrote an op-ed piece because they got fed up with this misleading information. she pointed out a couple of things. crime rates in the district of columbia have been plummeting for years. that decline started in 1994 with the enactment of the brady law. the one kind of crime that is increasing in the district of columbia is home invasion crimes. that is where a long people to have guns should make a difference. there has been a decline in street crimes. d.c. has that changed its laws with respect to people on the street. i would judge the judgment of the police chief of the district of columbia on that. the only peer review study showed that after the ban was enacted,, site plummeted over 20%. suicide's plummeted over 20%. the suicide issue is one that a lot of people ignore. the fewer guns that are in homes, the lower the risk of suicide. if people at 10 suicide with a gun, the completed much more often than they do with a knife or another weapon. caller: good morning

so today, will you assert before this subcommittee that all decisions by bp employees related to the deep water horizon reflected your priority, your priority of safety first. mr. chairman, the disaster in the gulf of mexico shows a series of unchecked bad decisions, we in congress and the federal government must also be mindful of the consequences of bad decision making. the subcommittee heard some of the administration's decisions are threatening the livelihoods of workers and families who depend upon the energy industry. we have killed half of their fishing with the deep water horizon spill and it looks like we're going to kill the other half of their committee with our moratorium. our hearing today looks at the consequences of bad decisions and the lessons learned, may we have the wisdom and humility to take some of those lessons and apply them to ourselves? and i yooeltd yield back the balance of my time. >> i would like to turn to chairman of the energy and environment subcommittee and chairman of the subcommittee on climate mr. markey, five minutes for an opening statement. >>

have that authority -- the state needs to start asserting that authority.e would no longer be 51st in the nation in terms of per student school funding. this is an example of how the u.s. constitution is not just a nice, abstract idea. it contains real solutions that we need to follow. >> your 90-second opportunity to respond. >> i was fortunate to have the opportunity to represent the state as a volunteer at the deputy of education, and there are real problems in our funding for education. we do not have a strong enough tax base for the costs for education system. one of the things that we do have is enormous wealth in this state of natural resources, coal, uranium. we have oil and gas and opportunity to extract it and create wealth and also korean money for the education system and create jobs in the state -- wealth and also create money for the education system. timber and other resources that we have. we have to fight against that tendency to lock ourselves out of the natural wealth of that we have and the jobs that could be created. there was a bill pa

osha had officials monitoring the training and asserting the cleanup. according to testimony we heard in louisiana, bp still failed to provide respirators to the workers exposed to the crude oil and the workers experienced health impact. the workers were afraid to speak up due to the potential to lose their jobs. those fishermen who attempted to where respirators while working or threaten to be fired by bp due to the workers using the press operators. are you aware of that? >> i am not aware of that. we intend to ensure that everyone involved in the response is appropriately provided with whatever safety equipment is required. >> endeavoring to provide -- are the workers currently provided with what they need? >> absolutely. in every case, we are trying to make certain that people do not -- >> you are trying to make certain. is all the equipment there and are all the workers protected? >> to my knowledge, yes. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. let us turn to mr. ross for questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. hayward, since my opening statem

so today, will you assert before this subcommittee that all decisions by bp employees related to the horizon horizon reflected your pirate -- priority of safety first? mr. chairman, the disaster in the gulf coast shows the cons against of a series of unchecked back decisions. we in congress and the federal government must be mindful of the cops conferences of bad decision-meaping. at a field hearing last week in louisiana, the committee heard some of the administration's decisions are threatening the livelihoods of the workers and families who depend on the fishing industry. we have killed half of their fishing with the spill, and it looks like we are going to kill the other half of their economy with a moratorium. we look can he consequences of bad decisions and the lessons learned. may we have the human it and wisdom to apply some of those lessons and apply them to ears. >> i would lick to turn to the chairman of the energy and environment subsubcommittee, mr. marcy for an opening statement. >> thank you. i want to begin by disagreing in the strongest possible terms with what about

people asserted i had some clues abouit. i agree with that.does not mean the cia and white house did not screw up. >> there is a larger point here. once the war started to go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency by a good number of reporters, partly by bob but reporting by the "new york times" and other news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presidency,as an awful lot of mendacity. a real dislike for the press. it is almost everything we know for about the bush presidency is we know from the press. we do not note from congressional hearings. we do not kw from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it from the press. i think the reporting on the bush presidey after the first six months of the war is a pretty hon. history of washington reporting. >> you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model. i am wondering what your thoughts are on what that might be. " how old are you? >> 22. >> i am 67. you figure it out. [laughter] it is your job. [

. >> in the queen's speech, asa -- may i say we need to assert the authority of this house? we have had too much. i wish you well in what is clearly a change of strategy of a politically-elected government. >> i was once told the first time it was from one of your old speeches. i agree a lot with what he said. i think it is important that the military feel they can give unvarnished, clear advice to ministers, but it is also important that ministers challenge that advice. that is how policy should be developed, and that is how it should be done in future. >> one problem has been mission creeds, and i thank the prime minister for his clarity. he pointed out it was still in the united states military search phrase. can he assure me once they have already begun to talk about a drawdown that we keep in constant touch with them to make sure we operate on a consistent timeline? >> can i congratulate my hon. friend on his election, and i look forward to the work they are going to do. you are actually right. making sure we work together with our allies is vital to success. one thing

frankfurter asserted that stone's republican credentials were asset. into worlds entry war ii, frankfurter a biased fdr that a bipartisan pick would serve him well in the turbulent days ahead. fdr promised a future supreme court appointed to be disappointed jackson. stone's nomination met with unanimous acclaim. for his nomination recommendation, but as a cheap and associate justice, stone earned another award. it is a bipartisan price. in the documented illustrations of his suggestions to the president, stone, recommended a democrat, cardoza, to a republican, hoover. truman knew all four supreme court appointees well. still supported burton believing his senatorial experience would serve the court well. stricken by a fatal hemorrhage while presiding over the court on the bench in 1946, chief justice stone was replaced by a german appointee. -- stone was replaced by a truman appointee. justice frankfurter continued his influence as his tenure move towards its conclusion in the 1960's. his position would be vacant. john f. kennedy said that replacing fr

they receive reports of direct information of payoffs or potential payoffs to varying levels of the assert -- the insurgency? give me a sense of what we may have missed, here. >> during my tenure as the cg, when information was presented i would call in the task force and i would normally task cid. >> can you validate the anecdotal evidence that this might have occurred. can you validate that this might have occurred. can you use all the resources that they have on hand could we would take the appropriate contractual remedies and we would offer to make sure that we held the prime contractor accountable for their performance. the was the responsibility of the contractor. >> how did it get to you? what level obligation is there to report what they're hearing from the port. >> it would come to the contractual chain of command. it would come to the contract in officer to the principle of system response will for contracting in afghanistan and they would -- if you was significant enough, there were reported to me and then we would figure out a way to pursue the evidence and the allegation, team

there were very assertive. they seemed to be accepted as -- they were very assertive. they seem to be accepted as equals in the political, public marketplace. when i was at the university, about 40% in the office or women faculty members or women students. -- about 40% in the audience were women faculty members or women students. perhaps it does not seem like a huge amount of change over 40 years, but, to me, it seemed dramatic. i do not know what all of the reasons were for that. maybe it would have happened anyway. maybe gaddafi had something to do with it. but it was a huge change. i think the libyans are still coming to terms with it. i think they will come to terms with this in their own fashion. i do not think they are going to be guided to much by us -- too much by us. another one of these countries, where there are more women involved in parliament, when they have one, the general people's congress -- there may be a higher percentage of women's represented and in the congress of the united states. -- higher percentage of women represented than in the congress o

what they are claiming to put out commercials and first amendment rights, democrats dispute their assertion, but we may not endorse you. that's a powerful message especially in this election year. dayton, ohio. is justyour opinion like our opinion. when it comes to the republicans, they are not doing their job. they are not doing their job for the people. they do not want to see the president succeed. when you sit up thereeand say they need to sign theecheck, %% sign the need to vote. work with the president. we can see that. cannot see that, because you spreading out certain things. go o capitol hill and deliver message, work with the president and stop working against him. host: a rocky week in a rise as he handled the oii spill situation. guest: they see him as the party's leader. democrats do not want him their district or their state. we interviewed blanche lincoln. big win. deliver her a that was bill clinton. theelle obama has been on trail.n some democrats did not want him. not popular in tteir district. a democrat who was a former aide of john murtha said he voted against health ca

. >> all like to place on the record the fact that the commission examined the assertion that was made which would lead to beaccurate that ther were various rates charged fodifferent charges t --ran -- for different tranches. >> i did not have time for comprehensive check of that. >> and neither did we but we're going to get to the bottom of it. >> make you both very muchfor appearing before. mr. buffett, i'm ing to take advantage of your being here by asking you about your derivatives and your views of them. as mr. wallison has said, your 2002 berkshire hathaway shareholders letter referred to derivatives, and this iswhat i think about all as "financial weapons of mass destruction carrying dangers that are potentially lethal." you also presently said that they are "time bob'mbs." more recently in yo 2008 sheholder letter you said that bear stearns collapse demonstrated that time bob of unterpartyrisk he metarli described. and i would ask bettis o shareholder letters be placed in the reco. >> they wilbe. >> i'll like for u to describe your view of the role that derivatives have played

can generally say more slots doesn't necessarily ensure better care or overall better training as asserted in your report. however, there is this other issue that i know we in our health care reform law we said we're going to do a workforce study, and you've mention that had here. and in fact, secretary sabiliou is announced now -- for primary care. but could you please address why didn't med pack consider the geographical inequities here in this report that is so fundamental. it's really underliing the workforce she and the diversity issue? can you address that in the impact of cutting the limited g.m.e. funds in some states -- steats have already received. >> we did not make specific recommendations about either increasing the caps or rheal location of them. however, we did suggest that we needed to take steps. medicare needed to take steps to increase the diversity of the physician workforce of the future and make sure that we're making sure we bring into medicine the people who are indeclined practice in rural areas, practice in inner cities that may be underserved. research shows in t

. >> we have a assert -- we have a sense of urgency, but there are clubs of welcoming into mobile, alabama right now -- when you look at the big picture, and not saying it's not urgent, it is extremely urgent, but is the whole gulf coast. i was sitting -- i was sitting next to the governor and the prisoner was pitching a complete fit to the president, saying he has sent all of the boom from alabama to louisiana. all of my dems are in louisiana. -- all of my blooms are in louisiana. -- all of my booms are in louisiana. he is telling the president, you have left us defenseless. >> miles and miles of navy boom and we don't have enough to contain the spill. >> i am not defending them, i'm just telling them it is a big coast. >> the marshlands in louisiana, you cannot clean that up. when you talk about the beach, it's a different story. clean the beach. -- if it washes ashore on the beach, they can clean the beach. >> do we know how many miles it would take to block all of the marshlands of louisiana? >> i kelly tell you in jefferson. >> how much in jefferson? >> 21 miles. >> but if you address

>> their assertion and their duty to stand by it -- i have not seen the advertisements yet. i am not sure. we need to separate a couple of things out. our applications of technology to cap this well or contain the flow -- using technologies that normally work in oil spill response orwell containment but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. we are doing things where there is no human access that are legitimate ways to respond to these problems. a lot of times they're going to be adaptations and evolution. that is what is courage to happen here. they have the duty. they are the responsible party. we have a duty to oversee them and we are doing that very aggressively. >> [inaudible] >> based on what they know, they are going to be drilling through. they anticipate it will be harder to drill through rock and other sediments. we are getting a daily update on that. they are slightly ahead of schedule right now. we stopped -- it is mid august for the first well. regarding the deep driller 2 that was taken off station, one that was being deployed and we thought there was an opportun

. >> all like to place on the record the fact that the commission examined the assertion that was made which would lead to be accurate that there were various rates charged for different charges t --ran -- for different tranches. >> i did not have time for comprehensive check of that. >> and neither did we but we're going to get to the bottom of it. >> make you both very much for appearing before. mr. buffett, i'm going to take advantage of your being here by asking you about your derivatives and your views of them. as mr. wallison has said, your 2002 berkshire hathaway shareholders letter referred to derivatives, and this is what i think about all as "financial weapons of mass destruction carrying dangers that are potentially lethal." you also presently said that they are "time bob'mbs." more recently in your 2008 shareholder letter you said that bear stearns collapse demonstrated that time bob of counterparty risk he met earlier described. and i would ask bettis two shareholder letters be placed in the record. >> they will be. >> i'll like for you to describe your view of the role th

in response to the flotilla in may, fidel asserts that israelis will like to send palestinians to be cremated like the nazis did to the jews. he ignore antley ignores the holocaust. to suggest that they will inspire a nazi-inspired genocide of the israelis is bad. this was widely distributed throughout the cuban regime. his offensive comments clearly puts prejudice and anti-semitic positions at the front of the regime. i ask my colleagues to continue to work with israel towards a peaceful solution for the israeli and palestinian people, and i encourage my colleagues to view castro's comments for what they are, the dangerous scheme of a brutal dictator designed to hurt the people of israel and -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is up. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? mr. boozman: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. . mr. boodsman: i rise today to honor harrison fire chief john neal who has devoted his life to the people and is now retiring from duty after 21 years of service.

of unsung men and women who gave their lives based on the simple game of freedom and a desire to assert necessities from a nation . we in the u.s. of a know something about that freedom and that determination. chief of all, these visionary african leaders are in cameroon. in ghana, in senegal, thomas in -- and tanzania. this resolution also commends the social, economic and political progress being made by these nations while acknowledging the associated challenges that they face today. many of these nations have become democracies and are striving to be released from their past oppression. men and women have worked tirelessly to overcome colonialism, neocolonialism, social adjustments, internal and regional war and their own hurdles. they also face serious changes beyond their control, which has been exacerbated by the global financial crisis, climate change and terrorism. many of the african nations today are becoming economically, politically and strategically important to the united states. our nation simply cannot afford to take that away, we can't afford to mistakenly see africa a

>> your assertion that they have slipped my mind is incorrect. having said that, frankly, members of our caucus, david obey in particular, has indicated that they are not slipping our mind but we ought to consider that. expenditures cannot be off the table. no expenditure should be off the table beccuse ww know that a decade from now or three decades, as much as we hope for catastrophes not happening, and national security problems not happening, history shows is thaa we need to be prepared. one way we need to be prepared issto be fiscally sound in our treatment today of those issues. frankly, president bush and those in the white house concluded that the efforts internationally. costas, as you recall, $60 billion. we are now in excess of $1 trillion in iraq and afghanistan combined, and certainly they need to be computed within the context of paying for things. in fact, as you know, and their people in the united states and republicans in the united states senate and democrats who oppose talking about that objective. i think that that needs to b

the dot made the false assertion that the north atlantic is a competitive market even though there has not been any entry in two years. this is based on fraudulent evidence violating the merger guidelines for verifiable case specific cases. each case relies on a completely false dot claims that eliminating competition actually reduces prices in certain markets and thus so automatically, regardless of market for competitive conditions. the committee in congress must addressed this core problem of evidence based antitrust enforcement and that it means that airline competition is no longer being determined by investors and consumers in the marketplace in accordance with the airline deregulation act, it is designed by bureaucrats. the committee cannot allow this merger review to proceed without full assurance that there will be rigorous independent scrutiny of the course energy and market power claims and it cannot proceed until the dot notification of antitrust enforcement has been clearly rejected and the irreconcilable split that exists between the dot and boj approaches to the trust ha

that decision asserted that corporations have the same free speech rights as individuals. all house, live on c-span. if you are watching c-span could coming up next, supreme court justices ruth later ginsberg and trial. and then, remarks from ashley judd in the appalachian region. >> the second one is to press to get action on the world for it if that is 10 kilometers into the gulf of mexico. it is beginning to explore the ice in the arctic. >> tony hayward on global energy policy this past and a very before the gulf oil spill. thursday, he will testify on capitol hill. hear what others have said about this bill in more than 100 programs. it is washington, your way. justice ruth ginsberg and samuel a littllito. they are joined by other federal judges and supreme court attorneys looking at the famous play of the english monarchs. this was held in march. it is about to hours for th. >> oyez, oyez. the supreme court of the amalgamated kingdom of england and france is now in session. you may be seated. >> the court has convened to hear the case of the french civil liberties un

they were very assertive. they seemed to be accepted as equals in the political/public marketplace. when i was at the university, about 40% of the people in the audience were either women faculty or when students. -- four women students. -- or women students. to me, it seemed dramatic. i do not know what all the reasons were for that, maybe it would have happened anyway, and maybe qaddafi had a little something to do about it, but i think that many are coming to terms with it. i do not think they are going to be guided too much by us. who knows, it may be another one of these countries where there are more women involved in their parliament at some point when they have one. there may be a higher percentage of women representatives then there are in the united states. this is a dramatic change, and a change for the better credit >> thank you. any other questions or comments before i turn it over to the ambassador? yes? >> [inaudible] try to figure it out. i do agree with the ambassador. i say that because i know that it is his job and his mission. i would like to emphasize what he re

the israelis are asserting that in fact the flotilla of meant to have a confrontation. something went horribly wrong. probably on all sides, to some extent. but this is a really tragic situation and i hope we get to the facts very quickly. i know that everyone -- the united states, israel, turkey, certainly the palestinian authority, regret the loss of life. host: the timing of this. there has been a public relationship between this president, barack obama, and benjamin netanyahu. last week rahm emanuel, white house chief of staff, meets with the israeli prime minister. he was supposed to be here today. the trip was canceled. it is on the start of reading talks between the israelis and palestinians, which have now broken off. guest: the timing of this could not possibly be worth actually. in fact, on june 9, the head of the palestinian authority in, the president of the palestinian authority is due here to meet with president obama. i am sure that will be a tough trip. the prime minister of turkey will be here today meeting with will be here today meeting with secretary

seeks to employ a three-prong tes from the bumadi; n case in which kennedy expressed himself rather assertively regarding these elements, there could be even a majority decision. the best i believe we can hope for in the defense of freedom is to have a majority decision that clarifies and brings certainty to the arena so when the military of the united states encounters and seeks to detain individuals, last matrix in which decision making can be made with confidence and which does not in some way undermine either the moral high ground the united states deserves or the decision making capacity that the united states must have in order to defend itself. as i indicated earlier, freedom is the value worth defending. it deserves an aggressive defense. its defense must be undertaken not only aggressively but in accordance with the law and inciples. i believe there's an opportunity in the case which will now appear before the united states supreme court which was only announced bthe court of appeals on may 21 of this last couple of weeks there will be an opportunity for clarification of the approprie

>> it is their assertion, and their duty to stand by it. i have not seen the advertisements. i think we need to separate a couple of things. the stuff that has been happening on the sub sea for our applications of technology that normally work in the oil spill, but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. the issue is trying to do things where there is no human access at 5,000 feet. that is pretty much what has been happening. they do have a duty. they are irresponsible party. we are overseeing them, and we are doing very aggressively. >> to have the status report of a relief well -- a second relief well? are the resources focused on the second relief well? >> they are, and i are both on target for a release. based on what the ndp knows, -- what bp knows, they are slightly ahead of schedule. we look at an update. we're not willing to declare victory until the really -- told on -- until the relief wells are actually connected. regarding the deep driller two, when it was been deployed, and we thought there was an opportunity to cap the well, we knew a blowout preventer was an optio

people asserted that i had some clues about it. and failed to pursue them. and i agree with that. that doesn't mean the c.i.a. and the white house didn't screw up. they did. >> but there's a larger point here. and that is once the war started to go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency, my good number of reporters, partly by bob but also some great reporting by "the new york times," other news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presence, was an awful lot of mendacity. and a real dislike for the molest. almost everything we know about the bush presidency we know from the press. we don't know it from congressional hearings. we don't know it from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it from the press. so i think the reporting on the bush presidency actually after the first six months of the war is a pretty honorable part of the history of washington reporting. >> mr. woodward you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model for the current news industry. what a most successful one

president obama does not intend to assert executive privilege -- bauer writes. present -- ex-president clinton also has an interest and what do you think about drilling in the gulf? caller: there are two things -- i don't know if the media just does not know, but the golf and the bermuda triangle probably have oil reserve -- it's incredible, beyond anything venezuela has. and they are doing it completely right. they have centralized pipelines, for one thing. we should have huge taxes on gas, for one thing, and a government -- it is natural resources. the entire gulf -- all the countries, everybody could have simple pipe lines that go into these vast pools. the bermuda triangle -- hello? host: we are listening. caller: the bermuda triangle, for one, it is so full of methane. it used to be solid seaweed when columbus came over. that all sank down and decayed into biofuel pared the gulf is the same way. host: arkansas, charles, republican. what about drilling in the gulf? caller: good morning. we have to drill. this entire problem started with the crooks in congres

>> their assertion and their duty to stand by it -- i have not seen the advertisements yet. i am not sure. we need to separate a couple of things out. our applications of technology to cap this well or contain the flow -- using technologies that normally work in oil spill response orwell containment but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. we are doing things where there is no human access that are legitimate ways to respond to these problems. a lot of times they're going to be adaptations and evolution. that is what is courage to happen here. they have the duty. they are the responsible party. we have a duty to oversee them and we are doing that very aggressively. >> [inaudible] >> based on what they know, they are going to be drilling through. they anticipate it will be harder to drill through rock and other sediments. we are getting a daily update on that. they are slightly ahead of schedule right now. we stopped -- it is mid august for the first well. regarding the deep driller 2 that was taken off station, one that was being deployed and we thought there was an opportun

challenge that a criminal brought to a position for a firearms in the district of column i and he asserted the second amendment meant he should have his conviction reversed. she wrote in a brief memo that she was quote, not sympathetic to this line of argument. it's hard to draw inference from that because at the time, know courts really considered that the second amendment was a threat to district of colombia firearms laws. in 1939 the supreme court had last heard a second amendment case and rejected the challenge to the argument that the second amendment prevented the federal government from restricted sawed-off shot fun. since that there had never been a regulation to any gun law that got anywhere. hard to know if she was reciting the law at the time or was going beyond it but the court didn't even take the case, so it's really hard to know what she meant. i'm certain she'll be asked about it this week. we might learn about whether or not she was viewing that as a crack pot lawsuit which the supreme gets a lot of petitions about. second issue came up in the clinton administration when t

. >> all like to place on the record the fact that the commission examined the assertion that was made which would lead to be accurate that there were various rates charged for different charges t --ran -- for different tranches. >> i did not have time for comprehensive check of that. >> and neither did we but we're going to get to the bottom of it. >> make you both very much for appearing before. mr. buffett, i'm going to take advantage of your being here by asking you about your derivatives and your views of them. as mr. wallison has said, your 2002 berkshire hathaway shareholders letter referred to derivatives, and this is what i think about all as "financial weapons of mass destruction carrying dangers that are potentially lethal." you also presently said that they are "time bob'mbs." more recently in your 2008 shareholder letter you said that bear stearns collapse demonstrated that time bob of counterparty risk he met earlier described. and i would ask bettis two shareholder letters be placed in the record. >> they will be. >> i'll like for you to describe your view ofhe role that

and a polluter can defeat those who want to holl it accountable by asserting that its part of %- citizens for clean air and clean beaches. insurance monopolies determined to deny american families access to care at a price they can afford are already out there with groups like americans for better health care, which is really designed to stymie our efforts to access health care. disclose act opponents have a great deal to not disclose. they want to be assassins, silent assassins of character where they buy one hate ad after another while denying the public an opportunity to know what the views being expressed in that 30 seconds are in fact limited to those of a narrow corporate self-interest that is determined never to be held accountable for its misconduct. the public without the power of this corporate deep pockets would also be denied access to the knowledge of who is really wielding the pen. who can look at washington these days and say that the problem up here is too little influenced of corporate cash. a vote for the disclose act is a vote to stop the corruption of our political sys

i believe if we continue to proceed in this manner, ann further assertions of openness and transparency will be a fiction and meetings like this one will only serve as political theater. while i have no illusions we will have this process is how to unfold, we should at the very least be honest with the american people about what is happening, where it is happening, and who is making those decisions. i would like to say a word about our time line as well. the new york times reported that chairman frank was urged by the administration to produce a conference report by june 24. that is from the time the president is expected to leave for toronto for a g-20 meeting. such a target is ambitious. while we mmy complete our work, i would hope that we could all agree that our schedules should be dictated by the needs of our financial system, our economy and the american families and businesses that will be touched by this legislation and not by the arbitrary time lines or the president's travel plans. before this bill can achieve the goals that i have enunciated, i think it is to be changed versi

that is an assertion by the vice-president of the united states. that is what concerns us. >> and you have the secretary of defense saying, no way. that is not good when you have the leaders in the administration seeming to say different things. i don't know whether the vice president affirmed that ". >> when you say it's time to start over, it is time for eikenberry to go? >> i will leave that up to the president. i want him to believe that he made the right decision by sending more troops and we are at a pivotal government -- pivotal point right now. the karzai government is the government of afghanistan. from my observation, not just from the rolling stone article, but there's a lot of attention that makes it very hard to move forward in a coherent fashion. and it comes to what the president had to back, -- had to act, the statements of the general were not only outside the norm, but they've put into question military insubordination of civilian control. letting a reporter from the rolling stone all your round is the first question. [laughter] a

to strike this balance between a stable industry and reliable air service, we assert today that the increase and consolidation activity requires appropriate regulatory oversight to protect the interests of employees and consumers. but while some protections are in place today for consumers and communities, since the regulation, there are virtually no protections for airline workers. of all the well-developed, pre- the regulation rules of the provision, only one exists today. a provision that establishes safety -- safe seniority protection in the event of a merger. after deregulation, congress was concerned that massive post- deregulation restructuring of the airline industry would displace large number of employees. in order to assist laid off employees, they added the airline employee protection program to the deregulation act of 1978. unfortunately, the almost 40,000 employees who lost their jobs in the immediate wake of deregulation never received the benefits that congress promised. since funding was never authorized for the benefits. as congress looks into the impact of mergers on emplo

interesting to see what happens in torrento this weekend, but i think you will see very little assertions of that sort about promoting still further liberalization on trade. i think the do hah round, which is the current round underway which they have not been able to conclude because of major political resistance in industrial countries to liberalizing agriculture, i think you are not going to see much movement on the trade issue. so i don't think you're going to see a huge de cla ration o about let's do fair trade instead of free trade. but i think you will see it dampen down and say we need to not usher in a new era of protectionism. but on the other hand, this effort for strong balanced growth that i mentioned a few minutes ago is meant to chart a path in which free trade and fairer trade can take place in a balanced way so there aren't exports subsidized by an undervalued exchange rate on the part of the chinese, for example. and obama reflects this, it seems to me, to not get gung ho again for free trade, not be idea logical about it either in the sense of saying free trade is absol