of this we are joined by writer protector of "generation" zero" and the executive producer of citizen's united. welcome here. you showed it at cpac a massive hit. did you ever expect this kind of reaction? >> i have to be honest, no. i am shocked and obviously pleased. >> two different audiences, too. the first older and the cpac very young. it's the first time they have seen all of these facts put together in a 80 minute, 90 minute presentation. >> let's give a broad over view. we are going to show highlights from the film. the myth is capitalism failed, the myth is the banks failed the insurance companies failed. there's something deeper to the stories. >> it's rum why yous and greed at the same time. the cultural and social breakdown it has taken 40 years to led up to the september 18th crisis. >> september 18th at 2:00 in the afternoon the secretary of treasury went to the white house went up to capitol hill and told leaders of the government that our economy was go to melt down the world economy was about to melt down and we would have such a complete social melt down. how did that happen

this company is a huge winner, perhaps the main winner from citizens united ruling.in fact, on its most recent conference call, entercom ceo said the decision "clearly opens the doors for additional demand as we enter into the heat of the political cycle this year." and it would certainly be our expectation that we are in for a robust year of political spending in radio, end quote. like mark twain's famously premature obituary, reports of radio's death have now been greatly exaggerated. just this past november a nielsen study mapping usage trends across all forms of media found that 77.3% of all adults are reached by radio on a daily basis, second only to tv at 93.5%. and it's more than the internet, when you exclude e-mail at 64%, and much more than newspapers at 35%, or magazines at 27%. what's more, the business of radio is improving, thanks to a recovery economy and increased advertising spending across the board. although many of the radio companies did not make it to the promised land. entercom has already noted an uptick in advertising demand, which is acceler

citizens united. that is a troubling decision. there will be great implications in the congress. there are problems now for donations in congress and we may see that more in the future now that corporations can use their treasury funds to run ads for and against other members. you will see other members of congress shaping their messages and boats to make sure they do not in your certain companies, or that they will make friends with companies who can pay for these campaign ads. host: the front page of "usa today" -- they write -- jericho, and vermont. ron, good morning. caller: i have two questions. are you not doing the job of the free press in the country? it is more of an indictment of our free press system than anything else. i was wondering, if someone tattletales on a congress member, do you have the power to protect resources, like us? and my second question is, do you consider a violation of the logan act and ethics issue? have you championed any kind of indictment for people who violate the logan act? host: let's start with the second point, what is the logan act? guest

. >> did you think the citizens united decision as helping that movement to more reform?i do, jim, i do. i think citizens united has crystallized the argument for everyone because for 100 years we basically have no corporate money in the process. you allow voluntary tax which corporation -- which grew since the big reforms in the 1970's. but we were limiting. now the floodgates are open and the expectation -- the other day i was astounded at our state level, our state races. when people run in a small state like mexico for a statewide office you're spending a couple hundred thousand dollars. people are now expecting the flood gates of corporate money to come in and millions of dollars be spent in those races by a variety of organizations. so as people learn and know about that i think it will give an impetus to try to tackle campaign finance reform regarding the decision. we are on the strongest footing constitutionally the way that the cases are now for disclosure and transparency. that's -- we can do that now. so you can say the ceo has to be on television a to can disc

mentioned the supreme court in light of the citizen's united decisions.guest my take from his comment was more than that he's concerned about the rulings of the supreme court and that one in particular because he didn't like it. it is certainly been a contentious ruling but it's awfully well grounded if anyone would read the 156 pages. the attempt by the federal government to severely regulate speech in the election arena is something we don't do in virginia. we just have a reporting and disclosure requirement. but the federal level they regulate the daylights out of it. - and they over did it according to the supreme court there. i don't think it has much bearing at all in terms of the jurisprudence with the legal decision on whether or not the health care bill would be constitutional. i have my own vents at the supreme court. host: you said in your initial comments this with a side from the demon past. what did you mean by that? >> it can be done constitutionally and unconstitutionally. let's focus on unconstitutionally because it's simpler if they use

valley forge is where he began to think of himself as a citizen of the united states rather than a citizen of virginia. a remarkable man. that is a good book to pick up, if you have not. it is very readable. i do not get a share of the royalties. [laughter] >> mr. chief justice, were you more nervous the first time you gave oral arguments or the first time you heard them? >> the first time i gave them. it is easier to ask questions and answer them. i mean, i was certainly nervous. it was an emotional day, among other things. the day began with justice stevens reading the court's message on the death of my old boss, chief justice rehnquist. i took over and presided. that was an emotional day. when you are there arguing a case, that is an intimidating thing. you have to have that self- confidence i was talking about. the issues are always tough. it is exhilarating arguing a case. you have an added stimulation of the competition. on the bench, we never win or lose. even when we are debating among ourselves, you never think of yourself as winning or losing. you are engaged in the same process.

would appear to exclude from the protection of national rights those -- when people are not citizens of the united states, they don't have national citizens rights. now within a state jurisdiction, so a noncitizen would still be able to assert rights under those causes by think that is a series issue. >> i'm sorry, insource corporation, the course admit code the privileges do not apply to corporations. >> ilya? >> as a noncitizen i'm particularly interested in that question. i just got my green card about 10 months ago. i am enjoying the fruits of the rest of the constitution, but i mean, there's every reason for having different types of constitutional protections for citizens versus noncitizens and legal immigrants versus tourists versus illegal visitors. there's a structure depending on what right we are talking about that applies different way. and the equal protection clause does a lot of the work to make sure that, for example, all of a sudden you can insulate noncitizens, or something like this. i think the reason the citizenship language was used and privileges and immunities is because it

like citizens united, that is an entirely valid concern. er to it is that -- as tim recognizes, privileges and immunities clause is limited to citizens and not corp. specifically, and two, there are economic rights traditionally, the right to contract, an individual's right to earn a good living, if they're living, labor and contract -- some of the cases that some groups have brought on economic liberty are powerful and routed in the history in the history of treatment of slaves and unionist after the war. the idea that we cannot have laws, that congress cannot pass laws on the 14th amendment to protect labor's and workers from mistreatment, i think it is completely antithetical to the history of the 14th amendment and should never be stored under the privileges and immunities clause. >> question? >> i am bret thomas. a historical question. presumably when the supreme court essentially eliminated the core of the 14th amendment, many the man who it pass those protections originally were still around. was there historical reaction to what happ

supreme court in a case called citizens united versus fcc has overturned two very draconian petitions in the mccain feingold campaign reform act. that is a major step forward, i can claim that the book was responsible for this to possible of the elements but i hope at least we provided some of the intellectual ambition. >> did you analyze the cases only where did you also talk to judges and lawyers and writing the book? >> well, i have over the years talk to many judges and many lawyers so we did analyze the cases. by regional selection was in part based upon a poll that we took about 75 other legal scholars including judges and lawyers and asked them what they thought were the dozen or so worst supreme court cases since the new deal. the words down by their determination that we were at least guided by their determination. >> you have a project you're working on? >> i have lots of projects but they do not include another book by projects include running the board of directors at the cato institute and serving on another board including the institute for justice and the george mason l

based on the citizens united supreme court decision, there is going to be even more of it in 2010.u are worried about what you can do to stem that corporate influence, the model is obama's campaign in 2008, from a fund-raising standpoint. what he was able to do -- he was a charismatic candidate. there's a lot of grassroots discontent over the iraq war and other issues. out of that, they were able to mobilize small donors. obama doubled the previous record. bush had 1 million contributors. i think that was in the 2004 election. obama had $2 million, the bulk of which were small donors -- the $5, $10, and $20 donors. that is a new model of fundraising. if it can be generalized to other races, house and senate races, gubernatorial elections -- that would be the most transformative thing we could do. the problem is it has been hard for other candidates to replicate that model. obama was able to do that because he is a celebrity, he is smart, he is charismatic, and there was this grass-roots discontent. you need all those things. technology is starting to transform fund-raising in polit

based on the citizens united supreme court decision, there is going to be even more of it in 2010.ed about what you can do to stem that corporate influence, the model is obama's campaign in 2008, from a fund-raising standpoint. what he was able to do -- he was a charismatic candidate. there's a lot of grassroots discontent over the iraq war and other issues. out of that, they were able to mobilize small donors. obama doubled the previous record. bush had 1 million contributors. i think that was in the 2004 election. obama had $2 million, the bulk of which were small donors -- the $5, $10, and $20 donors. that is a new model of fundraising. if it can be generalized to other races, house and senate races, gubernatorial elections -- that would be the most transformative thing we could do. the problem is it has been hard for other candidates to replicate that model. obama was able to do that because he is a celebrity, he is smart, he is charismatic, and there was this grass-roots discontent. you need all those things. technology is starting to transform fund-raising in political races.

host: on the legislative response to the citizens united case, as the article suggests, there are no specific suggestions on what should be crafted. we will continue to watch this debate as it moves through the congress. thank you for being here, david. we are going to take a break the next topic is the economy. we will hear about a new report that suggests we are teed up for another big problem in the economy if there are not regulatory changes. robert johnson will be here. >> a senate budget hearing this morning. housing and urban development secretary shaun donovan testifies on their $405 billion budget request. live coverage beginning at 9:00 eastern. sunday, your chance to come to karl rove starting at 10:00 eastern. a former adviser to president bush and current fox news contributor will take your phone calls and e-mails. on "afterwards" -- and the tucson festival of books. all the details on c-span.org. >> obama and his socialistic ideas -- the government running the car companies, deciding salaries -- this is a life lesson in congress right now for conservatives. >> michele e

and the citizens united ruling means that organizations will have yet another avenue of spending, they'regoing to be able to take now corporate, labor, and other organizations contributions and then direct that toward express advocacy for or against candidates. and this bill is probably going to be where a lot of that advertising, particularly negative advertising, is going to be focused. host: robert is joining us, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. i think i caught a while ago that the chamber of commerce was the largest expenditure of lobbying money. did you say new york chamber of commerce or the national chamber of commerce? guest: this is the u.s. chamber of commerce. the national chamber. caller: and of all of that, it's only 144? guest: in 2009. $606 million spent over about the last decade. and i should point out that it's kind of an unfair comparison because the chamber includes their grass roots lobbying. so their organizations can choose to use different methods of reporting lobbying expenditures so they're including a somewhat broader scop

it would appear to exclude from the protection of national rights when people are not citizens of the united states. to process and equal process applies to any person within a state jurisdiction. and on citizen would still be able to get rights under those clauses. i'm sorry. as far as in corp., the court has made it very clear that it does not apply to non-citizens. that is already a part of binding law. >> i just got my green card 10 months ago. i am enjoying the fruits of the rest of the constitution. [laughter] there is every reason for having different types of constitutional protections for citizens versus non-citizens and legal immigrants versus illegal their centers, depending on what right we're talking about that applies differently. the equal protection clause -- all the sudden you can enslave non-citizens are something like that? i think the reason the citizenship language was used was because it applies not just to natural rights and not to those rights enumerated in the bill of rights, not necessa do e matter, tim? >> as far as the issue at the slaughterhouse cases are concern

. >> do you believe the citizens united decision is helping the movement to have more reform? >> yes, i do. i think citizens united has crystallized the argument for everyone because for 100 years, we basically had no corporate money in the process. it grew since the big reforms in the 1970's, but we were limited. now, the floodgates are open and the expectation -- i was astounded at our state level -- the state races. people running in a small state like new mexico, for a statewide office, you spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars. people are now expecting the floodgates of corporate money to come in and billions of dollars to be spent in those races by a variety of organizations. as people learn and know about that, it will give an impetus to tackle campaign finance reform regarding that decision. we are on the strongest cutting constitutionally for disclosure and transparency. -- we are on the strongest splitting constitutionally for disclosure and transparency. you can say that the ceo has to be on television and disclose the donors, but if you want the big reform the

i think the citizens united decision was, frankly, the most radical decisions in plessy vs. ferguson. we are trying very hard to write a law, to write a bill that will be successful when there is a constitutional challenge, which i no doubt believe will come. but i think there's no question that this bill is constitutional. host: do you worry about the court? certain members? guest: this is a very little -- i think that the citizens united decision was an incredibly radical power grab where the court addressed an issue that was never before it. so i think we have to be very careful that this bill is written in such a way that precludes that kind of power grab in the future. host: tinder hook, new york, for rob andrews who is with us for another nine minutes. this is al on our independent line. caller: good morning. good morning, pedro, how you doing? a couple quick points. make sure my tv is all the way muted. two months ago i called in they had a gentleman there who -- i'm not sure -- it was an independent organization that analyzes these kind of programs. i asked him a que

secondly, we talked about the citizens united case. we have important elections coming up, and the question is are the special interests going to play a bigger role in those with their contributions than they normally would? obviously, there are a series of legislative activities around, tax credits for small business and hiring, small business lending, and different job creation programs that the president is focused on. emigration is something the president has supported for quite some time, and energy has made it through the house. my guess is there will be a clamoring for an energy bill when gas prices go up as they normally do when we get closer toward driving in the summer. i think the president is trying to get an update on each of these issues to see what the pathway for is. >> does the president wants to see something done on energy or immigration sometime this year? >> absolutely. what i said to the very first question, it has to be more than the president wants to get something done. the president is going to ask as he did i

he said that the valley forge was the place where he began to dig himself as a citizen of the united states. >> were you more nervous giving arguments than receiving them? >> i was nervous the first day that i presided. it was an emotional day. the day began with justice stevens reading the news about my old boss could tel. when you are arguing a case, it is intimidating. you have to have the same degree of self-confidence i was talking about. the issues are always tough. you have the added the stimulation of the competition. on the bench, we never win or lose. you never think of yourself as winning or losing. when you are arguing, you are going to win or lose and this can effect how you do. this process can be nerve wracking. >> i am getting married this weekend and i would like to take your brain on how to balance law practice and family life? >> it is easier to do as a judge then as a lawyer. if you are a lawyer and your brief is due tomorrow, your son's basketball game is today, it is tough. if you are a judge, your opinion is not due tomorrow, you have a lot more flexibility. my

it is, i think, the finest opportunity that any citizen of the united states ever had, and i am so proud to be a part of it, and i am so glad. i am bursting with pride that i am part of a group that has worked so extraordinarily well. there is nothing now that we can tackle. if you have any problems in the world, anything that concerns you, just give us your ideas. thank you, madam speaker. thank you, colleagues. >> as the majority leader mentioned earlier, it has been an honor for us to call them colleagues of the united states. it is important to note that the commitment to the issue of health care goes back decades. his father was a leader, a relentless advocate and leader of health care for all americans, starting in the 1930's? before that. oh, my gosh. before that. and when john came into congress in the footsteps of his father, he picks up the gauntlet and continue the fight. -- continued the fight. as was said, he dabbled it into law, and what a remarkable, remarkable set of events -- he dabbled in -- gaveled it into law. he calls for the recorded vote on this legislation that ho

they were civilians and citizens of the united united states of . the title of the book is called "black men built the capitol" which brings up the obvious question of did lack men really build the capital? i am going to take a couple of seconds more to lead-- read a little bit more to you. from millions of people who are the capital every year, few know or are told about the contributions that blacks made to the heart and soul of the u.s. government. no minor oversight. the capital would not exist as we know it today without slave craftsmanship and labor. records show that the slaves who lived in the washington d.c. area made up a good portion of the labor pool that worked on the capital. mo that constructed the capital cleared to land from jenkins hill and doug up stumps from the wide avenues that radiate to the city according to research first published, first publicized by nbc reporter ed hoadley in 2000. we now know slaves baked the bricks used for the buildings foundations and walls, saw the lumber for the interior walls and floors, dug the th

-- a united states citizen. the crude that we had for breakfast this morning and was probably picked by an immigrant worker. if we have a sick individual in our family, they are probably being tended to by the warm heart and the steady hand of an immigrant aid. we cannot wait to bring them out of the darkness and into the light. we cannot wait to reunite families and we cannot wait to read the economic benefits of comprehensive immigration reform. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] >> finally, democrats in congress asked for republicans to join them on immigration reform. it is time to put the politics of fear aside and do what is right for people in our country. we need reform that strengthens our economy by making employers stop exploiting immigrants and we can have immigrants pay their fair share of taxes, learn english and be good citizens. we need to strengthen our security. we need reform but protect the dignity of all human beings that call this

some of the president's big priorities after health care are financial regulatory reform and the citizens united case. what did you mean by that? in other words, what can you do specifically about that ruling? >> well, the legislation right now with senator schumer and congressman van hollen that would address some of the things that were opened up as a result of that supreme court ruling. we've certainly looked at that legislation, and i think counsel and others are evaluating that and other vehicles in order to address -- to address what the supreme court opened up in their ruling. >> one more question while you have the usa sweater on there. i draw your attention to a web site that's posted a letter to "barack the red" -- not what you think it means. >> do i need to get my canadian jersey back? >> no. [laughter] they write, "these are trying times. unemployment is in double digits audacity? check out number eight, alexander ovechkin. hope? this season has found the capitals with better postseason prospects than any other year." they plaintively write at the end here, "the capitals bandwagon i

legislation extending the protection of the national government over the common law rights of all citizens of the unitedtates. it recognize if they did not create a national citizenship, and declared that their privileges or immunities which embrace all the fundamental rights belonging to citizens of all free governments should not be abridged by any state. now, it's interesting to note a parallel develop in state law as well as federal law as far as the 14th of them is concerned. in 1857, the california supreme court issued a decision called billings versus all striking down a law that took private property a way from absentee landlords. in that case the supreme court held the republican view that states were limited. it has been a mostly supposed by many that the legislation of a state may do any act except was expressed accredited by the constitution. the supreme court said that the supreme court of california that others contend our boundaries set to the exercise of the supreme sovereign power of the state that it is limited in its exercised by the great fundamental principles of the social compact.

host: are you talking about the citizens united case? caller: that is the one in which they said corporations had the right to free speech of people. host: okay, thanks for the comet. guest: just the idea that a corporation as a person is an absurdity. corporations are institutions. the idea that corporations or bad or good is also absurd. they are institutions, tools. what we're supposed to do is use these tools wisely, like with any kind of tool. on its face, the idea it that is a corporation is a person -- this is like an old fiction in american legal system that goes back to the 19th century, and it has had this pernicious effect, on and off, over the last 150 years. it is on its face an absurdity. but the effect of this -- you know, we saw quite a considerable consolidation of power within the media system going back to the 1996 laws put into place by bill clinton. if anything, what we're seeing right now is that the distribution of power -- i am not sure of the fax of the kit -- i'm not sure if the actual effects of the case are as

as i mentioned, financial reform to citizens united campaign finance case. comprehensive energy legislation. there's no doubt there will be many, many more big issues with which the president deals with. obviously this is one he wants to see through. >> the president told some members that the fate of his presidency depends on passing health care reform. >> i'm not aware of that. but i can certainly check. >> would it be out of character for him to say that? is that one of the arguments -- >> nobody doubts his desire to see this through. >> on the trip, why not delay it one day? if it's going to happen sunday, does that signal he's concerned about what's going to happen in the senate? >> scheduling worked throughout the night when it became apparent the bill would not post yesterday to see about moving the trip back. we looked through and pulled out what very little padding remained from having moved the trip from thursday to sunday. and without -- unless we took off, basically, extremely early in the afternoon on sunday, it wasn't going to be possible to do

citizen because when these people died they were no longer slaves, they were civilians and citizens of the united states of america. now the title of the book is called "black men built the capitol," which brings up the obvious question of did black man really built the capitol? i'm going to take a couple more seconds to read a little bit more to you. while millions of people toward the capitol, to veto every year, few know or are told of the contributions that blacks made to the heart and soul of the u.s. government. no minor oversight. the capitol will now exist as we know it today without sleeve craftsmanship and labor. work would show the sleeves who live in the washington, d.c. area made up a good portion of the labor pool that worked on the capitol. more than 400 sleeves or more than half of the documented work force that constructed the capitol cleared the land from jenkins hill and dug up stumps for the wide avenues that radiate out into the city according to the research first published -- publicized by nbc reporter in 2000. we now know slaves baked bricks used for the building's foundat

me express to you the difficulty of trying to explain israel's security predicament to the citizens of the unitedates, a country that is 500 times the size of israel. so, i thought how why did this to bring it home. and i asked you to imagine that territory of the united states was compressed down to the size of new jersey. now i'm not speaking at new jersey because our ambassador michael comes from the new jersey. it happens to come from the right size. so, now you squeeze the united states down to the size of new jersey. next, put on the new jersey's northern border a terror proxy called hezbollah which fires 6,000 rockets into the small state. then imagine that this terror proxy amasses another 50,000 rockets to fire at you. now i'm not finished. you take new jersey's southern border and put another iranian terror proxy on it and call it hamas. and it, too, fires 6,000 rockets into your territory while smuggling even more lethal weapons into its territory. you'd think you'd feel real vulnerable? you think you would expect some understanding from the international community when you have to def

they think a supreme court decision of citizens united opens up a cash bonanza.to make work for us. we've got the bully pulpit, pla. mmh lu, we've got this down to a science. [laughter] look, holy god. [laughter] i have no idea how that got there. [laughter] look-- take that off while you? [laughter] look, i do want to leave the station tonight without addressing to electoral decisions that got an awful lot of media coverage the past several months and all of you asked me about. the massachusetts senator great and the delaware senate race. and i want to give you my responsibility. people wonder why have embraced scott brown so warmly. and scott is here tonight. look, i want to wish them well. this guy has a tough job filling the shoes of the sexiest man in the senate. well, that didn't work at all. [laughter] i think it's me scott, not you. look, with regard to go, people speculated why he decided not to run for the senate. why the hell would you? he loves the life he has right now. [laughter] i've got to get a new prompter appear. joe, you'd be real in trouble i

to again create jobs there is the outstanding case of the loophole that the case generated for citizens united. obviously financial reform, which senator dodd's committee will take up today. and i think we feel there is some momentum building for seeing that through as well as big issues like comprehensive energy and immigration legislation are obviously still left for the president to do. >> robert,-- [inaudible] >> i am sorry, say that again. [inaudible] >> i will say this and i think the executive order makes this clear. the president was, the president stated throughout this process that they health care reform should simply maintain the status quo. he believes that the bill maintains the status quo and he thinks the executive order reiterates that strong belief. >> it is existing law. there is nothing particular about the executive order that changes that. >> again, the president quite frankly and many in congress on both sides of this believed as the president did that there should be a health care bill, that it shouldn't be billed out of issues and what the bill does and what the execut

for one thing, the citizens united case is going to benefit local stations. really do not want to go there. you are right, that it is all part of a very long term secular -- cyclical change. >> have you formed any views about that at this point? >> i think the short answer is that it is not quite as bad for newspapers -- as newspapers. the other factors that affected newspapers are also affecting television stations. the lower add rates online -- ad rates online. i do not mean to be a downer, but some things will get better. on the other hand, there are some ways in which the negative parts of this have not fully played out yet. we do not have universal broadband. for all the benefits that broadband will bring, it will exacerbate some of these problems in certain pockets. one of the reasons that community newspapers are doing relatively well is that craigslist has not gotten there yet. but he will. >> maybe not. >> so when the classified sales keep going down, some of the smaller newspapers are going to have those problems as well. >> have you found anything

host: are you talking about the citizens united case?ler: that is the one in which they said corporations had the right to free speech of people. host: okay, thanks for the comet. guest: just the idea that a corporation as a person is an absurdity. corporations are institutions. the idea that corporations or bad or good is also absurd. they are institutions, tools. what we're supposed to do is use these tools wisely, like with any kind of tool. on its face, the idea it that is a corporation is a person -- this is like an old fiction in american legal system that goes back to the 19th century, and it has had this pernicious effect, on and off, over the last 150 years. it is on its face an absurdity. but the effect of this -- you know, we saw quite a considerable consolidation of power within the media system going back to the 1996 laws put into place by bill clinton. if anything, what we're seeing right now is that the distribution of power -- i am not sure of the fax of the kit -- i'm not sure if the actual effects of the case are as big

retrofitting initiatives to begin creating jobs -- there is the outstanding case of the loophole for citizens unitedand obviously financial reform, which senator dodd's committee will take up today, and i think we feel there is some momentum building for seeing that through, as well as big issues like comprehensive energy legislation. there is plenty left for the president to do. [inaudible] >> i think the executive order makes this clear. the president was -- the president's stated throughout this process that health care reform should maintain the status quo. he believes that the bill maintains the status quo and he thinks the executive order reiterates that strong belief. >> it reiterates the existing law. you did not need an executive order to do that. >> the president and many in congress on both side believed as the president did that they should be in health care bill. it should not be a bill about other issues, and what the bill does and what the executive order does that status quo preserving. that was the whole point. >> what the president have any new proposals for the israeli- palestinia

send sufficient troops to the border and uphold the national responsibility to protect the citizens of this unitedtes and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. ms. woolsey from california. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to take the time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from washington is recognized for five minutes. mr. mcdermott: as the dust settles, mr. speaker, on the capitol today, i read an article called "waterloo" by president george w. bush's speech writer. i think it sum u.p.s. nicely what we just witness -- sums up nicely what we just witnessed. he began, conservatives and republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960's. it's hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. conservatives may cheer themselves that they'll compensate for today's unexpected vote with a big win in november, 2010, selections, but, first, it's a good bet that conservatives are overly optimistic about november. by then the economy will have improved and immediate goodies in the health ca

citizen and an enemy combat and on u.s. soil? >> it is not clear that the united states has the -- an american citizen on american soil. there are other tools that the executive branch had to effectuate the incapacitation of that person as opposed to simply locking them away and not giving them a lawyer. >> the president has other tools. the president is the commander in chief. this is where the profound disconnect comes between where america is and where you are in this administration and where this leadership of the congress is. >> there is a split between america and the leadership in this administration, i would disagree with that. >> there is a disconnect. even the voters of massachusetts, as liberal at a different from the are from my constituents in texans -- in texas, those voters understand in massachusetts that he does not have the same rights as charles manson. >> he has the same rights within a court room. >> your clothing osama bin laden with the realities of the constitution, giving rights to enemy soldiers that is a profound problem, sir. >> you're

now, you have one who asks is the president of the united states a citizen.ost: michael we've addressed that issue. do you have another one? caller: just an issue with - understanding it's not a direct race issue, it's just that things said that can be take then a racist manner. host: matt kibbe? guest: i think that the attacks on the good people that are showing up, that their racist. they're trying change the subject. i think this is race baiting in reverse and it needs to stop. i think that you've seen this from day one when people started protesting the president's stimulus plan and when they started protesting health care. they showed up at the august townhall meetings. the democratic machines said first these people aren't real and then they - nancy pelosi suggested maybe they were affiliated the nazi party and then my barack obama.com called these people racist and i don't see the facts happening on this. i think that all of these tactics are really damage together the fabric that holds us altogether as a country. host: wanda on the democrats line from

this bill suggests that it be treated as a citizen of the united states and afforded all the rights and protections under the constitution of the united states. senator obama responded, well, it turned out that during the testimony, a number of members who are typically in favor of a woman's right to choose, woms's right to choose an abortion were actually sympathetic to some of the concerns that your -- you raised and were raised by witnesses in the testimony. and there was some suggestion that we might be able to craft something that might meet constitutional muster with carrying forth fetuses or children who were delivered in this fashion. senator obama continued, this bill goes a little bit further so i want to suggest that i think it will make -- excuse me, i just want to suggest not that i think it will make too much difference with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. number one, whenever we determine a previable fetus that is protected by the equal protection clause and other elements in the constitution, what we're saying i

it turns out these younger citizens of the united europe still feel that they're astonians or finns or dutch. and the kind of proof of it was when they had the referendum a few years ago on a treaty -- on a european constitution, the rule was it had to pass -- it had to be approved by every country. and it failed in france and in the netherlands. two of the original six countries who formed this united europe. that was kind of surprising. but the really surprising thing for me, the guy who wrote all about generation e is that the younger french and dutch people voted against the constitution more than older people did. do you think -- is it fair to say i was wrong about generation e, yeah, i think that was fair. i was wrong. >> host: and to look at the european-u.s. relations through the eyes of some brits, who are the laudbergers? >> guest: the laudbergers that's a typical american family, peter. they used to appear on a morning -- a funny morning tv show in britain called "the big breakfast." it was their version of "good morning america" or something. and it would have news. and it

fix that book by a guy would downplay the generation he because it turns out these number citizens of the united europe still feel there estonians or fans or dutch and the kind of proof was when they had their referenda a few years ago on a treaty and a european constitution the rule was it had to pass -- had to be approved by a free country and it sailed in france and the netherlands, two of the original six countries that form the united europe's that was kind surprising that there really surprising thing for me, the guy that wrote about generation each is that the younger french and dutch people voted against the constitution more than older people did so to do think is it fair to say i was wrong about generation e.? i think if yes that's probably fair. i was wrong. >> host: to look up of u.s. relations through the eyes of some brits who are the large burgers? >> guest: that is a typical american family. they used to appear on a sunny morning tv show in britain called the big breakfast. it was their version of good morning america or something, and it would have news and would have entertainm

mexican government in fighting the drug cartels and curbing violence against mexican and united states citizens, both in the united states and abroad. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, and the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. connolly: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of this resolution and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. connolly: i thank the speaker. on december 31, mr. augustine roberto bobby salcedo, a high school vice principal and school board leader was brutally murdered while on a family vacation while in durango state, mexico. while enjoying the company of family and friends in the city of gomez palacio, mr. sa

as a total disaster but the foreign policy applications every country said will the united states kidnap our citizens that is a violation of international law and of a glove pfizer said have they been at the table the united states would not have done that. finally most recently is the case of the white house torture memos. what happened that a law professor from berkeley who was recently hawking his new book together a lawyer for room at the defense department and the vice president's lawyer, am i missing a lawyer? about three lawyers decided to call themselves the work council and got together and cut out the military lawyers and state department lawyers and roe opinion after opinion that you devastates could do these things like waterboarding and it was not tortured yet they were not experts at the international conventions than made up their own conclusions and send them to the president elect john and said a war by any other name the reason why they cut out the state department lawyers as they were afraid of the president heard what he had to say he would not go along with their conclusions brok

said one of the president priorities other than health care our financial regulatory reform and citizens united case. what did you mean by that? in other words, what can you say specifically about that ruling? >> the legislation right now with senator schumer and congressman dan holland that would address some of the things that were open up as a result of that supreme court ruling, we certainly look at that legislation and i think counsel and others are evaluating bad and other vehicles in order to address what the supreme court opened up in their ruling. >> one more question while you have the u.s. a sweater on. drawing your attention to a website that has posted a letter to barack, not what you think it means -- >> 2i need my canadian jersey? >> no, these are trying times and employment is double digits, audacity, this is a prospects than any other year. they plaintively right at the and the capitals is filling up quickly but we need a leader. will the president commit to go to washington on this? >> i can't say -- i think he has been two -- i will check and see if he's been to a game in chi

a united states rather than a citizen of virginia. a remarkable man. i think that is a good book to pick up if you haven't and it is very readable. you will enjoy it. i don't get a share of the royalties by the way. [laughter] >> mr. chief justice were you more nervous the first time you gave an oral argument or the first time you heard oral arguments? >> the first time i gave them. it is lot easier to ask questions and answer them. and, i was certainly nervous the first day i presided. it was an emotional day among other things, the day began with justice stevens reading the court message on the death of my old boss, chief justice rehnquist, and then i took over and presided, so that was an emotional day. but, when you where are there arguing the case, that is intimidating bench. you do have to have the same degree of self-confidence i was talking about, and the issues are always tough. it is an exhilarating arguing a case in you have the added stimulation of the competition or go on the bench we never win or lose, even when we are d

citizens and therefore could become united states president in the same way a service man or woman living abroad and had a child abroad that china would not be prevented from becoming a u.s. president having been born on foreign soil because in this case that child would become a u.s. citizen by birth. >> host: he went on not only to be governor but hud secretary for president nixon. and you detail how he was such a saving voice in terms of american motors, the grumman. [laughter] you are not too proud to have a gremlin in your driveway youth saw people driving big fancy cars but it made him rich and he was very successful. >> guest: when he came into american motors, the company had selected him some years before as the vice president. but the chief executive officer was george mason. when it was formed with the merger of nash, george mason shortly thereafter passed away and the board elected my father to become president the stock went down dramatically think it dropped to about $5.50 per share and a couple years it was trading at over $90 per share. i am pretty proud of the job that he

>> we don't believe that the united states congress should mandate the purchase of a service on the citizens of virginia. it has never been done before. >> reporter: so far, 14 states have either filed or planned to file lawsuits against the if you federal health insurance reform law. attorney general ken cuccinelli says he will provide a full accounting of the money he is spending on these lawsuits starting with the $350 he spent on tuesday to file the paperwork in federal court. in richmond, tom fitzgerald, fox 5 news. >>> coming up next, on the run for nearly 40 years, police finally catch a convicted murderer. how the victim's grandson helped track him down. >>> coming up later, it is type of baby carrier that has grown in popularity recently but now, one million baby slings have been recalled after three babies died in them. we'll let you know what to look out for. we'll be right back. spars >>> u.s. and russian officials are making plans for a ceremony to sign an historic new nuclear arms treaty. the deal announced wednesday will likely cut the number of long-range missiles each countr

first soldier to fall in service to this country in iraq was a lucky know who wasn't even a united states citizen [cheers and applause] >> what we had for breakfast is what was probably picked by the hand of an immigrant worker. the chicken we had for dinner last night was probably picked up by the cutup hands of an immigrant laborer. [cheers and applause] >> and if we have a sick one in our family, they are probably being tended to by the warm heart and steady hands of an immigrant aid. we cannot wait to bring them out of the darkness and into the light. [cheers and applause] >> weekend away to reunite families, and we cannot wait to reach the economic benefits of comprehensive immigration reform. [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] [cheers and applause] [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] [cheers and applause] [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] [cheers and applause] [speaking in spanish] [cheers and applause] >> finally, democrats in congress asked for republicans to join them on immigration reform. it's time to put the politics of fear a side and do what's right for pe

me express to you the difficulty of trying to explain israel's security predicament to the citizens of the unitedthat is 500 times the size of israel. so, i thought how why did this to bring it home. and i asked you to imagine that territory of the united states was compressed down to the size of new jersey. now i'm not speaking at new jersey because our ambassador michael comes from the new jersey. it happens to come from the right size. so, now you squeeze the united states down to the size of new jersey. next, put on the new jersey's northern border a terror proxy called hezbollah which fires 6,000 rockets into the small state. then imagine that this terror proxy amasses another 50,000 rockets to fire at you. now i'm not finished. you take new jersey's southern border and put another iranian terror proxy on it and call it hamas. and it, too, fires 6,000 rockets into your territory while smuggling even more lethal weapons into its territory. you'd think you'd feel real vulnerable? you think you would expect some understanding from the international community when you have to defend yourself? i

[applause] >> our next speaker is brent wilkes, national executive of the united latin american citizens, the oldest and largest hispanic civil rights organization in the united states. >> thank you. in july of 2008, candidate barack obama attended the dimension addressed over 4000 delegates. and he told us that immigrants who are working hard and contributed to this economy deserved a break. he said if he was elected president he would pass comprehensive immigration reform in the first year of his presidency. now fast-forward 21 months. many of the delegates that were there believed him. they thought a candidate obama became resident that we would have comprehensive immigration reform. but one thing they never believed in their wildest dreams is that president obama would have a record like this, where he surpasses the bush administration and deportations. it is unconscionable to have over 387,000 people deported in the first year of obama presidency. and our community is angry. our members feel betrayed. and it's not just the deportations. in addition to the deportations, the raids tha