president george h.w. bush, the 41st president of the united states, and barbara, the former first lady who didn't wear her suspenders. >> oh, darn it. >> larry: you should have, right? it would have been in keeping. first of all, let's start with you. how are you feeling? >> very well. >> larry: what was wrong? >> i don't know. but may i give you some advice? never ask anyone over 70 how they feel. they'll tell you. >> larry: but you were taken to the hospital. was it an emergency? >> mm-hmm. but i feel great. that's it. >> larry: you're not going to tell me what was the matter? >> yeah, tell him. >> you mean when i had -- >> the -- >> oh, no, i'm not going to tell him that. when i had the perforated ulcer? >> yeah. >> larry: that's what it was? it wasn't the heart? >> no, i had the heart. i did have that. i have a pig valve. don't say oink or sooey, sooey, as some people i know say. >> larry: they gave you the pig, not the mechanical. >> which is better. you don't have to take coumadin. >> larry: how are you

i included george h.w. bush and barack obama. again, not for political reasons.u bush is in there because of this amazing story of when he was in flying, he was one of thes youngest pilots in world war ii, and there's the picture of him. as his plane was going down, he had two men on the plane withas him.e as the plane crashes and is crashing into the ocean, he maneuvers the plane so they can get out before he can and uses. that moment of selflessness. he lets them out first, he jumps out and is crashing this ocean. he's vomiting, he's crying, he's believing -- he's terrified. when i saw him and i heard thisg story, he told me he still thinks of these guys all the time. and here's the guy who became the president of the united states and never told anyoneve that story, never ran for it,or never self-promoting. i want my son to have that humility. and barack obama's in the book, again, not because of anybar political reason.f no one knows where he's going to be in the end, but what heat represents whatever yourr politics are is on

we all know that bill clinton inherited the largest deficit in history from george h.w. bush and then handed george w. bush the largest surplus in history, and then george w. bush nearly doubled the national debt and also handed barack obama the largest deficit in history. and, of course, my friends controlled the congress for most of those bush years. now, today we're talking about thousand get our economy going and keep deficits down at the same time. whilwhat we're discussing rightw is whether to restore the clinton marginal tax rate on the very wealthiest of americans. now, i remember when we -- when he raised the tax rate on the top 2%. republicans said that would kill the economy. newt gingrich, remember him? on august 5, 1993, he said, "i believe this will lead to a recession next year. this is the democrat machine's recession, and each one of them will be held personally accountable." senator phil gram, remember him? he said, "the clinton plan is a one-way ticket to recession. this plan does not reduce the deficit, but it raises it and puts people out of work." now go

george h.w. bush.ge schultz, james baker, yourself, lawrence eagleburger, colin powell, condoleezza rice and former secretary of defense william cohen. jim baker is on the list somewhere there. >> yeah, he is. >> doug, mr. secretary, let me go to doug on this question. what's the problem with this? why are you questioning it? >> i think a number of those republican officials that you mentioned also raise questions about the treaty. the treaty establishes a link, what they call an interrelationship between offensive force reduction and missile defense. this is something the russians have been asking for for years. they tried it when i helped negotiate the predecessor treaty. the bush administration said, no, that's harmful to the united states, bullet the obama administration said yes. the other thing, the treaty has counting rules. complex counting rules that have the effect of imposing penalties on the united states if we want to convert long-range nuclear systems into long-range conventional systems.

. >> how did you get to know george h.w. bush? >> i write thrillers. i talk to imaginary people. fan letter written by george h.w. bush. i don't care what your politics are, you are the former president, you write me a letter, i'll send you a free book. >> brad meltzer is our guest. first call. maryland, go ahead, please. >> caller: yes, brad, i wanted to thank you for creating such a wonderful book. i think it's extremely important that people really understand that, you know, the heros are not just the people that are famous. but i like that you did put in people who are not famous. and kids would have an opportunity, not only your son, but anyone who's giving this gift to their family to let them know that ordinary people not only can do extraordinary things, but also be truly extraordinary. by pursuing their goals, dreams, going after it, trying to make a difference. i want to thank you for this. that's something that i share with my family. >> thank you. >> host: who's your hero? >> caller: my hero is my mother. she was an african-american woman from the south, had a nice ed

. >>> still ahead on "way too early," george h.w. bush was president the last time we saw this picture, brett favre in street clothes sitting out an nfl game. the streak is over. two monday night games to show you including the vikings/giants ahead and john boehner got emotional on "60 minutes." which crew of ladies ripped him for his weepiness when "way too early" comes right back. [ speaking a foreign language ] ah, this is just what the eight layers needed. hey guys. sorry we're late. milk looks warm. finally got the whole gang together. maple brown sugar, strawberry delight, blueberry muffin. yeah, a little family reunion. [ wind rushes ] whoa! whoa! whoa! whoa! we're cereal here! what? just cooling it down. enough said. gotcha. safety first. whoo-hoo! watch the whole grain! [ female announcer ] try kellogg's® frosted mini-wheats® hot. just add warm milk and you've got a hot way to keep your kids full and focused all morning. oops. dude your eight layers are showing. [ female announcer ] mini-wheats® hot. keeps 'em full, keeps 'em foc

the list of endorsers includes president george h.w. bush, george shultz, jim baker, jim schlesinger, henry kissinger, brent scowcroft, colin powell, condoleezza rice, stephen hadley, howard baker, laurence eagleburger and frank carlucci. many of these officials served at a time when the stakes related to russian nuclear arms were even higher than they are today. during the cold war uncertainty over russia's intentions and weapons advanced, and this cost us tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars. an academic industry developed that was devoted to parsing soviet military capabilities. this was one of the biggest, if not the biggest expenses of our intelligence budget each year, and the fact that we could not accurately judge soviet military capabilities led us to elevate our spending on weaponry out of a sense of caution. these times were dominated by contradictory risk assessments and rumors about dangerous new soviet weapons systems. we were constantly worried about missile gaps, destabilizing arms deployments or soviet technology brea

much like previous arm control treaties, including the old start treaty signed by george h.w. bush and the sort treaty signed by george w. bush -- the new start treaty will reduce the limit of strategic nuclear arms aimed at the united states. the united states and russia will be bound to a lower number of nuclear weapons which will be 30% fewer than the current numbers under the sort treaty. the treaty's new rules allow us to count russia's nuclear weapons more accurately. i think that is a critical piece about whether we can really verify what's going on. these new counting rules give us the ability to more accurately figure out what's happening with russia's nuclear arsenal. new start leaves us the flexibility to determine our own force structure and maintain a robust deterrent capable of protecting us and our allies. and despite all of the concerns that have been raised, this treaty does nothing -- let me repeat that. this treaty does nothing to constrain our missle defense plans and further it allows for the modernization of our nuclear weapons complex and we've already heard

language expressing a legitimate concern, we have support for this treaty by former president george h.w. bush, secretaries brown, car liewchy, cohen, perry, and schlesinger support this treaty without this language. it was true that former secretary schlesinger said, for instance, he has a concern about this imbalance. i think we all do. he stated that concern. he still supports the treaty without this language, without this expression of concern. secretaries albright -- former secretaries of state albright, baker, christopher, eagleburger, kissinger, powell, rice, schultz support the treaty without this language. they have the same concerns. as a matter of fact, i believe that it was senator sessions -- it may have been someone else -- who said that former secretary kissinger has expressed this concern. in fact, quoted, i believe, from secretary -- former secretary kissinger's writing on this issue. he has that same concern which senator risch and all of us have about this imbalance. but without the language, former secretary kissinger still supports this treaty. so all i can say is, i think

although it may be like george h.w. bush in 1992 where a lot of them sit out. >> thanks. i'm going to walk over here. we'll show you some of the president in the briefing room earlier today. you heard dana bash say one thing that democrats liked the least about this tax cut deal is the estate tax provision. every night this week we're going to break down a provision of the deal so you can see what it costs and how it fkt as you. so let's come over to the wall and take a peek. this is the entire deal. this is all $900 billion. if it's yellow it has bipartisan support. blue is the parts democrats like and red is the republicans. the president wanted to set the level at $3.5 million and a 45% max yum rate above that. under the current law the exemption is $1 million with a 55% max rate. this is the much more favorable deal. the president agreed to $5 million is where the line is and only a 35% max rate. that's why it adds up to $68 billion. let's take one more quick here. see the line come down? that's the two years of this deal. this is a two-year deal. $68 billion added to

and to his great credit, president george h.w. bush who noactd the start treaty -- negotiated the start treaty in 1981 has urged us to dot same. it is not in -- to do the same. it is not insignificant that this body should ignore it. not every day do we have the chance to avert armageddon. nothing short of that is at stake in my view. it is worthy of our time, attention and our vote even at this time of year. in fact, one might make the case, what better time of year than to make this case than in this holiday season where we talk about peace in the world to all men of goodwill. and so, madam president, i urge my colleagues to take whatever time we have to in these next few days to cast a vote and leave a legacy to our children, grandchildren, and others, that in a tough time in our country when we couldn't come to an agreement on much, that on this issue, the one that transcends all of politics, transcends all of ideology, that when we can come together as others have to urge us to support this effort that we do the same in this chamb

meaningful verification was a significant achievement of presidents reagan and george h.w. bush and its reinstatement is crucial." finally, i'd like to point out that we addressed the importance of this verification question in condition 2 of the resolution of ratification. that condition requires that before new start can enter into force and every year thereafter, the president has to certify to the senate that our national technical means, in conjunction with the verification activities provided for in the new start treaty, are sufficient to ensure the effective monitoring of russian compliance with the provisions of the new start treaty. and timely warning of any russian preparation to break out of the limits. so we're going to remain seized of this issue for every year that the treaty is in force. it's my judgment -- i continue the quote. excuse me, that was the end of the quote. the treaty is in force. so, mr. president. so, mr. president, not only could we lose the treaty if this amendment were to pass, not only could we impose unwanted and unneeded requirements on our mi

people in congress, democrats and republicans, they talk about the clinton administration and the george h.w. bush administration as pretty good at congressional relations, really making the calls, making the contacts. the last two administrations, not so much. >> rose: so you have a dialogue with the president. does he acknowledge this, does he understand this, that these were the mistakes that were made? >> i think i am a journalist so he treats me as a journalist. >> rose: fair enough but you could have a conversation with journalists, the last time i checked. >> yeah, no, that's fair. you know, so i'm not sure i know everything that goes on. i know what he wants me to think and what he wants me to argue. >> rose: well then, do you know whether he has looked at his self and said i was too insular, i didn't reach out, i made these mistakes, i was captive to a certain element of the party, and it wasn't smart. >> he never said that to me. and the people i know in the white house, i don't think i have ever heard them say he said it to them. what they would say is that, you know, events happened. t

george h.w. bush was the president. there have been 212 other starting quarterbacks in the nfl since then. >> nothing worse than ending the streak, sitting on the sidelines, and then watching the team lose, as well. >>> nfl jets coming down hard on an assistant coach. good that they did. he tripped a dolphins player. the team suspended him for the rest of the season. and fined him $25,000. he apologized saying that his actions were inexcusable and irresponsible. what was going through his mind? hey, here he comes, i think i'll trip him. that'll be funny. >> whatever it was, it was a lapse in judgment for sure. and he's lucky. the player was down for about a minute. he's lucky he didn't get hurt worse. >>> well, a stunning turn of events in the baseball world while you were sleeping. all of a sudden cliff lee is a philadelphia philly again. he was the most sought after free agent pitcher on the market. a lot of people thought he was going to the yankees. almost everyone thought that or perhaps maybe the texas rangers. bu

language expressing a legitimate concern, we have support for this treaty by former president george h.w. bush, secretaries brown, car liewchy, cohen, perry, and schlesinger support this treaty without this language. it was true that former secretary schlesinger said, for instance, he has a concern about this imbalance. i think we all do. he stated that concern. he still supports the treaty without this language, without this expression of concern. secretaries albright -- former secretaries of state albright, baker, christopher, eagleburger, kissinger, powell, rice, schultz support the treaty without this language. they have the same concerns. as a matter of fact, i believe that it was senator sessions -- it may have been someone else -- who said that former secretary kissinger has expressed this concern. in fact, quoted, i believe, from secretary -- former secretary kissinger's writing on this issue. he has that same concern which senator risch and all of us have about this imbalance. but without the language, former secretary kissinger still supports this treaty. so all i can say is, i think

advisors or a whole host of presidents, presidents nixon, presidents ford, presidents reagan, george h.w. bush, presidents clinton and george w. bush. they all believe, all of those people have come together, regardless of their partisan labels or views, they all believe this is in our national security interests and necessary if we are to show the world that we demand as much of ourselves as we ask of others. so as we press the iranian and north korean governments to come into compliance, this treaty demonstrates to all nations who have nuclear aspirations that we are willing to live by the rules, that nonproliferation of nuclear weapons is not an empty wish but a national policy that is in our national interest and the interests of the world. that our willingness to accede to overside and monitoring of our nuclear weapons and facilities, our willingness to reduce our nuclear arsenal in the interest of global security and our willingness to cooperate with willing partners is part and parcel of american policy. it is what we believe is right, what we will live by, and what we will demand of al

superhornet and we just did 750 miles an hour ground speed and we are on our way to the uss "george h.w. bushthat every day. maybe you do. >> i do, yeah. >> reporter: it's a beautiful day as we approach the aircraft carrier. >> look at that thing. how awesome is that? >> reporter: that is awesome. as we make our final approach, whisper tells me to expect a controlled car crash. >> 15 seconds. >> reporter: okay. and that's exactly what it feels like as we go from 115 miles an hour to zero in two seconds. an amazing landing with a perfectly calm, cool pilot. but the fun wasn't over yet. the most exciting part was the catapult off the carrier from zero back to 180. in three seconds. landing on the "bush" a second time, you quickly realize why it takes 5,500 young men and women working together in a tight ly choreographed mission. >> you saw them up on the flight deck, not an easy job, a lot of responsibility, dangerous. >> reporter: admiral nora tyson is the first female to command a flagship. the average age of the crew is under 20. >> it takes every single person doing their job for all the pi

. >> interesting you've had secretaries of state from reagan administration, george h.w. bushgeorge w. bush getting behind this treaty. >> you're right. what do we have next, willie. >>> here is a turn. we'll go to the vatican. >> did you edit this? >> no, no. we're going to try to explain what exactly is happening in these pictures here. >> i don't think i want to know. >> and what it means for the future of europe. >> it's the holiday season. oh, my god. look at the pope. >> "morning joe" man pyramid next. ♪ [ ted ] for years, i was just a brewer. until one of the guys brought in some fresh bread that he'd made from our pale ale. and from that first bite, i knew my business would never be the same. [ male announcer ] when businesses see an opportunity to grow, the hartford is there. protecting their property and helping them plan their employees' retirement. ♪ beer or bread? [ male announcer ] see how the hartford helps businesses at achievewhatsahead.com. and while it can never be fully answered, it helps to have a financial partner like northern trust. by gaining a keen un

he hasn't missed a game -- the last time he missed a game, george h.w. bush was in office.. carolina, tennessee, jacksonville, they didn't even have teams the last time he missed a game. i was a pentagon correspondent back in september of '92. shaquille o'neal, the oldest current player in the nba, was a rookie. >> major historical events. >> just to give you perspective on what's going on. we wish brett favre the best. he's done a wonderful job as a quarterback. >> he's fun to watch. >>> what's on president obama's christmas list? if some d.c. kids have anything to say about it, a new suit and maybe if he's really good, a hot tub. stay with us. we asked people all over america where the best potatoes come from. the best potatoes? idaho. idaho! idaho. and how do you know you're getting idaho potatoes? well...uh... uhm... heh.. (sighs) not all potatoes come from idaho. so if you want the best, you have to do one important thing. always look for the grown in idaho seal. i knew that. i knew that. look for the grown in idaho seal. three. two. one. ♪ don't cha wish your work pho

from 1990-1991, sam was accepted as a white house fellow under president george h.w. bush where he worked for the united states trade representative. three years after that, he ran for congress as part of the republican revolution and was overwhelmingly elected to kansas' second district. it was the first time in sam's life that republicans had the majority in the u.s. congress, and he was a part of it, and he planned to make the most of it, focusing on limiting the size and reach of the federal government. sam's tenure in the house was brief. in 1996, just two days after senator dole announced his plan to resign from the senate to run for president, sam announced he would seek the republican nomination in a special election to serve out the final two years of dole's term. sam handily defeated the former lieutenant governor who had been appointed to fill senator dole's seat earlier that spring. in the general election, sam's campaign message was simple. he called it the three r's, reduce, reform and return. reduce the size and scope of the federal government, reform congre

he is a former top advisor for presidents reagan and george h.w. bush. and he recently wrote the following in opposition to this payroll tax cut. and this is what mr. bartlett wrote: "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow" -- ever allow -- "this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time" -- right now -- "for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history. if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax cut in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans" -- this is brute bartlett who i'm -- bruce bartlett who i'm quoting, a former advisor to president reagan and the first president bush -- "republicans who would wish to destroy social security's finances or permanently fund i

h.w. bush -- excuse me, george h.w. bush. our moderator also has written about justice souter. just after he announced his retirement in 2009, she called him, quote, perfectly suited to his job. his polite, persistent questioning of lawyers who appear before the court display his preparation and mastery of the case at hand and the cases relevant to it. far from being out of touch with the modern world, he is simply refused to surrender to it control over aspects of his own life that give him deep contentment, hiking, sailing, times with old friends, reading history. these days justice souter is doing some of the things he loves but he is also very occasionally speaking out about some important issues, at a commencement speech at harvard university this past may, justice souter spoke out about the different mode of constitutional interpretation. ian deone said it was a philosophical shock that should be heard across the country. our moderator, mrs. greenhouse, is one of the foremost authorities on the supreme court, reporting on the court for "the new york times" from 1978-1998

caller: this all started with george h.w. bush when he went into panama. we do not deal with governments that all political prisoners, but we consistently hold political prisoners. now we have these so called enemy combatants that are not fighting for any government. every war in the past has been between governments and not people. guest: i think you give a good point, citing the example of noriega. he stood trial, a civilian trial, and was convicted. in his case, there was a refusal to treat him as a warrior. instead, the government decided to delegitimize him simply as a criminal. i think that is one of the arguments for why these cases -- from a national security standpoint, from a standpoint of delegitimizing terrorists and their support groups, who are --eking more your status, warrior status, you are simply reducing them to a criminal. host: next phone call. caller: if you have cable tv, watch tru tv. you will find out at 9:00 central time, this coming friday, this 9/11, this war that is going on and continues, was a government cover-up, and it is w

bart slate former top advisor for president george h.w. bush. this is what he wrote in opposition to this payroll tax cut. that is guy who was an advisor to president reagan and the first president bush. this is what he said. he said -- quote -- "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history." end of quote for a moment. so what mr. bartlett is saying -- and i'm going to go back to his quote in a second -- what he's saying is we all know to be true, that around here in congress, if you provide a tax break for one year -- in this case, a payroll tax holiday -- a year from now, if you restore the old rates, which are 6.2%, our republican friends are going to say, democrats are raising your taxes. it ain't going to happen. this one-year extension could well bec

george h.w. bush and bill clinton both enacted drastic cuts in the u.s. conventional and nonconventional arsenals. clinton and george w. bush adopted appeasement policies toward north korea. pee i don't think yang owes its nuclear arsenal to those presidents' desire to be perceived to do nothing. and the nuclear weapons in many other states owes its existence that then secretary of state condoleezza rice insistence that they not see -- say anything about the iranian built and financed nuclear reactor in syria in 2007. as for iran, obama's attempt to appease the regime is little different from his predecessor's policies. the bush administration refused to confront the fact that the wars in afghanistan and iraq are iranian proxy wars. they refused to acknowledge that lebanon is run by tehran and that the 2006 war in israel is nothing more than a proxy war extension of the war in afghanistan. obama's quote, reset, unquote policy is nothing but a continuation of the bush policy, the clinton administration set the stage for vladimir putin's k.g.p. state by squa

treaty negotiated by presidents ronald reagan and george h.w. bushon urging the senate to give its advice and send to ratification of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty this year. thank you and alternate back to p. and take your questions. >> okay, thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible] >> could you please identify yourself? >> hello, may miss vince young can i work for the u.s. army active duty retired nationally, did 26 years with the nuclear biological chemical warfare. and having spent time over 10 years in europe, sitting on the border there and having been around the threat of russia, that's what we thought to protect for years. what is different today with the threat? i mean, that than we thought that, you know, anytime the russians russians and the warsaw countries could come across the border. and he said that it's important to approve this now and it just doesn't seem like there's the third from russia today, like they're going to come across the borders tomorrow and start an attack. in the second part the question and i think that at least wha

fact, lieutenant general brent scowcroft, national security advisor for presidents ford and george h.w. bush has said the principal result of nonratification would be to throw the whole nuclear negotiating system into a state of chaos. he is not alone in this considered view. the presiding officer: senator, the time for the majority has expired. a senator: may i ask unanimous consent to extend our time to 10:20 and to then allow for five minutes for the republicans at the other side of their time? the presiding officer: is there an objection? the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: i thank the senator from new hampshire and i will wrap-up in the next couple of mention. he's not alone in this considered view, madam president. listen to the bipartisan wisdom calling on the senate to ratify the treaty. george shuts, ken baker, madeliene albright, former defense sects, jim schlesinger, bill cohen, former national security advisers, brent scowcroft, stephen hadley and sandy berger, patriots all, committed public servants who take it as a public faith that partisanship ends at our wat

administrations, and congresses controlled by both parties, going back to at least the administration of george h.w. bush. nothing in the treaty bars the development and deployment of missile defense for countering those very real threats from the likes of iran and north korea, nor does the treaty give the russians any say over missile defense or any kind of veto over it. the fact that we and the russians remain at odds over missile defense is, to some degree, nothing new. it has not prevented overwhelming support for arms control agreements in the past, including this treaty's predecessor, the original start treaty. a more radical strand of criticism argues that our missile defense should target russian forces and should, in fact, seek to render russian strategic forces useless. i won't have much to say about this criticism. in reality, it's criticism of the entire foreign policy consensus of the united states that has prevailed across party lines, at least since the end of the cold war. secretary gates has spoken about the danger and the needless budget-busting expense of this perspective. so setting t

caller: thi all started with george h.w. bush when he went intoanama. we do not deal with governments that all political prisoners, but we consistently hold political prisoners. now we have these so called enemy combatants that are not fighting for any government. every war in the past has been between governments and not people. guest: i think you give a good point, citing the example of noriega. he stood trial, a civilian trial, and was convicted. in his case, there was a refusal to treat him as a warrior. instead, the government decided to delegitimize him simply as a criminal. i think that is one of the arguments for why these cases -- from a nation security standpointfrom a standpoint of delegitimizing terrorists and their support groups, who are seeking more your status, -- warrior status, you are simply reducing them to a criminal. host: next phone call. caller: if you have cable tv, watch tru tv. you will find out at 9:00 central time, this coming friday this 9/11 this war that is going on and continues, was a government cover-up, and it is with

former deputy attorney generals who served in the administration of president reagan, president george h.w. bush, president clinton, president george w. bush, as well ages the current administration. former republican senator jack danforth, who worked with jim cole for more than 15 years, described mr. cole to the committee as someone without an ideological or little agenda. -- or political agenda. through the months of delay of this nomination have been unnecessarily debilitating and wrong. so at this time i note that my colleague from alabama is on the floor. i propound the following dwuct request. -- the following unanimous consent request. i ask unanimous consent as if in executive session that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, following consultation with the republican leader, the senate proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 1002, the nomination of james michael coe to be deputy attorney general, there be two mors of debate with respect to the nomination, to with the time equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the judiciary committee,

h.w. president george h. w. bush, pri president george w. bush as well as democratic presidents.i ask o i ask unanimous consent to include in the record the statements of the last sixrepube republican secretaries of state all of whom support ratificatioe of the treaty. >> without objection. madam presiden >> i will votet, to ratify thist treaty but the vote we are abouy to have today is whether to endd the debate. major the majority decision to jam mae through other matters during this lame-duck session has poisoned the well, driven away d republican votes and jeopardize ratification of this important treaty.reaty nevertheless, the treaty wasente may 13th after 12 hearings and n to committees and many briefings the foreign relations committee reported to the senate onbipartv september 16th in a bipartisan . vote of 14 period four.al for several months there were de intense negotiations to developa a realistic plan and the funding for the nuclear modernization. that updated plan was reportedon on november 17th. proce to the senate voted to pr

hampshire primary politics, coordinating the primary campaigns for ronald reagan in 1976 and george h.w. bush in 1980. it was during this time that he really developed his conservative principles. and over the years, he stuck to those principles and the voters have rewarded him for it. never lost a race -- not one. part of the reason judd wins is that he's not afraid to lose. he'd rather lose for the right reens than win fo -- right reasn for the wrong ones. over the years, he's become something of a political legend in new hampshire, and for good reason. he's the first person in new hampshire history to serve as congressman, governor, and senator. first elected to congress in 1980, where he would serve four terms, and then in what some viewed as a political gamble, he followed his father's footsteps to run for governor in 1988. he was elected and easily reelected in 1990, and during his second term, new hampshire, like the rest of the country, faced a difficult recession. but laced with pressure to raise the state's income tax or sales tax, he cut government spending instead. the new hampshi

language expressing a legitimate concern, we have support for this treaty by former president george h.w. bush, secretaries brown, car liewchy, cohen, perry, and schlesinger support this treaty without this language. it was true that former secretary schlesinger said, for instance, he has a concern about this imbalance. i think we all do. he stated that concern. he still supports the treaty without this language, without this expression of concern. secretaries albright -- former secretaries of state albright, baker, christopher, eagleburger, kissinger, powell, rice, schultz support the treaty without this language. they have the same concerns. as a matter of fact, i believe that it was senator sessions -- it may have been someone else who said that former secretary kissinger has expressed this concern. in fact, quoted, i believe, from secretary -- former secretary kissinger's writing on this issue. he has that same concern which senator risch and all of us have about this imbalance. but without the language, former secretary kissinger still supports this treaty. so all i can say is, i think th

he is a former top advisor for presidents reagan and george h.w. bush. and he recently wrote the following in opposition to this payroll tax cut. and this is what mr. bartlett wrote: "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow" -- ever allow -- "this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time" -- right now -- "for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history. if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax cut in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans" -- this is brute bartlett who i'm -- bruce bartlett who i'm quoting, a former advisor to president reagan and the first president bush -- "republicans who would wish to destroy social security's finances or permanently fund i

hampshire primary politics, coordinating the primary campaigns for ronald reagan in 1976 and george h.w. bush in 1980. it was during this time that he really developed his conservative principles. and over the years, he stuck to those principles and the voters have rewarded him for it. never lost a race -- not one. part of the reason judd wins is that he's not afraid to lose. he'd rather lose for the right reens than win fo -- right reasn for the wrong ones. over the years, he's become something of a political legend in new hampshire, and for good reason. he's the first person in new hampshire history to serve as congressman, governor, and senator. first elected to congress in 1980, where he would serve four terms, and then in what some viewed as a political gamble, he followed his father's footsteps to run for governor in 1988. he was elected and easily reelected in 1990, and during his second term, new hampshire, like the rest of the country, faced a difficult recession. but laced with pressure to raise the state's income tax or sales tax, he cut government spending instead. the new hampshi

well, meaningful verification was a significant achievement of president reagan and george h.w. bushand its reinstatement is crucial. i agree with that. she's not saying that she supports this. she's saying she supports something, some kind of verification. because at the lapse of the last treaty, there is none today. so anything's better than none, so i think that's what she's saying. she also agreed the next statement she made in "the wall street journal," on december 7, still there are legitimate concerns about new start that must and can be addressed in the ratification process. implying that's there's nothing wrong coming through, having amendments and going back and forth and between the duma and the united states senate coming up with a new treaty. one of the statements that the senator from massachusetts stated in response to mine were -- he said finally i'd like to point out we address the importance of this verification question in -- in the resolution verification, that requires that before a new start can enter into force an every year after, the president has to certify

national security giants from seven former presidential administrations, and former president george h.w. bush. all of these national security heavyweights argue the exact opposite of senator demint. and they all agree that the new start treaty strengthens our national security. the new start treaty has the unanimous backing of america's military leadership and america's nato allies. and according to the most recent cbs news poll, the treaty now has the support of 82% of americans. now is the time to vote on the new start treaty. no one is rushing this treaty. since the treaty was signed back in april, the senate has had 245 days -- i want to say that again -- that's 245 days to thoroughly review and consider this agreement. after 20 senate hearings, more than 31 witnesses, over 900 questions and answers, and eight months of consideration, including a significant delay during the august recess for additional time before the senate foreign relations committee, the consensus is clear -- new start is in our national security interests and the senate should not wait any longer to ratify this treat