government knows best, there is no end to what the government will try and keep from us. >> glenn: let me go to -- if i can, pull up national i.d. card. can we go there? pull the national i.d. card quiz. a couple minutes. national i.d. card, there should be no national i.d. card required. national i.d. would end all privacy in this country. why would that be true? >> it's absolutely un-american that the police could stop you and say show me your papers. the right to travel and think and express yourself requires breathing room. it doesn't permit uniformty. >> we need a national ay i.d. card to prevent terror event but shouldn't go to far into personal privacy. who said yes to this? look at this. the hand goes up. how come? >> i thought maybe it would be a good idea that we identify people. there is a lot of illegals in the country and a system, they go to hospitals -- >> here is the thing. first of all, nobody should be high about -- i don't, i really don't care. if you are a progressive, you're a progressive, it doesn't matter. there is no right answer. i'm not saying you're a progressive.

let me go back to the point that alternative energies are important to the future, to the environmentp. we should go after that aggressively and develop those. the government has a role in promoting that type of technology and energy development. companies like myself, we're a business, and we're an oil and gas business today, we will be an oil and gas business for long into the future, but we also are an energy company, and we have our hands in other types of energies going forward. as an example, for us, when we think about the climates out of the equation, we have the opportunity to produce bio fuels at very low carbon content that we think can get to having an impact on the global industry quickest. >> do you support the idea that clean energy will actually create jobs? >> well, i do. let me be very specific why that is. i'm going to use my industry as the example. if you take where the u.s. starts today and think about this multi-decade transition, then you think about how much energy that we import into this country as opposed to producing it here, our opportunity around job cre

so let me go on with some comments about future trends. one of the trends about security is to make each individual device more self-defensive. and irfan indicated having one firewall is not the answer and the alternative then is individual devices, hiding behind a firewall, can't give up and say, someone got behind it, i'm doomed and i'll listen to anybody and do anything somebody says as long as i have the right commands. right? that is not really acceptable and we have to think of security at the individual device levels, so you have some other defenses. all right. i mean, in a colonial times we looked at i guess the second amendment and right to bear arms. and it was the same kind of idea. people, individuals could have some of their own defenses, not just a border, you pass the border, everything is lost. another important future area, we're looking at, to be looked at, i should say, is what the electric industry called wide area situational awareness. an interesting effort afoot using what is called phaser measurement unit and that i

let me go about what was going on here. a comment out of the white house press secretary robert gibbs that made people less optimistic about the jobs report. he said jobs revisions could be greater than expected here. we're back above 10,000 on the dow. that got a lot of comments from traders. there will be revisions, probably 2007 and 2008 that will be for tomorrow. the other big issue was the subprime issue, greece being described as the new subprime. why would they do this? subprime was an issue poo pooed initially and became greater because of the contagion risk. they i ear saying that's a similar analogy of how greece could be doing. they won't make the same mistake with subprime. that's for sure. gold the big issue. big commodities names were to the downside. about 5% decline in oil, 4% decline in gold, copper down just about 4% here. how about gold overall? what was the issue? three major points that traders made to me this afternoon. first, you think it will be a safe haven and it wasn't today. dollar strength and t

prozac usually takes four weeks to kick in. >> to the lawyers, let me go to mickey sherman first. everything she says is about herself. do you think she's savvy enough not to give the information? what do you make of the comment that she's got information she may tell investigators to get out. >> i think she's desperate. and you're also presuming she's guilty. if anything, she's probably going to give her some b.s. story. there's nothing to say what she says to get out is going to be the truth. and clearly, she is under the influence of the narcotics still. but nothing to suggest she is going to give the authorities or anybody else, or us as we are watching this voyeuristic tape anything that is going to lead the police to the actual killer of this young girl. >> well, police tend to disagree with you as usual, mickey sherman. because as we go to air tonight, they are combing over these tapes hoping for any evidence that might help find hayleigh, dead or alive. great-grandchildren. man, what a beautiful family you must have. happy birthday, betty. >>> i'm brooke anderson, this is

morning, local councils controlled by all parties have said the prime minister's plans on social care, let me go, are unclear, unfunded, will lead to possible cuts, rises in council tax, they have major weaknesses and will raise false expectations amongst any of the most vulnerable. everybody wants to do more to help with care. why does the prime minister think -- >> here, here. >> why does the prime minister think so many of the people responsible for delivering this policy are so completely unconvinced by what he has put forward? >> mr. speaker, his party supported this bill as it went through the house of commons. i don't know if he's done another u-turn in policy. and but, mr. speaker, we have set aside 670 million pounds in the next year, 420 million will come from the health service to providing that care for urgent needs. now, i know how much he likes personalizing politics. and they -- i know -- i know -- of course, i know how he hates punch and judy politics and a knowhow much you want to build a consensus as we have for a week on the economy, but surely it is in the interest of this ho

go have a little prayer session with him. we got to get the system functioning. now, let met that bank executives have been getting away with these big bonuses and so forth. so there are a bunch of us who are introducing a provision whereby banks' future tax deductions on large banks, that they are going to depend on responsible executive compensation. and the form would require banks to adopt policies that reward long-term performance. so extending investing pay and employer stock, claw-back arrangements for misconduct -- all of those things would be required. and the banks that adopt these responsible pay practices for their executives would, therefore, see no loss in benefits. and banks that continue those irresponsible executive compensation practices would see their bank taxes rise. is that something you can get behind? >> i think you had exactly the right executives, exactly the right standards, how to encourage more prudent risk taking and investing periods et cetera. we completely support that. i'm happy to work with you and your colleagues on how best to achieve tha

let me go to the witnesses. e this scenarios and i applaud you for going through and actually coming up with alternative scenarios. it is sobering, it is it not, mr. penner ? you are well known as a conservative, a financially. you are somebody that has been very clear with respect to the long term but trajectory. when you go through the effort to come up with the plan to stabilize the debt at 60% gdp, a lot of very unhappy to reese's? >> yes, sir, any reasonable path involve significant changes the but you might call this sacred cow of social security and medicare and i think an increase and the tax burden for baidu thing the best way to go about it is implied which is radical tax reform because the way economists see it the inefficiency of the tax system depends on the marginal tax rates and if we are at below today's level. >> and we're talking about that we talk about things like the interest deduction on mortgages and the fact that today that those that are taxed for benefits from our employers are not taxed

i'll concerned, because of what i know of history, so, let me go through key areas. if you want command and control, and you needed to control it, you need to do manufacturing including g.m. and chrysler. gobble up what you can. then you control labor. if you control labor you control industry. guess would controls labor? unions. they have more power than the average american. the number one visitor in the white house is the president of a union. whose concerns are addressed first? his or years? let me let president obama answer that. >> you will know who is on your side. i've been at this a long time. i spent my entire adult life working with sbiu. i'm not a newcomer. energy. that is next. global warming rates dead last among the issues of the day with the american people. but cap and trade is in the new budget. wait until i show you the gains. the president is putting phantom profits into the budget from an energy policy that we are nowhere near close to passing. what does he know that i don't know? i don't want to hurt mother earth. i don't think you do. they will

i was wondering if you could clarify that. >> let me go real fast because i don't think there's a lotstance between john mccain and president obama. i think senator mccain is personally responsible for changing along torture to make it so unconstitutionally vague that we do not know what it is anymore. mr. mccain has a lot to answer for per. >> they will use anything protection ally. both positions are that guantanamo bay cause of terrorism. we hear that is real cause of terrorism, a guantanamo, israel, abu ghraib, israel, [laughter] but what causes terrorism is islamist ideology and successful attacks. that makes them think they can win. what we are trying to do is to hope they don't jump inúwith the real bad guys. what makes a difference is that we stop them from attacking. if anybody thinks -- i convicted a guy who is sitting in a nice civilian prison after having a nice civilian trial. if you think those guys are not offended that he is in an american prison because he happens not to be in guantanamo bay, that is suggestive of completely being divorced from the reality of who we a

starts very small but with each pull down it grabs and pulls more pieces of it. >> glenn: so now let me goe have to wrap up? i was going to a happy solution. can we -- well, you're going to have to wait for happy solution i guess. david we'll have you back. i want to talk to you about the solution, one thing we're talking about on the american revival. david will come with me in orlando and phoenix. tickets available at glennbeck.com. we are talking about not only this, but the solution. >> impact, what it does. >> glenn: it's an easy solution. we just have to be brave you have to do it. thank you. >> good to be here. >> glenn: i'll find out the ticket information and everything else for the american revival at glennbeck.com. we'll be right back. the top of . now back to glenn. ♪ ♪ >> glenn: all right. by the way, don't miss tomorrow night's program right here on the fox news channel at 5:00. we have incredible, we have three people on tomorrow. i don't usually have guests. we have three people on at once, the whole hour. it is amazing. amazing what you will see and learn tomorrow. all rig

>> she was on with the 911 operator. >> wouldn't let me go. >> trying to pass to me the instructions. >> larry: were you able to explain to 911 what the problem was? >> i just knew that from when she collapsed, i was with her in the bathroom. and i was sitting across from her with her little puppy, clara, and she said, mom, please hug me. and i went to get up and she just collapsed, like right there. and that's when i screamed for simon. >> larry: did you do cpr? >> i did cpr from the minute my wife collapsed until the minute the paramedic walked in the door. >> larry: did they get there quickly? >> define quickly. they were there in nine minutes. >> larry: where is it, beverly hills? beverly hills is three minutes. >> i know. >> one block from beverly hills. >> larry: nine minutes is a little long, maybe. what did they do? >> they put a breathing tube in, ushered sharon and i out of the way. i drove -- they were taking her to cedars sinai. i got in the car. in my pajamas, now legendary. we drove down, they knew exactly who we were when we got there. we were shown into a waiting room

starts very small but with each pull down it grabs and pulls more pieces of it. >> glenn: so now let me gohave to wrap up? i was going to a happy solution. can we -- well, you're going to have to wait for happy solution i guess. david we'll have you back. i want to talk to you about the solution, one thing we're talking about on the american revival. david will come with me in orlando and phoenix. tickets available at glennbeck.com. we are talking about not only this, but the solution. >> impact, what it does. >> glenn: it's an easy solution. we just have to be brave you have to do it. thank you. >> good to be here. >> glenn: i'll find out the ticket information and everything else for the american revival at glennbeck.com. we'll be right back. @2 >>> i'm patti ann browne. a shocking death at seaworld. a killer whale attacked a female trainer in front of the terrified crowd in orlando, florida. investigators say the trainer slipped and fell into the tank at shamu stadium. at least one witness says she was pulled in the tank by the whale who killed her. the ceo of toyota apologized in perso

let it go and put it out in the ocean. drop it in there. but i'm not going to pay money to see an animal that's killed three human beings. that makes mectoria this same whale killed assistant trainer it was then a deal to release the animal back into the wild of the waters off iceland. the deal fell apart because sea land closed because of the absolute repulings, revulsion of the animal rights people in canada. so the sea world intervened. they got the whale before it was released. they brought it to their facilities and have had it ever since. so you now have the -- this same whale tilikum involved in the death in 1991. then you have 1999 the homeless person falls into the tank and this very same killer whale is one of two -- three of them in total who kill another man, a second man. now, you have the third person who dies. there is a law -- a theory, a philosophy in law called the first bite. the one bite rule. if you have an animal and you have no reason to believe the animal is violent and it bites somebody, you are probably okay. but the second time around, if the animal bites a second person, you are on notice because of the fir

government with its citizens to protect them against indiscriminate killing of civilians. >> well, let me go back to this issue here. because, at first, when the reports came out, in israel, there was, you know, a certain amount of pride and glee. there were also words to the effect that israel had -- this was the way to attack terrorism. and then things got a little bit dicey, because all these pictures came out, all the surveillance video, all the passports and the faked identities and the stolen identities, governments calling your ambassadors in to ask what on earth is going on since many of those people who stole those identities were israeli civilians. what is going on? >> christiane, you know me long enough to assume that when i tell you that i have nothing to say about this story, i have nothing to say and i will not say. >> would you deny it? >> i will not say anything. >> you believe, though, in targeted assassinations? israel -- >> look -- >> there's the famous one back in -- >> in the next interview, you can ask me about it. if i will answer this right now, i will implicitly answ

host: let me go back to kennedy this morning. . .ler: that person was utterly disrespectful for you. you have conservatives on frequently. i've seen that often, sir. please, you have had a lot of people on there. the bottom line, we went into afghanistan because of our support for israel. we have no business being there wasting r wasting billions of -- being there wasting billions of dollars while we go broke. how long will this go on for? host: we'll get a response. guest: there were contentions that u.s. support in iraq had something to do with israel, but this is the first time i've heard someone suggest that u.s. policy in afghanistan had something to do with israel. it clearly was in response to the attacks of 9-11. i don't think there is too much of a connection. although one could argue the attacks of 9-11 were a response by arab extremists to american support for israel. one could make that argument. i would suggest that u.s. policy -- i think that the suggestion that u.s. policy in afghanistan is a result of our relationship

, you're adding to the debt that our kids are going to have to pay back, when you're claiming at the same time that you're being fiscally responsible. let me ask you another question, because clearly we're not going to agree on this and you're not going to follow the law. secondly -- >> excuse me. we will be following the law. this will involve legislature -- >> you're not going to do it unless congress gives you authority to do it. >> exactly. >> gloria borgman joining me about this. the law is very clear about this. the president cannot just announce he's going to do this, right? >> look, the president can announce whatever he wants, he's got a proposal, but he does have to change the law to do it and that's something congress is going to have to do, as peter or zach sa zag said. just take a look at this. today the president was in senator gregg's home state. that's what was really getting him upset, too, talking about this proposal which senator gregg clearly does not like, clearly will not support, clearly believes will add to the deficit, and he was upset that there the president was in new hampshire and here he was in washington, and

let me go to true view and show you what is going on right now.looks like a lot of rain and even some snow mentioned in down to the south. if you start poking around down there with thes there's not really any of this touching the ground. we still have a fairly dry atmosphere, like a few more hours, a couple more hours before we begin to see a bit more of this in the form of light rain. it will quickly change over to light snow. the indications are we'll have some snow out of this this evening later on. even the temperatures will be above freezing. 44, now 42 for dulles, hasn't been bad. a lot of sunshine. cloudy for everybody at 7:00. then as we get into 9:00 a light mix but by 11 it certainly goes over to all light snow. notice the temperatures. still above freezing. we'll get some snow overnight tonight but temperatures will barely touch freezing if they do at all. and that will limit accumulations. we'll talk more about that. the complete details of this big storm coming up maureen. >> i don't want to make light of that wind because it can be

now, let me go to the witnesses. let me ask you this question. you have done at the scenarios. you for going through and actually coming up with alternative scenarios. it is sobering, is it not? and you are well known as conservative financially. you are somebody that has been very clear with respect to the long term trajectory. when you go through the efforts to come up with a plan that stabilizes the dead as 60% of gdp, just a whole lot of very unhappy choices, is that not the case? >> yes, sir. i think any reasonable path that involves a significant changes. -- to what you might call the sacred cows of social security and medicare. as i said, i think some increase in the tax burden. i do think that the best way to go about it, as you implied, is through a radical tax reform, because the way economists see it, the inefficiency of the tax system depends on the marginal tax rates. and if we can get rid of a lot of tax expenditures, we can lower those rates below today's level and still raise additional revenue. >> but let's be very clear. when we talk about that, we are talking

go to indianapolis. i will give it to peyton manning. >> ground, about adrian peterson may get a nod here, with all due respect. >> let me just interject here, chris johnson ran for over 2000 yards and he caught a lot of passings for big yardage too. i think it's going to be hard. >> but you know what, he's a titan and i remember before the league realigned the titans were our arch rival before it became the steelers he can still go suck an egg. that's how it's supposed to be, it's supposed to be, you know, about your team and it's okay if you hate the opposition. i think that's what great about sports, root against the other guy. it's okay. >> phil we can talk forever. we got to run. thank you for all the hard work you do off the field. thank you for the great job in the booth we appreciate it. you're a solid pro, man. >> thank you, don and marty both thank you for having me on today. >> phil we'll see you later blower. >> fedex find out more on their website of how you can get involved. q. does a great job. >> played 14 years for one team, super bowl, 33,000 yards not enough. backing up flacco today. >>> first warninin

if he pushes it through via reconciliation republicans are going to cry foul. let me ask you this. rst of all, can it happen? second of all, should it happen? based on everything that you've known and seen? >> yes, i think it can happen. he's going to have to scramble to get the votes to move this bill through the senate and the house with the reconciliation process. so it can happen. the question, i think, sanjay, is it wise to move forward in that way? it's going to -- clearly the republicans are going to call foul and say it's yet another deal by the democrats but there's also this question, is it wise to pass a bill, major landmark social legislation with only one party voting for it and the other party completely opposed? we haven't seen that in this country stretching back to the new deal. is it wise to pass major social legislation when the polls show on a consistent basis that the public is basically, you know, 15 points against it? and we haven't seen that either. so today's -- i want to come back to the politics of today. what the democrats hope to do is use this as the pr

let me go down the list.o most important decisions a family makes will be conducted with a government monopoly. from cradle to grave, aspirations of the welfare state, the marches on. one of the first things done in january 2009 is to expand schip. created by republicans and a small program. republicans thought it would stay small. it was for the working poor. now it has been expanded. families with incomes up to $125,000 a year are eligible for schip. there is no reason to expanded as much other than to raise a generation of young americans who consider getting their health care from government normal. . . the baby boomers will join the ranks of social security and medicare rolls today. in this town, we have a school that a program that serves 1300 mostly poor, almost entirely minority students. it enables them to choose what a great many lawmakers in this town choose to do which is to send their children to private school. the democratic party and congress has worked tirelessly to extinguish this because th

[laughter] let me go to chris and then we will go that way. >> the investigation found a number of problems with contractors in afghanistan. in light of some of the problems that the detail that the lack of oversight, does the pentagon need to take another look at continuing to award contracts to companies like black water and another look over whether or not it does exercise enough oversight? >> we have learned a lot of lessons over the past eight years or nine years. clearly, contract and oversight is one of them. we have made a lot of mistakes, both in iraq and in afghanistan. we have tried to address those mistakes in the number of ways, one of which was in the 2010 fiscal year budget. the secretary has added -- i would have to get you the precise numbers -- nearly devore our contract riverside, especially in house, to monitor the awarding of execution of contracts to guard against fraud, abuse, waste, and i think that the 2011 budget reflects the same commitment. while we had some problems efficient -- initially, particularly in iraq, afghanistan was never as bad as it was in iraq. the

but let me go on to another one.ly nhtsa as i understand it has 41, 42, 49 in the high year -- thousands -- and the auto companies have theirs. if a company reaches a certain threshold they have a requirement to accepted that in in the u.s. if an auto company has a recall this another country, they have an obligation to inform nhtsa. i understand sort of that system. now you and i served in our past lives on select intel squens committees so you're very familiar with our open source system. can you tell me today that there's any technical reason or common sense reason that, in fact, we should not, we the united states government and nhtsa, should not be able to transparentally see all claims from all of our first world partners and obviously to be arranged and all the collateral material from all the people who want to sell vehicles in this country? meaning, is there any reason you have to wait until there's a recall to get information? as you know, great britain, they didn't actually have a recall but they had a sim

let me go on record -- i saw the return address.y, i am a bitter childless loser but i'm a bitter childless loser that agrees with 71% of the country she's not qualified to be president of the united states. that's the main thing. i think that's the thing everybody personalizes. >> larry: andrea, where do you stand? >> i was laughing listening to john kerry talking about how she was interesting. he ran against a bumbling idiot that connected with americans and ask him how well that worked out for him. >> you think george w. bush is a bumbling idiot? >> you can argue -- you can't argue she's captured the imagination of the good portion of the electorate. what she does next, it's anybody's guess but she is on the side of, i think, a majority of americans, independents, swing voters now who say government even a republican approach to employing government solutions is the wrong way. >> larry: let me check in -- >> i think that statistic is worth a fact check. >> larry: hold it. got to check in. let me check in with anderson cooper. wha

welcome, gentlemen, peter na vary rowe, let me go to you. will europe rescue these southern european countries and will they keep the european union alive and will they keep the euro currency alive, peter? a lot of people are asking those questions today. >> they're great questions and i'm a little more pessimistic about the global economy than you are. let's do a little kudlow 101. first of all, this is what happens, larry, when they rely on tax cuts to stimulate and it's what happens when you have a fixed rate system like the euro without it being backed by gold or some other hard currency and we get what we get. from a trader's point of view, let's look at what happens today. the spread on the greek and spanish bonds widened because the risk of default but meanwhile the euro is falling because there's risk that europe is going to bail them out. >> what are they going to do here? ? here's the big question. what's going to happen to the euro and euro zone? i don't think it's going to collapse but it's shrunk. i think we're going to lose som

let me go around here. should he do that?f he doesn't have an "or else" should he try to ratchet up the international pressure. >> i think he has to put the regime to a fundamental choice. it can either survive as a regime or they can continue to pursue a nuclear weapon. that's the only diplomatic strategy which i think might force the people in tehran, the leadership in tehran, to make the right decision, at least as far as the rest of the world. but this becomes the same probable that jcial had in the prunup to the iraq war. you isn't say "or else" and not mean or else. >> rose: jeffrey is right about that. you can try to be much more forceful. i think the regime has been -- the american president has been remarkably restrained in terms of what he has said, to be critical and to be even engaged by the conflict in iran. >> charlie, can i just say that historically -- look, we, the americans, have not been very good at lining up on the side of the iranian people over the last 40 or 50 or 60 years. it's probably time to say, l

let me go to the next point, if i can, and we're going to come back -- i will stop and recognize himse he has not had a round. as we look ahead to this medium and long-term plan, spending has got to be adjusted, and yes, that means shall security, medicare -- social security and medicare have to get on a lower growth trend. it has to be because that is where most of the spending is. i also think the revenue side cannot be exempt. we have the lowest revenue of shares of gross domestic product in 60 years and the highest spending at a share of gdp in 60 years. so we have the lowest revenue, the highest spending, i don't know of any logical conclusion that you don't have to deal with both sides of the equation. that goes to the question of what should the balance beat? i would like each of you to answer this question -- going forward, in the longer term, should most of the emphasis be on the spending side, should most of the emphasis be on the revenue side, or what do you think the appropriate balance should be between spending and revenue? contributions to dealing with this long-term d

let me go through why i say that. the majority leader said the bill scores as reducing the deficit $131 billion over the next ten years. first a little bit about c.b.o., i work with them every single day. very good people, great professionals, they do their jobs well. but their job is to score what is placed in front of them. and what has been placed in front of them is a bill that is full of gimmicks and smoke and mirrors. now what do i mean when i say that? well, first off, the bill has ten years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars. with ten years of medicare cuts about half a trillion dollars to pay for six years of spending. >> woodruff: ryan's assertion was challenged by democrats. about half of the democratic bill would be paid for by cuts to medicare advantage. the president pointed to weaknesses he sees in the program. >> the medicare advantage program-- which is what we are proposing to reform-- is actually not a good deal for taxpayers or for seniors and certainly not a good deal for the 80% of s

let me go to you.here is it today. >> deep apologies and bows by the president and ceo of toyota, kept a company in crises. first they blamed floor mats on the floor then it was a sticky gas pedal and then computers a cars had an electronic lift of some sort. on top of that this week they acknowledged their state of the art the future car the prius had they had defect and they've raised the ire of safety officials here and in japan. >> charlie: what happens next. >> they find a way to solve the problems of the run away cars. they've insisted they've found those problems. many safety analysts are skeptical of that. two congressional hearings, one next week, the one the week after that. and lots of questions about their long hard work that gave them the reputation for quality safety. and now in tatters, they're beginning a new television commercial campaign this sunday. they've hired pr specialists in washington, former republican and democratic press secretaries to get them past this crises. >> charlie:

let me go to congressman van holland.ou listen to pfeiffer down at the white house, the spokesman for the president, it's pretty clear they see themselves probably heading towards an up or down vote in the senate based on majority rule, not on some 60-vote deal. what do you think they're head toward down at the white house? >> well, first, chris, look, i agree with john. we want to see how this goes tomorrow. the president has invited people down to the white house in good faith to have what our republican colleagues, our democratic colleagues and the american people have been asking for, which is a big public discussion on health care. i think it's unfortunate that mike pence called it a setup. i mean, this is going to be in the full light of day. people are going to be watching. i think it's important that we find out exactly what people want to accomplish and what their different ideas for getting there are. and the president has put a proposal on the table. it will be interesting to see what our colleagues on the othe

. >> let me go to peter. what is the argument against -- in terms of actual performance in the barracks, in life, in the military? what gets in the way of military discipline in a crack unit? your view. performing as soldiers. >> military life is unlike civilian life. soldiers are put in positions of forced intimacy all the time. they shower together, sleep together in the barracks. and it's simply unfair to put soldiers in a position of forced cohabitation with those who may be viewing them as a sexual object. that is a formula guaranteed to lead to greater sexual tensions, sexual harassment and even sexual assault. >> my dad was in the military, my brother was in the military. everybody i know who has ever been in the military says there are gay people in the military. they're known to be gay. you say we will have a gay people forced with intimacy with straight people? isn't that the case now? it's simply not official. isn't that the case now? are you saying there are no gay people in the barracks or on sub

let me go to chris and then go back that way. chris? >> the armed services committee investigation found the number of problems with contractors in afghanistan. in light of some of the problems that they detailed and the lack of oversight, does the pentagon need to take another look at continuing to work contracts to companies like blackwater? and another look at whether does exercised enough exercise -- oversight? >> we learned a lot of lessons over the past eight or nine years. and clearly, contracting oversight is one of them. we've made a lot of mistakes in both iraq and afghanistan. and we try to address those mistakes in a number of ways. one of which was in the 2010 fiscal year budget, the secretary has added, and i would have to get you the precise number, i think we nearly doubled our contracting oversight for professionals in the house to monitor the a warning and execution of contracts, to guard against fraud, abuse, waste. and i think, the fiscal year 11 budget has the same commitment that i think what we had problems initia

proprietary trading but there are certainly american banks. >> maybe we can get back on that so let me goa step further, i'm going to say that is a lack of love somebody tells me different. >> i think obviously the causative distress in these very big firms are multi factorial but i think there're plenty of bank pulling companies that suffered losses in headstrong as the sponsored or in a proprietary trading activities that were part of the the capital's. >> i am talking about material. >> even material cost -- cause why of taxpayer money was committed. so to pinpoint a single reason why this or that burma -- this is clearly one of the reasons. >> let me move on, my point stands and we can talk bought back. i take your point. let me make another point that the capital of a bank, a commercial bank within a bank holding company or financial holding company cannot leave and go to any other part of that affiliate's without reducing in the capital of the commercial bank which reduces their ability to make loans into that sort of thing -- you all and -- it knowledge that? >> there are laws betw

let me go through these and perhaps the chair will give you the additional time. the first list, the first bullet, 150 employees, leadership conference, $28,995, was that a legitimate conference? >> to be perfectly honest with you, sir, our scope did not involve determining the legitimacy of the conference. we took what we were able to get from the department at face value. i e it it is a terrible thing to assume it was legit and it is my assumption it is a legit conference and perhaps ms. ducan elaborate senate i can get back for the record but when we looked through all the conferences, they were legitimate and that particular cvp conference, in later years they did it by technology rather than holding an in-person conference on that particular cvp one. >> let me ask, mr. chairman may i ask one additional question, my time is up and i don't want to abuse the privilege. >> i appreciate you asking and because of that, you will be granted additional time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we have this list i have accorded you. is there any conference on this list that is

finally let me go let me move on to the international context because people are correct in pointingo the proliferations concern as real. north korea demonstrated a willingness and the capability to proliferate nuclear technology and it's important to syria and its construction of the rea dirt to how the war. its history of exporting will stick missiles to iran, syria and other countries. it's long roster of activities, counterfeiting of the u.s. currency from international narcotrafficking. it's clear north korea place by a difference in the international norms of behavior than other countries do and while we want to provide for north korea and opportunity to normalize its behavior and opportunity to pursue a path that doesn't require the proliferation of these types of weapons, these types of arms, these types of illicit activities, and while we continue to pursue that within the six-party talks context, as we keep for north korea all the benefits it would have by pursuing the road it has yet demonstrated unwillingness take over denuclearization. in addition to all of those benefit

let me play devil's advocate. the refreshing nature of seeing people come face to face and sort of hash it out, as opposed to letting the spin machines goer the fact or, you know, sending mass e-mail out, refuting the other guys, they were at least in there with their hands rolled up trying to sort of refute each other. was there anything that struck you as refreshing about that? i haven't seen it in a long time. >> i think it's great when the president and congress sit downs together at a table. it reminds people that, you know, there can be civility and accountability when people sit down at a table with the cameras present. there's an exchange of ideas. it's honest, it's invigorating. what -- it's a matter of also moving beyond that moment to real progress. on the one hand, i think they should do more of those. i wouldn't hold my breath, i don't think it's going to happen. i think it's a great moment for the president and the american people. but when they -- >> i was going to say, you say hyper partisanship is what is ruled and has led to a dysfunction in the government and it's the heart of its current problem. take us through some

let me go to the next point, if i can, and we're going to come back -- i will stop and recognize him because he has not had a round. as we look ahead to this medium and long-term plan, spending has got to be adjusted, and yes, that means shall security, medicare -- social security and medicare have to get on a lower growth trend. it has to be because that is where most of the spending is. i also think the revenue side cannot be exempt. we have the lowest revenue of shares of gross domestic product in 60 years and the highest spending at a share of gdp in 60 years. so we have the lowest revenue, the highest spending, i don't know of any logical conclusion that you don't have to deal with both sides of the equation. that goes to the question of what should the balance beat? i would like each of you to answer this question -- going forward, in the longer term, should most of the emphasis be on the spending side, should most of the emphasis be on the revenue side, or what do you think the appropriate balance should be between spending and revenue? contributions to dealing with this long-

let me go back to a theory i have about midterm voters. t 66% of two-thirds of voters -- of midterm voters are going to vote on the basis of the candidate. i think that if this issue, he is closer to me, about 33% will vote on the basis of mood. so the result of these midterms is the combination of who the candidates are, covering 67% of the voters, and the mood. a third come out to say that we have to keep going in the direction that we're going and, or we have to change the direction -- i am dissatisfied. that 33% does not know or even care who the congressional or senatorial candidate is, but they care that they are expressing themselves through the vote. right now, the third that does that then produces bigger swings than one imagines, which is why the swings are stronger and bigger than pollsters predict. its wings on one direction, then that can really produce a strong reversal. the 1994 elections got me my job with president clinton, because the president really changed his team, his staff, the direction, and really move back to the

i withdraw any objection. >> let me say that we will go to minutes on this side, two minutes on that side but remember -- >> reserving the right to object >> i don't know what you're objecting to. spaghetti would recognize me. unanimous consent request i would be happy to forgo my time with secretary paulson to ask secretary geithner -- >> i wish we could operate that way but when you have hearings that are structured they are not structured in the fact someone would give up their time -- that's all the way we do this so the point of the matter is we either accept the two minutes on each side or we move forward. that is what is on the table. so two minutes on this side and two minutes on that side. spec i withdraw my -- >> mr. connolly, you have a minute to raise a question with the secretary. mr. connolly from virginia. -- before, mr. chairman. >> recognized for one minute. >> mr. geithner, we only have one minute and one has the sense some people in this room brass want to rewrite history and i understand given that history why they might what to do that in reading your statement to