mr. mccain: madam president, that further reading of the motion be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: madam president, simply put this motion to commit would be a requirement that we eliminate the half a trillion dollars in medicare cuts that is envisioned by this bill. a half a trillion dollars in cuts that are unspecified as to how, and half a trillion dollars in cuts that would directly impact the health care of citizens in this country. medicare advantage cuts totali totaling $118 billion. an independent medicare advisory board that would cos cost $23 billion. expansion of medicare hospital penalties totaling $7.1 billion. home health care cuts totalin totaling $42.1 billion. hospice -- of all of the things, hospice, some $8 billion. and the list goes on and on. all of these are cuts in the obligations that we have assumed and are at the rightful -- rightful benefits that people have earned in our -- and our citizens -- our senior citizens across this nation. this is -- this eliminates a half a trillion dollars in cuts to medic

mccain staffers. that shows how low-level a drama queen is going to take it. >> host: okay, mr. continetti. >> guest: i don't begin with sarah palin picking on advisors, but sarah palin responding to them picking on her. it was an attempt by mccain advisers on background here so we don't know their identities, but they're talking on background reporters to blame therapy lamp for mccain floss. i totally disagree with that thesis. i think of anything she helped them close that gap with barack obama. i think many, many people who voted for john mccain who wouldn't have had sarah palin not been on the ticket. so i think she's more trying to put her side of the story up there, rather than just picking on anyone. the caller made a good point. i don't exonerate sarah palin and everything in the "the persecution of sarah palin." on the fiery of the department of the head of safety, where there was one political report, which try to blame her for not taking that to stopper has been from contacting ahead of public safety, by the judicial council exonerated her. >> host: from political, the

senator mccain, thanks for being here. >> thank you, mr. chairman.thank you for holding the hearing. i'd like to ask the witnesses, do you believe that the act on fort hood was an act of terror? >> in my mind, i do. based on the preliminary reports and what major hasan was claiming at the time of the act and the -- and his behavior and attitude prior to that. just based on that preliminary report, certainly investigations will confirm what his motivation are. but what's in front of us right now, i do. >> senator, you know when you look at the just basic english definition of terror, which is the wruse of violence to instill fear and intimidation, it's hard to think this wasn't. but what remains to be seen is whether this was an individual or a part of a larger conconspiracyy. >> from the new york city police department perspective, this is an ongoing investigation, so we're not going to prejudge others' findings. >> well, i ask your opinion, not your findings. if you don't want to voice your opinions, fine with me. >> senator mccain, it certainly loo

the president did not invite john mccain, even though mr. obama pledged a post-partisan presidency. -- presidency." we will have live coverage of the dinner giving way under -- getting way tonight at 9:00. there is also a press conference that will happen at 11:30 eastern time. the arrival ceremony was originally scheduled for the south lawn, it will be moving to the east room. lester, good morning from detroit. caller: good morning. listen, i do not have any problem with the rich being taxed for this war. over the years, you know, the people that prospered by the people that have had money. poor people do not have any say so. all they do is fight the war as. they do it in the guise of patriotism. but if you are going to war, you should pay for it. i do not recall anyone wanting to go to afghanistan. if you are spending money on the war, you do not have money for health care. what bothered me on sunday is senator lieberman, he will put the money up for a war in afghanistan but not for health care. that disturbs me. . host: from "usa today" t

the president did not invite his 2008 rifle, senator john mccain, even though mr. obama the candidate pledged a post- partisan presidency." we will have more on the dinner later this morning and we will have live coverage getting under way at 9:00 this evening, showing you some highlights, including the toast from the tent is situated on the south lawn of the white house to house the 300 or so guests invited to dinner tonight. there is also a press conference that will happen at around 11:30 eastern time. the arrival ceremony will take place on the south lawn and move to the east room because it is raining in washington. les is joining us from detroit. welcome to the program. caller: good morning, steve. i don't have any problem with the rich being taxed for this war. over the years, people that prosper are the people who have money. and the poor people, they don't have any say so. all they do is fight the war is. but they do it in the disguise of patriotism. but you know, if you go to war, you should pay for it. i don't see any poor folks in my neighborhood in det

mr. support for john mccain. that was not a two-person race like the democrats were reported one measure is called favorable. some surveys ask if they were favorable toward john mccain norman braman. i call that favorable. the other variable is support, whether they supported him compared to the other candidates. you can see that in the first two sets of bars, the cbs survey early in 2008, in support, the northeasterners were more likely to vote for him but they were not more likely to have a more favorable opinion of him. you can find a mixed with the cnn survey, a slight northeastern advantage but not on favorability. it is a real mix. some westerners were the least likely to vote for john mccain because of mitt romney's strengthen that region. there is stronger evidence of ideological factors. cnn used favorability and support and these are self- described ideologies you can see that the farther to the right you go, the farther down the bars get. he continues to have appeal to more moderate to liberal republic

mr. bennett is an economics professor at george mason university. >>> the new book "sarah from alaska" offers an exclusive look at sarah palin by two reporters who were in bed on the mccain palin campaign. scott conroy and shushannah walshe give anecdotes about the former alaska governor's return home from the campaign trail. borders bookstore in washington, d.c. hosts this event. [applause] >> we want to start off by thanking everyone for being here. it's nice to see so many friends and new faces. the question we've been getting a lot is how the book came out. throughout the campaign, it was only two months but it seems like along you're especially now, we saw there was a lot of disorganization and secrecy but it wasn't until election night we realized the intention that was really going on. one that is actually not in the book is that i found out that sarah palin was planning on giving a speech, there was a speech written and i reported that and i got a call, frantic call from her press secretary was very angry with two senior advisers in the background killing that there is no speech ever written and it was totally incorrect information. now we know that was wrong and

mr. chairman for the invitation. i like to spend two minutes with a quick review. the intellectual gantry or such public policies as a stimulus package of course is john mccain's general theory and the notion was that in times of economic disgraced downturn, governments could with the screwed up the economy in texas we call it the economy. by either temporary running deficit or by either increasing spending or cutting taxes, there is a mixed review of the history of the policy prescriptions and their success. i would be one i would suggest that on the stimulate the economy through the increases spending side there's a pretty de minimis record of success in the history of the application of these theories. while on the other side, stimulating the economy through reduction in taxes has been a fairly rich history of success with the two most notable cases be in the kennedy tax cuts of 1962 and the reagan tax cuts of 1982. i of course lived as an economist through both of these times, they are exciting times for our profession, but one of the sweet irony is that i reflect back on in the academic community is when president kennedy proposed stimulating the economy through