and ideology profoundly and pathetical to conservative beliefs. david of yell university put it this way just before thanksgiving at a blog at national review online. each year he wrote there is less american isn't and more globalism among our citizens, less knowledge and more sophistication. among children less interest in thanksgiving and a small band of fears questions hanging onto a new world by their fingertips and more interest in black friday, the perfect post christian feast. what does all this portend for the party of the right? for generations of american conservatives have been united in their defense of our nation, of our inherited constitutional order, against enemies both foreign and domestic, something relatively easy to do during the cold war but increasingly difficult today. traditionally american conservatives have been eurocentric and their political and cultural discourse, but how can conservatives convincingly articulate this respect to non-european immigrants into millions of superficially educated young americans and a time

only this prime minister thinks that we should all be pathetically grateful for this recession when he led the world when he left britain behind. he's normally reading out lists of countries. australia, canada, turkey, brazil, they all went into recession after britain but they came out before britain. france and germany went into recession at the same time as britain. and yet they came out before. can the prime minister answer this. given that all those countries are now in growth and we are not in growth -- can he tell us what on earth he meant when he said and i quote we were leading the rest of the world out of recession? >> mr. speaker, not one policy from the leader of the opposition -- we have taken action to restructure the banks and nationalize northern iraq opposed by the party adversary. we have taken action for a fiscal stimulus and kept poverty down for jobs opposed by the opposition. they have been wrong on the recession. they will be wrong on the recovery. mr. speaker, the voice may be that of a modern public relations man. the mindset -- the mindset is that of the 1930s

only this prime minister thinks that we should all be pathetically grateful for this long and deep recession for it somehow he has led the world when he leaves britain behind. >> now from london, prime minister's questions from the british house of commons. this week, prime minister gordon brown responded to several questions about president obama's speech on afghanistan. recently, the prime minister said that he would send 500 additional british troops to afghanistan. members also questioned mr. brown on the british economy and the upcoming climate change conference in copenhagen. >> questions to the prime st

all it is prime minister thinks that we should be pathetically grateful for this long, deep recession.

policy designed at the federal level is pathetic. there is a gap between communication and understanding. it is done without implementation considerations. there is a big problem here. what is the cause of this? the civil servants will say it is the politicians. the politicians will say it is the bureaucrats. what we found actually was that neither one is the case. the problem is the gap between the two that has actually gotten better in recent years. this wall of separation -- severson tech -- the wall of separation which was iis betweeo designed and those to implement it. the real goal is way down the line. nowhere is it more apparent than in the quest for energy independence. in 1974, president ford signed a law that energy policy and innovation act. by 1980, imports of oil were higher than 1973. in 1978, president carter signed the national energy act. the goal was to add 20% of all the energy we use from the sun by the end of the 20 century. we did not quite get to 20%. in 2005, president bush signed the energy policy act with t

they said it is pathetic. there is a gap between communication and understanding.ictated part -- -- top down. there is a big problem here. what is the cause of this? >> civil servants will say it is the politicians. politicians will say it is the bureaucrats. what we found was that neither one is the case. the problem is the gap between the two. that is a gap that has gotten bigger in recent years. this wall of separation has a lot of problems. one of them is that if you are in the policy side of the process, success for you equating getting a bill passed. that is success. but the real goal is way down . nowhere is this more apparent that our for decades quest for independence. president ford signed a laww3. the goal was energy independence. the results, by 1980, net imports were 400,000 barrels per day higher than the were in 1973. in 1978, president carter signed the national energy act. we did not quite get to 20%. by 2000, the sun provided 0.007% of all the energy in the u.s.. in 2005, president bush signed the energy policy act. the results was the energy inde

this bill was pretty much an pathetical to everything i know about medicine as well as what i know about the future likelihood of our country to be able to survive this bill. >> let me say the argument to that is then it was transparent. we did have the c-span cameras with the help committee and we did have the c-span cameras in the finance committee that i think senator reed posen explanation to the american people who walk this to proceedings unfolded. the reasons why the changes have been made in those bills, there are earmarks in this bill that is on the floor now. vie were those commitments made in the american people are owed an explanation of why those were made in that kind of transparency certainly is not there. >> anybody else. kenny that-- thank you guys very much. [inaudible conversations] >> the commander of u.s. forces in afghanistan, generals danley mcchrystal and u.s. ambassador to afghanistan, karl eikenberry will testify at two hearings tomorrow on afghanistan strategy. in the morning it will be the house armed services committee. that is live on c-span3 at 9:30 a.m. ea

they said it is pathetic. there is a gap between communication and understanding.ictated part -- -- top down. there is a big problem here. what is the cause of this? >> civil servants will say it is the politicians. politicians will say it is the bureaucrats. what we found was that neither one is the case. the problem is the gap between the two. that is a gap that has gotten bigger in recent years. this wall of separation has a lot of problems. one of them is that if you are in the policy side of the process, success for you equating getting a bill passed. that is success. but the real goal is way down . nowhere is this more apparent that our for decades quest for independence. president ford signed a laww3. the goal was energy independence. the results, by 1980, net imports were 400,000 barrels per day higher than the were in 1973. in 1978, president carter signed the national energy act. we did not quite get to 20%. by 2000, the sun provided 0.007% of all the energy in the u.s.. in 2005, president bush signed the energy policy act. the results was the energy inde

policy designed at the federal level is pathetic.between communication and understanding. it is done without implementation considerations. there is a big problem here. what is the cause of this? the civil servants will say it is the politicians. the politicians will say it is the bureaucrats. what we found actually was that neither one is the case. the problem is the gap between the two that has actually gotten better in recent years. this wall of separation -- severson tech -- the wall of separation which was iis betweeo designed and those to implement it. the real goal is way down the line. nowhere is it more apparent than in the quest for energy independence. in 1974, president ford signed a law that energy policy and innovation act. by 1980, imports of oil were higher than 1973. in 1978, president carter signed the national energy act. the goal was to add 20% of all the energy we use from the sun by the end of the 20 century. we did not quite get to 20%. in 2005, president bush signed the energy policy act with the goal of econo

working on on the economy in this country think the money we're spending on outer space right now is patheticthank you for your call. i will be honest, my perspective is that this year to the oppression -- my perspective is that i certainly appreciate that sentiment. i was always struck by one of the later apollo flights -- maybe 14 or 15 -- one of the astronauts was speaking about maybe the 20th anniversary of their lending -- landing. it is relevant to the caller's question. he said that when he got up to the moon and walked around, and he looked everywhere but did not find any bags of money on the moon. all the investments made in the space program were made ultimately here in this country, providing high-paying jobs and new advancements and things that would help prepare our economy -- help directly our economy. but for some reason, that was not directly communicate, or not committed as well as it might have been. i am not sure i would agree with the caller on that particular perspective of money and it being not beneficial to our economy. host: one of the journalists you spoke to the fil

working on on the economy in this country think the money we're spending on outer space right now is pathetic. guest: again, thank you for your call. i will be honest, my perspective is that this year to the oppression -- my perspective is that i certainly appreciate that sentiment. i was always struck by one of the later apollo flights -- maybe 14 or 15 -- one of the astronauts was speaking about maybe the 20th anniversary of their lending -- landing. it is relevant to the caller's question. he said that when he got up to the moon and walked around, and he looked everywhere but did not find any bags of money on the moon. all the investments made in the space program were made ultimately here in this country, providing high-paying jobs and new advancements and things that would help prepare our economy -- help directly our economy. but for some reason, that was not directly communicate, or not committed as well as it might have been. i am not sure i would agree with the caller on that particular perspective of money and it being not beneficial to our economy. host: one of the journalists you

congressional committees, big contributors on wall street and larry summers at the white house is so pathetic that it makes me cry and worry about the future of the country. host: let us hear what our viewers have to say. you can always reach as by e- mail as well. brad on the republican line. caller: i believe what the obama administration did not address along with the bush administration was job creation. a lot of problems in a lot of countries it is caused by unemployment. if you don't get people back to work, you have serious problems. that is pretty much all i have to say. guest: we have very weak job growth in the bush administration. but in fairness we had a bubble economy. he walked into the collapse of the stock bubble. he didn't have good answers to that and it was not until 2004 that we regain the jobs lost. a very weak job growth vendetta again, as peter was saying, the stimulus could have been better directed. one thing i have been very impressed, in germany a work share policy where they encouraged companies instead of laying off workers, have them work shorter hours and a rema

it is pathetic. this hole scare tactic they've brought up with debt panels and rationing.ut rationing, i went to the doctor about my blood pressure and they refused to do anything about it and 30 days later i was getting open heart surgery from the e r. so, we got rationing correctly. i am afraid insurance companies had to much influence in this bill and i would like to see something that really reflects what the people need and not what insurance companies won, and merry christmas to everyone. host: larry, independent line from north carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. health care, i looked at the bipartisanship -- if you think back, we have a short memory but when clinton was in the chair, i noticed a lot of the republicans were pushing for the free trade and they would not let him get nothing through unless he signed the thing with the free-trade, it is a new world order and we need to do this and that. and clinton went along with it just so he could get other things done. we see what happened. these people are so far to the other side, they want big busines

congressional committees, big contributors on wall street and larry summers at the white house is so patheticthat it makes me cry and worry about the future of the country. host: let us hear what our viewers have to say. you can always reach as by e- mail as well. brad on the republican line. caller: i believe what the obama administration did not address along with the bush administration was job creation. a lot of problems in a lot of countries it is caused by unemployment. if you don't get people back to work, you have serious problems. that is pretty much all i have to say. guest: we have very weak job growth in the bush administration. but in fairness we had a bubble economy. he walked into the collapse of the stock bubble. he didn't have good answers to that and it was not until 2004 that we regain the jobs lost. a very weak job growth vendetta again, as peter was saying, the stimulus could have been better directed. one thing i have been very impressed, in germany a work share policy where they encouraged companies instead of laying off workers, have them work shorter hours and a remar

policy design at the federal level is pathetic.here's a gap between communication and understanding. policy design is dictated top-down for idealogical reasons. it's done without implementation considerations. there's a big problem here. so what's the cause of this? now, the civil servants will say it's the politicians. the politicians will say it's the bureaucrats. what we found actually was that neither one is the case. the problem was the gap between the two, and it's a gap that's actually gotten bigger in recent years. now, this wall of separation between those who implement policy and those who design it has a lot of problems, and one of them is that if you're on the policy side of the process, success for you equates with getting a bill passed, getting a bill through the legislature or congress, and then that's success. but the real goal is way down the line. nowhere is this more apparent than our four decades quest for energy independence. it started in 1974. president ford signed the energy policy and conservation act. the

only this prime minister thinks that we should all be pathetically grateful for this recession when heled the world when he left britain behind. he's normally reading out lists of countries. australia, canada, turkey, brazil, they all went into recession after britain but they came out before britain. france and germany went into recession at the same time as britain. and yet they came out before. can the prime minister answer this. given that all those countries are now in growth and we are not in growth -- can he tell us what on earth he meant when he said and i quote we were leading the rest of the world out of recession? >> mr. speaker, not one policy from the leader of the opposition -- we have taken action to restructure the banks and nationalize northern iraq opposed by the party adversary. we have taken action for a fiscal stimulus and kept poverty down for jobs opposed by the opposition. they have been wrong on the recession. they will be wrong on the recovery. mr. speaker, the voice may be that of a modern public relations man. the mindset -- the mindset is that of the 1930s.

policy designed at the federal level is pathetic.a gap between communication and understanding. it is done without implementation considerations. so what is the cause of this? civil servants will say it is the politicians. the politicians will say it is the bureaucrats. what we found, actually, neither one is the case. the problem is the gap between the two. is the gap that has gotten bigger in recent years. there's a wall between those who employed policy and those who design it. if you are on the policy side of the process, success for you equates with getting a bill passed, getting a bill through the legislature of congress. that is success. but the real goal is way down the line. nowhere is it more apparent than our four-decade quest for energy independence. by 1980, net imports of oil to the united states were 400,000 barrels higher than they were in 1973. in 1978, president carter signed the national energy act. it was to derive 20% of the energy we use from the sun by the end of the century. the results, we did not quite get t

want to say that we're going to see a lot of people trotting out here with such a shop-worn, tired, pathetic argument to try to keep things as they are and try to keep saying to the american people you pay the highest price in the world for brand name drugs, and that's just okay, that's the way we're going to leave it. we'll call it health reform, and at the end of the day, that's what you end up with. the highest prices in the world. a 9% increase just this year alone. over the next ten years, that 9% increase just this year nets the pharmaceutical industry industry $220 billion. but that's okay. that's the way you're going to end up, american consumer, because we don't want to give you the freedom to access those lower priced drugs where they are sold for a fraction of the price. one final point. i've mentioned often an old codger that sat on a straw bale at a farm once when i had a meeting and he said i'm 80 years old. every three months, we have had to drive to canada across the border because my wife has been fighting breast cancer. and why do we drive to canada? to buy tamoxifen. why d