the reason the reagan administration and first bush administration, and although don't have a quote from the second bush administration, the second bush administration as well was a supporter of the i.m.f. as the gentleman perhaps knows. the fact of the matter is the united states will play a very significant role in the decisionmaking of the i.m.f. because we are a very significant contributor. it is a red herring from my perspective to raise the fact that money could go somewhere. of course money could go somewhere, any money that we appropriate could go to -- if the gentleman is going to reclaim his time, the gentleman asked me a question. money could go any place. it could go to a bad place. we don't want it to go to a bad place. i don't think any of the 19 other nations want it to go to hezbollah or other organizations that might be negative in the use of that funds as far as we are concerned. what we do want, however, that's what ronald reagan was talking about, that's what george bush was talking about, that's what president obama is talking about, we do want to see the internatio

in the early years of the reagan administration, hundred fighter attack aircraft, we grew the fourth to thirty-eight wins, then we went on a procurement holiday. the f-22 was coming and we going to wait for it. so we banked on those 2 programs that we really couldn't afford from the start. we should have known. these are the number of aircraft fighters -- you notice the vietnam war on the left side. then we built up -- i always tell you this, we bought more aircraft in those years than we are going to for the next 20 years. so you see on the bottom, on the right, 2003 to 2008, 20, f-22s a year verses the 400 aircraft we bought in the 70s. the pitt the average age. we were looking at 10 years, the average age, we kept it that way. the average age on the top has gone from 38 to the mid 80s down to 10 active wings. if the structure is half of what it was. the air force says we are striving to get between 15, and 20. another look at procurement of aircraft. on the top, we see the numbers of aircraft on the bottom half, it costs $1. billions of dollars on the bottom, the reagan administra

in the reagan administration, they came up with legislation that resulted in the current federal sentencing system, they dealt a lot with death penalty issues, really came forward with an original meaning jurisprudence, that is what olp did in the reagan administration. in the clinton administration they spearheaded anti-terrorism administration in the aftermath of the oklahoma city bombing, spearheaded the violence against women act and the brady bill. in the administration office, growth initiated the patriot act. if there's something, you talk about state secrets, whistle-blowers, that is another issue we are working on. there's something unique, we work with different components within doj to really balance out and work through, negotiate these institutional interests, the criminal division at the o.j. has different interests than the civil-rights division, or a d a made the primary focus, preventing trafficing, or h h s, how many have access to drugs. they have different interests and how we negotiate that to come up with the best policy, a neutral arbiter, so there are some big issues

he, at that point, was instructed by the reagan administration to try to facilitate the resumption of ties with iraq that had been ruptured during the iraq-iran war. both the reagan administration and saddam hussein at that point were interested in resuming those ties and the u.s. thought it would be important as a way of offsetting iran's influence in the region. it seemed to be a good idea at the time. of course, 20 years later it was an embarrassment for rumsfeld to have those pictures circulating of him shaking hands with saddam hussein. >> host: you have tottoson your book in the oval office, the picture here of secretary of state colin powell and national security speiser condoleezza rice. what was secretary rumsfeld relationship with those two? >> guest: his relations were strained with both. particularly, on policy questions. and personal terms, he could be very engaging, courteous and so on. he would-- but there were tremendous attend-- tensions between rumsfeld's pentagon and pol pot state department on a broad range of foreign-policy and national-security issues, and there

he was instructed by the reagan administration to facilitate the resumption of ties with iraq that hadbeen ruptured during the iraq/iran war. both were interested then had resuming those ties. it would be a way to offset the influence of iran in the region. it seemed like a good idea at the time. 20 years later it was embarrassing to have those pictures circulating and his shaking hands with saddam hussein. host: here is a picture of him with colin powell and was secretary rest. what was his relationship with them? guest: his relationships with them were both strain. particularly on policy questions. on personal terms he could be engaging and courteous. there were tremendous tensions between donald rumsfeld and colin powell on a broad range of possible new there was a lot of gamesmanship and the billing. he would needle powell at meetings. sometimes to pick on his pronunciation of the capital of afghanistan. powell who is no slouch in self we get back at him, his well-worn suits. he was critical for management of the national security council. host: did you talk to either for this book

. >> in the reagan administration for example, they came up with the administration which resulted inthe current federal sent entersing. the dealt with death penalty issues and really came up with original meaning jurisprudence. ftermath of the oklahoma city bombing. spearheaded the violence against women act. and the brady bill. in the bush administration office, -- the office initiated the patriot act. if there is something that -- you talked about state -- state secrets, whistle-blower is another issue we are working on. we work with different components within doj and also different agencies around the government. so really balance out and work through and negotiate these institutional interests. the criminal division at doj has different interests than the civil rights division and cit -- add the zero j and dea made -- the primary focus is preventing trafficking of illegal drugs whereas hhs mixed sure how people have access to -- sick people have access to drugs. how do we become a neutral arbiter? certainly there areome big issues that are out there with regard to state secrets

. -- reagan administration. there were questions about what arguments we could make to the supreme court to advance our goals. standing was a big thing with the justice department. john roberts was a part of that. when he did become chief justice, one of the first opinions he wrote was a case dealing with dimer chrysler -- daimler chrysler. it was all about standing. i think it was his first opinion or second opinion as chief justice. he wrote a powerful standing decision going down various different bases for speeding in rejecting all of them. the other cases in the environmental area -- one case was where the ninth circuit had issued a decision that restricted the use of sonar by submarines because of the damage it might do to wales and the submarine's one. the next case was the one dealing with the loggers who won. the next one had to deal with the use of the best available technology to pool water. that was best available technology piccolo cross benefit analysis, which won. -- technology versus cost- benefi

during the reagan administration -- a republican president's administration -- he was a career lawyer in the office of legal counsel at the department of justice. in 1998, unanimously confirmed as the u.s. assistant secretary. mr. koh's academic credentials are amazing. a marshal scholar at oxford, a graduate of harvard law school, editor of the harvard law review and he went on to be a clerk at the supreme court across the street, which is about as good as it gets going out of law school. since 2004 harold koh was a dean at a law school. he's been awarded 11 honorary degrees and 30 human rights awards. i don't know that you could present a stronger resume for a man who wants to serve our country to be involved in public service and step out of his professional life as a lawyer in the private sector and with law schools. he's been endorsed by leaders, legal scholars from both political parties including former solicitor general ted olson, ken starr, josh bolten, seven former department of state legal advisers, including three republicans, more than 100 law school teens and 600 law pro

would affect top wage earners, a charitable deductions, returning them to the rates of the reagan administration. >> how much has the president -- i know you have said you could turn that policy -- the policy change over to the pentagon. >> the president has himself been involved in meetings with the pentagon. a solution has to include working with the pentagon. it is something that the president has been involved in since coming to this administration. >> how high priority is this for him? >> we can get it done. the president has talked about this. i have talked about the fact that to have an enduring solution, this has to be done legislatively. that is -- i think most people recognize this will take time to do. working with congress and the pentagon. i think the president will address this in remarks later today. pardon me? no. again, in order to have a solution, this is going to have to be done legislatively. >> one more question, quickly on the d.c. issue -- why hasn't the president changed his license plates on the presidential limousine? is he going to change them to the taxation without r

revenue would affect top wage earners charitable deductions, returning them to rates of the reagan administration. >> i have a question on that today's event. how much is the president involved in the don't ask, don't tell? >> the president has himself been involved in meetings with the pentagon. a solution has to include working with the pentagon, but it is something that president has been involved in since coming to this administration. >> how big of a priority is this for him now? [inaudible] >> when we can get it done. the president has talked about this -- i have talked about the fact that having an interim solution, this has to be done legislatively. that is what i think most people recognize will take some time to do, working with both the congress and the pentagon. i think the president will address this during his remarks later today. >> [inaudible] >> no. but in order to have that in during solution, this will have to be done legislatively. >> why hasn't the president changed his license plates on the presidential limousine? >> i think rather than change the logo around a license plate

and no question that united states was a declining power and three or four years into the reagan administration, the fundamental reality of american power reasserted itself. in other words the underlying reality of the size and magnitude of both economic and military power reasserted itself in what seemed so absolutely obvious the decline of the united states turned out not to be so obvious. i destroyed an op-ed where i begin with carter's a speech. i don't tell anybody it is not barack obama until later on. we as americans vastly tend to overestimate our problems and the rest of the world eagerly over estimates our problems. [laughter] the great desire of every european is united states should suffer the same fate as europe. not yet. so what is it we can expect? first i argue in the book to go very quickly is the jihadist war is not a 100 year war, it is about over certainly there will be radical islam as two hour prepared to commit terrorist acts, there have been for over 1,000 years but this is what is very important, the united states is withdrawing from iraq, that was set in place by bush

the context going back was the reagan administration's broader policies in central america and dad readingthe various countries there of communist forces. the members of the committee were shocked to find at the cia had put these mines in the harbors. bill casey so they should not have been surprised because he had mentioned it in a briefing months earlier. it is reminiscent of her current interrogation techniques. essentially, the chief of the cia failed to make mention of of the mining testimony and buried the lead. he did not tell members explicitly what had been going on. there were furious when they found out. garn exploded back at the numbers, alleging that it had broken down along the local party lines. that is what prompted the outburst. host: you used this incident as a launching point to talk about the current discussion over who knew what about the treatment of detainees. a sidebar to your article says that the cia typically gives a 1100 briefings to the members of congress. it seems like congress should be getting all they need to know from the cia, but from your article that i

>> martin anderson was formerly a policy advisor in the reagan administration. he's currently a fellow at the hoover institution and co-author with annelis anderson of reagan's path to victory. reagan in his own hand and reagan a life in letters. annelise anderson was a reagan advisor to the presidential campaign and a director of president reagan's office of management and budget. she's currently a fellow at the hoover institution. the reagan presidential library in simi valley, california, hosted this event. for more information, visit reaganlibrary.com. ♪ >> this summer, book tv is asking, what are you reading? >> what are you reading this summer? >> well, elmore leonard has a new novel out and george pelecanos has a new novel out so i'm reading some new novels. i'm listening on recorded books driving over here and will listen going back to the history of jacksonion called waking giant. >> there's predictions books might go the way of news and that is all digital. >> well, the kindles are out there. i tend to like a great thump and a feel of a book in my hand

[applause] >> martin anderson was formerly an economic policy adviser in the reagan administration. he is currently a fellow at the hoover institution and co-author with annelise anderson of reagan's path to victory, reagan in his own hand and reagan:a life in lenders. annelise anderson was an adviser to the presidential campaign of president reagan and soviet director of president reagan's office of management and budget and is a fellow at the hoover institution. the ronald reagan presidential library in california hosted this event. for more information, visit reaganlibrary.com. >> book expo america in new york city, 2009, publisher of basic books, what does a publisher do? >> the publisher is the title i have. i run the imprint of basic books, we have editorial marketing and publicity, design, and the final decision on things, i say a lot of yes or no. >> what do you say yes or no to? >> whether we are going to acquire a book, how much we're going to pay for it, what resources we put into marketing and promoting it, the final call on which jacket, a lot of a over be, what the pric

he joined the justice department in 1981 when rex lee -- the beginning of the reagan administration. then john roberts, now chief justice roberts was a special assistant to the attorney general. one of the things going on in the justice department then is judicial restraint. what kind of arguments can we make to the supreme court to advance our goals of encouraging more judicial restraint? and standing was a big thing with rex lee and the justice department, and there was john roberts as a part of that. then when he did become chief justice, one of the very first opinions he wrote on stepsively -- on extensively involved -- involved several things. as chief justice, he wrote a very powerful standing decision going down different bases for do all of them. i know we are short of time. one case was wales versus submarines. the ninth circuit issued a decision restricting the use of sonar by submarines because of damage to the whales. the next one was tree huggers verse loggers, and the loggers won. and the use of the best available technology to cool water that was being used for nuclear

she was general counsel of army during the reagan administration and pentagon inspector general when richard cheney of was the defense secretary. she is a lifelong republican. susan crawford reached the same conclusion, reached the conclusion mohammed al-kahtani, the so-called 20 hijacker couldn't be prosecuted for his role in the 9/11 attacks because he was tortured at guantanamo bay. here is what susan crawford said. madam president, can i ask for order in the chamber? >> the senate will be in order. >> here is what susan crawford said. quote, we tortured al-kahtani. if we tolerate this and allow wait how can we object when hours servicemen and women or others in the foreign service are captured and subjected to the same techniques? how can we complain where is our moral authority to complete? well, we may have lost it, and of quote from susan crawford. this is one reason the president obama closing guantanamo and put an end to the abusive interrogation techniques that were used in guantanamo because they put the troops at risk of being abused of the troops are captured. senator ky

so with i was in the reagan administration civil rights division, we went up and said the 1982 voting rights act leads to proportional representation and these racially jerry meand meandered districts, every one said we were backward racist, but that could never happen in a million years and i think they did wait about an hour and a half after the law was enacted before they started demanding proportional representation in majority-minority districts, which anyone that looks at what happened in the early 1980's and 1990's, is exactly what happened furthered by a case called jingles, written by justice brennan, which made up three factors that had absolutely nothing to do with the rang of the statute and basically said if you're a majority-minority, you can draw a square majority-minority district if minority are losing elections outside of toes districts and then they said and we will also look at the so-called senate report factors, which again have absolutely nothing to do with how people vote or how the lines are drawn, but socioeconomic disparities between minorities and other gro

beginning really in chile in 1973, but sort of really deep here in the united states in the reagan administration is the currency. that seems paradoxical if you are making the currency stronger, making it basically more expensive to buy abroad. but what does here, and it does kill inflation which is the point and that of course is a good thing. but by making it too strong, what you do is you kill your domestic manufacturing and that's what we have seen over the last 30 years your sort of this gradual death of our domestic manufacturing base as a good flow into our country that are now cheaper because the dollar is stronger and goods that flow out of our country into countries like argentina, countries like brazil, all over the world, people can no longer afford or don't want to buy because there is artificial inflation of the price. that of course it works both ways so it's not just the united states. you see that in argentina. this was really the crux of their problems that they made their peso equivalent to a dollar. for every peso they printed, they had a u.s. dollar in reserve. inflation plun

in the early 80's, about the middle of the reagan administration, barry bower, his spiritual adviser testified to congress. it's in c spain's archives because i saw it on c-span. there was a hearing. and a congress person asked gary bower why ronald reagan kept vetoing the aids money they were putting in the package. and it was really bothering, hiv was just coming along there that nobody knew that much about it. bourd told congress, he said, well i've advised the president that god created the aids epidemic to eliminate the blacks and the queers. those were his exact words. at that particular time i laughed. i didn't know that i had a 16-year-old son that was hiv positive, which died later. and i look back and i say to myself, how foolish was i. if congress would have just let that money be appropriated back in the early 80's, i think aids would be solved today. and you've little pipsqueeks like gary bower running around. and that man ran for president. you can understand, i hope, how i feel. >> it was a sad time and it was disgraceful how long it took. the government, to act back i

eutopian fantasies and self-deception of the 1977 carter administration and the 1993 clinton administration. the reagan movie is a remarkable portrait of the contrast between idealistic realism and idealistic eutopianism. let me remind you. ronald reagan and his idealistic belief in democracy announced firmly that our goal in the cold war was we win and they lose, that our opponents were an evil empire. and 1 years after his administration the soviet union disappeared -- 11 years. jimmy carter who was a sincere idealist was totally out of touch with reality. he lived in a world of fantasies. the result was a catastrophic failure. the clinton erra failures are similar. their passion for mistreating terrorism not as an act of war but as an act of criminal justice, their refusal to accept the threats to america, meant that they couldn't cope with the world trade center in 1993 which was in part plotted by a prison ica prison. -- in attica prison. or deal with the bombing in saudi arabia that they blocked the fbi from going and finding out what happened. they couldn't take charge of the two embassies bombe

various documents, there were 355 meetings of the national security council during his administration that reagan chaired, and they are almost 200 of them have minutes taken by a scribe that tells with everybody said, and martin requested declassifications and got the classified. about 85, 87 of those minutes. they are a great resource on what reagan was actually saying. there are a lot of other stories in those minutes as well. what other people are saying. but what he has to say is very important. and, you can see that he is his own strategist and that he is following this over a long period of time, but i wanted to go back and read you something that he said in 1963. this document happens to be in the hoover institution archives and was quoted in an earlier book. and it is also quoted in this book, hurts annelise-- "reagan's secret war." he says in 1963 in a speech, the only sure way to avoid for is to surrender without fighting. the other way is based on the belief that in an all-out race, our system is stronger and eventually the enemy gives up the race as a hopeless cause. then ennoble nati

rated various documents during 1955 meetings of the national security council during the administration that reagan shared and we got there about almost 200 of have mistaken that tells other base san and martin requested classification and got the classified about 85 or 87 episodes a minute two and they are a great resources on what reagan wasjÁactually saying. there are a lot of other stories in those minutes as well of what other people are saying, but what he has to say is very important. and you can see that he is his own strategist and that he is following this over a long time. but i wanted to go and every do something and then he said in 1963 and this document happens to be in hoover institution archives and quoted in our earlier book. is also quoted in this book, "regan's secret war". and he says in 1963 in a speech, the only sure way to avoid war is to surrender without fighting. the other way is based on the belief that in an all-out race our system is stronger and eventually the enemy gives up the race as a hopeless cause. and then a noble mission for leaving in peace extends a hand it t

the missile defense program, which right now is being chipped away at by a recurrence administration. ronald reagan was a visionary. he had a vision of america, that shining city on a hill. what is your vision? what is it that you were called to do? you can have several visions. you have your individual personal visions for your life, your relationships. those above all else are critical. one of the things i try to focus on, especially in my work in washington d.c., is reminding all of these great people like come to town to save the country that if you save the country and you lose your family in the process, then you have really lost the heart and soul of who you are. at this age in life, before your committed in relationships such as marriage and parenthood, understand what your vision is for those relationships. then, when you have your vision, would you do next, you step into your plan. how are you going to make that vision a reality? again, let's hearken back to this great document, the constitution of the united states. this is a plan on how to run the nation. it is a plan on how to debate i

is fair to say that in many ways, the hard-line hawks of the 43rd bush administration to some extent use dragon, the example of reagan and the cold war in ways that i would argue were not precise. ronald reagan was an actor, sportscaster, corporate spokesman, but one of the important things about and that does not integrate the attention is he was a laborer -- union president beard what the negotiators do? they ask for 100 and settle for 50. if you look at his management of the soviet relationship, he goes from 1981, calling the soviets and evil empire, 1983, focus of evil in the modern world and ends up in 1988 in red square kissing babies with gorbachev. that was a successful negotiation, but it was not simply a kind of churchillian resilience and refusal to compromise. and so, i think reagan merits great studying and in some ways speaker gingrich marriage rates steady but for a man who built the majority, who won a hughes -- huge victory and then circumstances and the politics of the moment brought in that revolution down. that merits study. gingrich has done and -- important things in his career, and serious cons

administrations. beginning his career in government, in the office of legal counsel in the reagan era. dean koh, i think that everybody who has dealt with him and worked with him on a personal level understands the skill that he would bring to this job. he's worked with the state department on a first-hand basis. served as assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor. in the clinton administration, a post for which he was unanimously confirmed by the senate in 1998. he left government to teach at yale law school and went on to serve as dean until his nomination to serve in the current administration. as a renowned scholar and a leading expert on international law, he has published or co-authored eight books over 150 articles. an throughout his career, dean koh has been a fierce defender of the rule of law and human rights. he understands that the united states benefits as much, if not more than any other country, from an international system of law where we are governed by the rule of law. at the same time his personal commitment to america's security and to the d

the presidents we've had, save for the past four or five administrations, he really was the one true friend of our wild horse, not ronald reagan,, you know, our great equestrian president. not george w. bush, the guy with the ranch. it was richard nixon who spoke out most eloquently on behalf of wild horses, and was really not since u.s. grant was something of a horse whisperer himself. he used to dress down salters and you his command in the civil war for mistreating horses. it was not since u.s. grant that a president had spoken out on behalf of wild horses. so since 19 is it 1, that bill has been the law that protects our wild horses, but people have been trying to unravel it since then. and something i discovered after i began looking into the massacre that i mentioned earlier, is that in the american west, a bizarre war is under foot. it is a variation of the old range wars of the 19t 19th century, and it is waged by stockman and sage brush rebels, with copies of the second amendment tucked into their back pocket and it is backed by republicans and democrats and a federal agency that circumvent the wild free roaming horse

reagan appointed him the united states attorney. he represented the third district of arkansas until president bush appointed him as administrator of the drug enforcement administration. in 2003, he was confirmed by the senate to be the first undersecretary of the department of homeland security. he served in this office until 2005. andrew grossman is the heritage foundation senior legal policy analyst. he was a writer and analyst, current limiting to a program in foreign policy and legal affairs. he is a graduate of the george mason university school of law. he received his master's degree from the university of pennsylvania. in 2002 he received his bachelor's degree from dartmouth college. mr. wiser has been a staff attorney at the aclu. he has litigated several cases in which the government has invoked the privilege, including a challenge to the cia's abduction of an innocent german citizen, and a suit against a private services, and then -- company, and a case on behalf of an fbi translator accused of misconduct. he was a clerk to the u.s. court of appeals. he is a graduate of harvard college. i have a fondness of the new york

reagan appointed him an yeah attorney. you represented the third district of arkansas from 1996 until president bush appointed him as administrator of the drug edmund enforcement administration. in addition he was a member of the intelligence committee. in january 2003 representative hutchinson was confirmed by the u.s. senate to be the first undersecretary of the newly created department of homeland security where he served until 2005. visas supinely founded the asa hedges and law group with his son, asa the third. and your grossman is the heritage foundation senior legal policy analyst. before being named as senior legal policy analyst mr. grossman was the writer editor and analyst at heritage. contributed to think-tanks research program in domestic and economic policy, foreign policy and legal affairs. mr. grossman is a graduate of the george mason university school of law resurgence in your article editor to the lardy. receive his master's degree from the university of pennsylvania. in 2002 he received his bachelor degree in economics and anthropology from dartmouth college rate edited the dartmouth review. ben wizner has bee

distinction ronald reagan appointed him united states attorney and he represented the third district of arkansas from 1986 until president bush appointed him to the drug enforcement administration. in addition to his service on the committee, he was also a member of the intelligence committee. in january, 2003, representative hutchinson was confirmed by the u.s. senate to be the first undersecretary of the newly created department of homeland security. where he served until 2005. he subsequently found the asa hutchinson law group in 2008 with his son, asa iii. andrew grossman is the heritage foundation senior policy analyst. before being named in january 2008, mr. grossman was a writer, editor and general analyst at heritage. contributing to the think tank program on economic policy, foreign policy and legal affairs. mr. grossman is a graduate of george mason university school of law where he served the senior article of the george mason law review he received his master from the university of pennsylvania in 2007. in 2002, he received his bachelor's rieg in economics in anthropology from dart -- dartmouth university. he's litigated several post-9/11 civil liberties cases in wh

reagan's evil empire. it was gone and now that it was gone the whole framework of propaganda collapsed. so what was the response of the planners in the bush administration? very straightforward. in brief, everything will go on exactly as before but with new pretexts so we still need the same new huge military system but for a new reason. literally, because of the technological sophisticated of third world powers. nobody laughed. [laughter] >> we have to maintain -- we have to maintain what they call the defense industrial base. it's a standard euphemism for high tech industry. the system whereby the public pays the cost and takes the risk and high tech industry gets the profits. they said we have to maintain intervention forces directed mostly at the middle east. and then comes this interesting phrase. directed at the middle east where the threats to our interests that required military intervention could not be laid at the kremlin's door. in other words, sorry, folks, we've been lying to you for 50 years but now the clouds have lifted so you could see if you choose to and few chose to. the fate of nato is very instructive and highly pertinent right now

administration. according to what we thought or the principles of white house communication, he is overexposed. on the upper hand, he may have figured out something that the reagan people and the clinton people did not figure out. i still think that he is in danger of it. it is ambiguous evidence. the thing i look at, every time the president has to take a stand publicly, he antagonizes somebody. you would rather have him -- you would rather be able to send up somebody other than the president to knock down a story. if he bash is something down, he read -- he risks taking the brunt of being out there. at least there is a hint that he might be overexposed. so far, he is around 60% and he is doing fine. guest: he has a lot on his plate. he is a president that wants his staff out there talking about health care and the bailout and the recovery and reinvestment programs, talking about the car bailouts, the deficit, this regulatory plan that he launched last week. it is hard to keep up. i called him the energizer president. he has to get out there to sell his products. guest: the more that any president is out talking about issues, the less the media will accept the

administration can't continue the unprecedented level of spending while claiming to hold the middle class harmless. now, if you don't believe me, listen to leading economists. martin sullivan, a former economic aide to president reagan, actually, who backed president obama last fall said and i'm quoting -- "you simply can't tax the rich enough to make all this up." unquote. he goes on to say and the quote continues: "just getting the budget to a sustainable level, there needs to be a broad-based tax increase." leonard butman with the tax policy center said and, again, i'm quoting -- "there is no way we're going to be able to pay for government 10, 20 years from now without coming up with a new revenue source. and, finally, economist paul krudman wrote, and i quote -- ""i find it hard to see how the federal government can meet its long-term obligations without some tax increases on the middle class." unquote. all of these experts echo the point i'm making, you can't tax the rich enough to pay -- to cover all the spending. inevitably what all of this is leading to is the middle class will fall victim to massive taxation. i'll put this into more tangible terms by examining how much the tax rate would need to rise to ma

his administration is aggressively seeking to topple pro-life laws in sovereign nations, a clear, deeply troubling contradiction. first mr. obama rescinded the mexico city policy, a pro-life reagan era executive order, that ensured that the half billion dollars in population control funds appropriated by congress each year only went to foreign nongovernmental organizations, family planning, organizations that did not promote, lobby, or perform abortions as a method of family planning. as a result of owe bam obama's new policy, they are flush with cash and will continue to get hundreds of millions of dollars annually to push abortion around the world. all of it decoupled from pro-life safeguards. i mention the mexico city policy which is not on the floor today for context. to underscore what is actually happening 24/7 in the obama administration. add to this the fact that the administration has stuffed pro-abortion activists, a literal who's who in the abortion rights organizations, in key gatekeeper positions and you get the idea. you see that abortion is a serious undertaking by this administration. even the gatekeeper, the woman, and a fine woman, who heads up the u.s. agency

guest: since the reagan years, the civil rights commission legislation was changed after a fight with the administration. i ended up suing president reagan in federal district court because he fired commissioners for criticizing his policies. in any case, under the new legislation passed as a compromise them, the commission has been ruined, in my opinion. it no longer has senate confirmation for people who are appointed. congress appoints half. the president appoints half. there is no confirmation. when personnel director at the white house told me was that you could appoint an ax murderer and no one would know it. we tried hard to make it work. it is hard work in terms of how the terms operate. the commission has not come out to try to shed a spotlight on some of the issues we have today like immigration. that is highly contentious, as we know. there are the issues of lbgt people and same-sex marriage. these issues seem they would be proper for the commission did instead, it has done things like being against the voting rights act being authorized when it was voted for by the congress. i have proposed