tv Washington Journal CSPAN November 5, 2010 7:00am-10:00am EDT
six seas were lost by the democrats. the alaska race is still outstanding. the democrat has conceded. the winner will be chosen among the republican and the in combat with a right in votes. we will do recapping of what happened in the election this week. our guest includes americans for prosperity. we will pick for the state's result with lou jacobs said. we begin this morning with a team leader regularly on the campaign trail and that is american? nationalism. is america the greatest country? we want to hear your thoughts. 75% of americans say yes. we want to hear from you if you agree that and why and what about the united states makes us the greatest country. we'll show you specifics and hear from a number of politicians in this first 45 minutes. the thon numbers are on your screen.
-- the phone numbers are on your screen. is america of the greatest country and tell us why you think so. statistics of a poll that was done before the election by abc news and yahoo! and you can say that 75% believe that america is the greatest country but back in 1984, that number was 88%. 29% of americans recently said america used to be blood is no longer. we want to hear your thoughts on this. michael kinsley will be our guest at 8:30. there is little of what he writes -- the theory that americans are better than everybody is endorsed by an overwhelming majority of u.s.
voters and approximately 100% of u.s. politicians although there is less and less evidence to support this. he talks about the evidence but here is his concern. if people believe this is true, they will not do what is necessary to make a trooper in it is true. the brits are different. maybe these cuts are a mistake but the british really got to change. we will talk with michael kinsley later on about this party want to get your thoughts. this is marco rubio talking about america's place in the world. >> this race is about -- was
about the great future that lies ahead for our country, a feature that americans know is there for the taking but requires action on our part. americans believe with all their heart, the vast majority of that and the vast majority in of floridians that the united states of america is the single greatest nation in all of human history. thoughts,'s get your beginning with indiana, caller: good morning. i think america is the greatest country on earth. i am 72, going on 73. i look to my children and main street for that goodness. i have five children. two of my son's work in the big steel mills here in butler. i have a daughter that works for a german company. i have a daughter in law portrayed german company. they work hard every day and
they pay their taxes and they obey law. i have a daughter in florida, a son in florida study to be a nurse, a daughter married to a landscaper. they are a all working hard and trying to be good americans. host: people work hard and other countries. what about those qualities makes them part of a country that is the greatest on earth? caller: america has such wonderful ideals for what we stand for. i am telling you -- someone is in control now that is changing the whole situation as far as what our ideals used to be. hard work, pay your taxes -- why does $40 trillion lie in the hands of just 5%? that is not right. host: thank you for your call. london, kentucky, next. caller: good morning.
we were at one time the greatest country in the world. now we have such evil leadership in washington that our value system is going down the tubes. no longer is the will of the people being recognized. we have judges that are legislating from the bench against the will of the people. if we ever get back to our call -- the core values, we will once again be the greatest country in the world. host: has another country taken our place? caller: i think israel is the greatest country and they recognize god as the true leader and we keep him out of everything in our society. host: the united states is first
-- the light bulbs. host: arthur, thank you. we have a democrat talking about america as the greatest country. >> god bless our veterans. they are putting themselves in harm's way so we can live in the greatest country in the world. host: back to statistics. the number of people who live, lichtenstein takes the first place. host: next is a call from
indiana. this is walter. caller: thank you. the foundation of america is the greatest foundation. the declaration of independence say we have our rights given to us by our creator. i think those fundamental platforms or building blocks are a second to none. i think one of the callers may appoint about kentucky point we might have the platform, but only until the live up to the instructions of the owner's manual. we have killed millions of babies and say it is a choice. our political and moral views are in decline and we except is lowering our abilities to be the best. i have never seen anybody hop in boats and wrote thousands of
miles to go to ethiopia. i think is going back to restore our common sense and basic values and our pride. actions speak louder than words. until we do that, we are hypocrites. we talk about china. i have never seen anybody say i cannot wait to move to china and lived in a hut. we are not living up to our potential. host: thank you, walter. eets.ll mix in a few tw host: fredericksburg, virginia. the democrats. june. caller: thank you. you don't witness the greatness
of america until you come from somewhere else. i came from sleeping on a mac to living in a 10-room house. -- from slipping on a mat. you are able to do anything in america. i am very grateful. so many people don't appreciate the greatness of this country. host: what is it that makes america great? caller: the most important thing is the free system we have come from poverty to middle class to the top 2%. there is poverty in other places and there is no room for growth. in america, if you work hard, you come from poverty, you can move to the top 2%.
it is a system that works and we're grateful to be in this country. if you work hard and do what you can do, you are able to live a successful life. host: how many years have you lived in the united states? caller: 26 years. host: next up is new york city. caller: good morning. i think what has happened in this last election proves that our country is not as great as it should be. i think what is happening -- we are despised all over the world. you cannot be a great country
when every country in the world despises us. despise our system. we are such hypocrites. we are -- i give you an example. any time a political party is elected to office on the ground, how much they cannot demonize the president of the united states with lies and threats and twisting and they have been encouraged. host: thank you for your call. you could hear some feedback. please hit the mute button.
it is hard when you can hear yourself on the delight. we have a tweet. let's go back to the campaign trail. this is rand paul. >> america it is exceptional because we embraced freedom. we enshrined it in our document and the cost we have lived and fought for the principles of freedom. host: next call from rapid river, michigan. the republican. caller: good morning. the united states is the greatest country historically. i hope you challenge him on who will be a greater challenge -- a greater country historically. you quoted the gop numbers. as we spend more and more of our
gdp of the federal government, we are becoming a laughing stock to a lot of people around the world. the debt is piling up for it is ridiculous. i have a one-sentence ". "americans will never give up capitalism. they will one day wake-up" -- i am so pleased about tuesday's election. i think we will head on the right track and start balancing our budget and do the right thing and we will give back to as great as we once were. host: that was pete from michigan. zimbabwe is number one in the debt to gdp ratio.
we are talking about the concept of america as the greatest country and we are listening to politicians of the campaign trail. our next call is from ohio. caller: good morning. the fact of the matter is that the romans thought they were the greatest country on earth. the british thought the british empire, the sun never set. american exceptional some is a dangerous concept. it leads us to believe that we can take actions that would be accessible from no other country on earth. host: next is panama city, florida, an independent. caller: good morning. i do think america has the potential to be the greatest
country in the world. we have our basic rights and we have the foundation of freedom based on the constitution. i think that lately people in this country have grown disconnected with the community and the country as a whole. they let their opinions be controlled by the media and they do not form their own opinions. if people got involved in the committee and what is happening in the world, they would learn to form their own opinions. we have more people running for office have not been in politics their whole lives. people are voting based on what they knew to be true. we would give back to what is more real and more related to the people, how they live on the street. we would not let political parties and the political agenda runt what happens in this
country. host: thank you. we next have a tweet from mike freeman. back to phone calls. shreveport, louisiana. good morning. caller: america is not the greatest country in the world. look at america's history to people of color. look at exploitation of the poor and the hatred of the poor. why are the corporations going to other nations? they want free to slave labor. they don't want to pay a living wage. so they go to other nations that already have health care. if america was the greatest nation, why doesn't she have universal health care for all of
her citizens? women cannot even get free health care, a living wage in the united states. it's a travesty and a tragedy. the worst part about it is that if a person never acknowledges their problems, they will never connect them -- correct them. america is getting worse and worse. a few democrats are leading to a total destruction. host: is there a country that has the number 1 spot? caller: countries least depended on the federal reserve will be places like venezuela, iran, and they're trying to change that dynamic. they do not want anyone to see that a nation can run itself independently of the federal reserve. host: back to your calls.
we saw the money-easing policy on the front page coverage. 600 billion boost equities. in this, "china, brazil, and germany criticize in defending their economies against large capital flows." zeke talked about health care. there are rankings in health care. host: this is from a viewer and he writes on twitter --
we are asking you we think about the concept of america as the greatest country. caller: i am glad to have this opportunity to ask a question. i think that we were the greatest country until we got our first black president. [unintelligible] by bill like the united states have too many talk shows and people go against one another. there is health care that we are trying to get. i feel like one of the main things that the united states -- it is not as great as people
want it to be picked you get what you don't want -- some people to know what other people to have health care. i voted for bill clinton because she wanted universal health care. and so that was one of the things i looked at. canada it is one of the great countries that i feel like -- when i saw somebody speaking, he said he wanted health care for everybody and in their country, they have free health care. i'd seen a lot of hatred. they claim that the united states was going bankrupt. i seen people go over the country and buying many all
kinds of signs just to go against the first black president. host: thank you from georgia. here is a response from president obama. >> i believe in american exceptional listen, just as i suspect that the brits believe in british exception was in. i am proud of my country and i think we have a whole lot to offer the world. it does not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of other countries for recognizing that we are not always going to be right or that other people may have good ideas or that in order for us to work collectively, all parties have to compromise, and that includes us.
i see no contradiction between believing that america has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world toward peace and prosperity, and recognizing that that leadership is incumbent depends on our ability to create partnerships because we cannot solve these problems alone. host: president obama on the concept of america and we're talking to you on this friday morning after the election and whether this concept is appropriate for this country. next is a telephone call from texas, an independent. you are on the air. caller: good morning. the fact that i am calling and speaking on c-span as a woman is
proof that we are a great country. but we have so far to go. this country is great but we're not educating our children. how can we expect -- how can we respect the foundation of our nation and the potential of our greatness? how can we compare ourselves to other nations if we cannot compete economically with them? that is all. host: with regard to statistics on education, here is just one . host: next is new haven, connecticut. this is john, a republican pierre >> first i want to say
that as -- caller: i want to say where the best -- we are able to talk on a talk show about our government or about what is going on in the world and not be held accountable as far as taking to the wall, it shot, or prosecuted. for that alone, able to speak out freely amongst one another. i am glad about our forefathers who have put things into place. obama is putting into place not come easy to play for another 12 years, or another four years. nobody is realizing is watergate or the other eras where money
was pulled up for us, whether you call social security or were the government has built up for us. that is what we're living often appeared how could it not be about, we are number one when we have had it back boat that has stood up by our forefathers. host: here is sarah palin. >> we are rolling up our sleeves and getting down to business. the principles that have made this country the greatest country on earth. host: next up is a call from virginia. caller: good morning. this is the greatest country because most people want to come here. people would disliked america would say, yankee go home. the other thing that makes me
love this country, we have everything here, the good. and the ugly. i cannot come up with an example. this is the greatest country and i would die for this country. host: next is a call from hollywood, florida. caller: i am an immigrant. i came here from cuba. i do agree with the comment the president made what he said that we are a great country. i am glad i'm living here. we have the capability to be a leader. we have to realize that we with arrogance. we consider ourselves a partner or a member in the global community economically.
we have to do so as it relates to social and whoo other dynamics. if we do so, i think we can maintain that status. we have to let the world know that we are a leadership because the actions and policies and the care would give it to our people. i think the world will fall and they will see like to have in the past. if we lose our way come we will just be another country in the world community. we can and we should maintain that status. host: thank you, juan, from hollywood, florida. our next caller's from chantilly, virginia. a republican. caller: good morning.
thank you for taking my call. this is not the greatest country on the planet. but it once was. we have the best constitution in the world. our politicians are taking advantage of that. it was set up -- by international bankers. we're living at this time because there are rules on that. it is meant to be -- that is our freedom. we cann change it. give me freedom or give me death. host: were you born in another country? caller: i it was born in mexico. i came here 16 years ago.
i have been doing a lot of things. i read for history. i understand what the problem is. i love this country. if we change america -- i know who and how can change it. republicans and democrats are working for the same corporations. that is all i have to say. i can say fellow american changed my life and i am proud of that. it gives me the opportunity to vote in here. host: thank you. listening to callers say they are able to call into c-span.
for a young country. andk of all of the nation's we have run the show, but we have run it like a teenager. we have used up all of our assets and the goodness we need to produce something. we need to produce educated individuals. we need to not have to import nurses and doctors. we have to reproduce products here and not export all of our wealth. and then we can go back to being potentially the greatest country that we have begun today. host: thank you.
lots in the papers this morning digesting the election. "a quick move from tea party to flex muscle." michele bachmann intends to fight for the number four position. a new political reality. related to that, mcconnell ends talk of a flaw. he had heard the no compromise message coming from the most conservative members of his party. republicans failed on tuesday to gain a majority. we'll be talking with the policy had for americans for prosperity. about theg to asked
policy objectives. as the new congress convenes. this is the outstanding grace's situation. three races were culprit patty murray is keeping her seat in arizona. a democrat in arizona is keeping his seat. pat quinn in illinois keeps his seat. we have a new tally. nine seats still yet to be called. 51 democrats in the senate. it is really 47 seats for the republicans. minnesota and connecticut still
need to be called. caller: i think this was the greatest generation or is in decline because -- host: do you have your tv volume up? caller: and no, i do not. the greatest generation is declining. people used to work harder and pay their bills, pay the mortgage and not overextend themselves. i put three boys through college with note grant money whatsoever. they have student loans. one of my sons is in the restaurant business. he hired young people to work. you can only pay minimum wage.
they sit around. you have to tell them every move to make. that was not true years and years ago. i have worked very hard to get where i am. people talk about the millionaires and the richness of the millionaires. did warren buffet or bill gates start out with wealth? no. it is work ethic and the integrity that has fallen off, which is bad. host: thank you, bill. next up is lincoln, nebraska. caller: america is a great place. you come back and find america is the best place in the world. the man who said -- if israel is said they believe in
god. then they don't kill the innocent young children. they demolished the schools and woman. hopefully it will never be the same. that is what makes -- the united states is a great place to live and god bless america and all the american people. host: thank you for your call. back to some statistics. host: next is midland, michigan, a democrat. caller: america used to be the greatest country in the world. it was great for the reasons that they took care of their
people and they were able to provide for the world what other countries could not. but we fall short because i think we took god out of the solution. israel and rome fell because they were too proud. think we need to get back in making the country strong. then we can say that we are the best. look at france. look at canada. host: nancy pelosi has not decided. she is working the phones. she is considering staying on as minority leader. she was called to leave
leadership. she was called to step down. heath shuler said democrats need a new leader that can recruit top-notch candidates. a moderate call for a new direction. "we need to shake things upper, ," he said in an interview. caller: a foreign head of state was asked what made america great. he visited the united states and saw the great things we have. then he went to the churches of america. he said america is great because america is good. i believe that this very much. host: two texas politicians
have doing books out. george w. bush is on the book tour travel and a few stories about this. he breaks belong silenced to promote a new book. here is one thing that was highlighted. kanye west said that george bush does not care about black people. this the suggestion i was racist was an all-time low. rep. -- rick perry is out with a book. he has no interest in running for president. he released a book that reads like a tea party manifesto.
great country this is and it is the greatest country, to act with more keynote, we might be a better country. host: the last comment will be from west virginia. correct -- eric, you are on. caller: why do we have to be insecure to warwick we're better than anybody else? thomas jefferson said patriotism was the last refuge of a scandal. we saw millions and millions of dollars poured in from wall street hedge funds and from pharmaceuticals and they are the ones who will benefit. people got fooled again. we wrap ourselves in the flag. we think we are taking the country back. these people are cyclic upset we have a president who is not caucasian -- these people are
>> changes need to occur in congress. if the people of our country really get involved in the political system and begin to run for congress and come over here to make the changes that are necessary. >> john boehner on a c-span numerous round table in 1990, more coverage of him since. you can learn more about the presumptive speaker of the house for his own words in over 800 appearances on line at the c- span video library. it is washington, your way. >> it is harmless if one is making a start out of britney , but when oner
takes this notion of stardom into the national security realm, lives are at stake. americans after a while get wise that the stars and the wizards and the dream teams and the best and brightest might not be what they're cracked up to be. but in that fateful about of time, chaos and mayhem can come to rein. >> henry kissinger, donald marron ran ronald black america rumsfeld. -- ronald mcnamara, conable by lee baert. host: we have been talking with our viewers this morning about the concept of american excess was in. what are your thoughts on that? guest: i think america was founded on a different basis, founded on a philosophy of
individual liberty and people being in charge of their own lives, and government doing only those few things that people are incapable of doing for themselves. i think it is like so many people -- host: the president talked about you frequently appeared here is one incidents of it. >> last year's supreme court decision with citizens united, which basically says that special interests can gather up millions of dollars -- they are now allowed to spend as much as they want without limit, and they do not have to ever reveal who is paying for these ads. that is what they're doing all
across the country. they are doing it right here in pennsylvania, millions of dollars being spent. and the names always sound very benign. americans for prosperity, committee for truth in politics. americans for apple pie. [laughter] i made that last one up. [laughter] none of them will disclose who is paying for these ads. you do not know whether it is big financial interests, a big oil company, an insurance company. you do not even know if it is foreign control. we tried to fix this, but the leaders for the other party would not even allow it to come up for a vote. they want the public to be in the dark. but we cannot allow a special interest takeover of our democracy. host: lots to talk about there. why don't you tell the audience what you're always about.
guest: americas for prosperity's mission is to train and mobilize citizens to become part of the public policy process from the perspective of limited government. we have 1.6 million activists nationally, active in all 50 states, and we take that mission very seriously. the president had a number of factual errors in the piece that you play. the citizens united decision has zero effect on us because we did not and do not engage in any express advocacy, so there was no change with respect to that decision on what we were able to do. also incorrect is the idea that it is knew that membership organizations like ours to protect the privacy of our members and donors and keep them secret. that dates back to 1958 in the supreme court decision naacp vs. alabama with the court held there was a critical free-speech right in protecting the privacy of membership organizations to buy forced disclosure could be subject to retribution that would shelve their free-speech rights.
we take it very seriously to protect the privacy of our supporters. host: some of the names that have been a says it with you are tim phillips and ralph reed. can you tell us about the roles that each of these people have? guest: we have both a 50137 it -- we have foundations that do educational work, and the 501- c4. david is the founder -- is an original founder and the chair of the c3. ralph reed is not involved in any way except that he used to work with him in a previous capacity before it tim came to us. host: what role did you have a specific races this time around? guest: we had an active role in educating voters on the house side in particular.
we insisted districts where we went in with our november project, and we were very aggressive in educating folks -- we educated vote on radio, television, we did phone banking, we did door knocking, we did a huge volunteer grassroots mobilization. i think it drove the issues forward and this was an issues election. people were voted on health care, on cap and trade. they were expressing concern about the overall direction of the country on things like spending, and i think that is very positive on people voting on the issues, voting on policies, and getting engaged in order to protest it in the process. host: what is the scorecard on the races? guest: is up in the air, but i think it is up in the 50's, a pretty solid. to us, no matter what candidate
wins, we're happy that people are out there talking about the issues of voting on the issues, and in some races where we may have a ticket folks about someone and really criticized some of their votes, we think we did something positive because we got people engaged in paying attention on the issues and will continue to hold that person accountable. for us it is not so much about wins and losses in the election, over -- although i think the overall -- she really is about driving these issues forward. on that measure, we think we did very well, and that this next congress will be focused on a return to fiscal fonts -- fiscal responsibility. host: what is your affiliation with the tea party movement? guest: we are a great supporter and ally and friend of the tea party movement. we have sponsored and organized tea parties and our state. in other states we have been part of the chorus and joined in with that. we do not agree with everything
they do, but overall we are great supporters. anything that brings people off the sidelines and into the political and public policy process is a good thing. it is something the political left has done very well for many years. free-market activists have .argely caught up for h host: if you would like to join us, call 202-737-0002 for democrats, 202-737-0001 for republicans, and four independents, call 202-628-0205. the first indication about whether or not the house leadership got the message -- those are my words -- will be the year marks decision in congress. can you talk more about that? guest: this will be a critical vote. this will be when they come back and a vote on conference rules, whether or not to extend
the current moratorium on earmarking. john boehner is arguing for an extension of that. i believe he will succeed. if they fail to extend the moratorium, their first order of business upon coming back to washington, to say pork barrel in march are coming back, that will be a devastating signal that they did not get the message at all and have not learned their message from the 2006 defeat and everything that has happened after. that is an important vote, and we are optimistic they will do the right thing. host: if they do not? guest: if they do not, i think they will lose the confidence of all the free market activists and all these groups like ours in the tea party and so on. it would be a disaster for them in terms of have the grass roots support that they need. host: a piece in "washington journal" this morning, no earmarked -- it must be brought
to a vote for our partners that you? guest: people were really disgusted by the process by which a number of bills were forced through in the past congress, almost as much as the content. the idea that we did not have an opportunity in some cases to read these things. on the cap and trade bill, they added 380 pages at 4:00 a.m. on the day of the vote. people were angry about the way that health care was forced through. speaker presumptive john boehner is promising a three-day online posting of the bill before is voted on. i would hope for more on major pieces of legislation. i hope the minimum we can get is what he is promising. host: all the other bullet points that he has here are process oriented. but americans read bills, the next is comprehensive bills.
is this what you are looking for, the framework changing? guest: i think that you have to fix the process first so that we can get better outcomes in terms of policies, and i think he is on the right track when he says that we need to operate this congress in a different manner than the way it has been run under democrats with nancy pelosi, and other republicans in the past. which was a very closed process where they forced things through. i think it really does show that he understands what people are angry about when he talks about changing the way congress works up front and not just grab the reins and taking control and autocratic way that made people so angry. obviously the process reforms will not have great value unless they lead to policy changes, but having a more open process when there are so many activists engaged will lead to better policies and less spending and better decisions. up-front you have got to get better rules and play, and we can use those process reforms
for better politics. host: one of the early decisions congress will have to make is about the debt ceiling. here is john boehner talking on abc after the question about the debt ceiling. >> the next congress looks like one of the first early test will be facing the debt limit, the way the candidates oppose that -- how would you achieve that? >> we will be working that over the next couple of months. host: and organizing press conference right after the election. "we will be working on that all over the next couple of months"? guest: is a very challenging issue. on a short-term basis, you cannot define all the spending cuts that you need. there is inner shut in the federal government. so when we do set the debt limit, there are some things that can be done bookkeeping increase flexibility
and buy some time. will congress said that it needs to be done so we will do it, or will they use that as an opportunity to say, look, if we are going to take a difficult vote to raise the debt limit, we need to buy some cooperation from the white house to agree that we can cut spending, that we can address some of the immediate and long-term challenges so that we do not need to do this again soon, so we can begin to turn the tide and lower debt, without raising taxes. i think it is hard to imagine a scenario where they will not increase the debt limit, but i think it is important to use that as an opportunity, as leverage for a broader discussion about where we are and really to give the white house to come to the table and discuss meaningful spending reductions. i think we have a real opportunity next year for bipartisan compromise along the lines of the historic balanced
budget agreement of the 1990's, and i hope that president obama will react to this election the way president clinton reacted to the 1994 election and do that in a constructive way. host: we begin in kansas city, missouri. sherry on the democrats' line. caller: one of the things that really bothers me about your organization is that you are like a front group for the biggest corporations. the top 2% that you are trying to fight for these tax cuts primarily are the people who outsource our jobs and to pay no taxes. by closing the tax loopholes, we could cut taxes on small business by 10%. but the people like -- guest: what do polls? caller: you know --
guest: what loopholes? caller: you know, they have been going on for decades. george bush gave businesses incentives to move their jobs overseas. these are the so-called small businesses you are trying to protect, not the american businesses. guest: that is false. we are funded by ideologically committed individuals. we get very little corporate support. less than 10% of our funding comes from corporations. you are using talking points that i don't think apply. we are advocating lowering the deficit, getting the cost of government back in line. i think that in particular, our regulatory agenda of yo reducing the cost -- the official estimate from the office of advocacy is that
federal regulation now costs $ 1.75 trillion in compliance costs. for small businesses, it costs tens of dozen $500 per employee per year. -- it costs $10,500 per employee per year. we believe philosophically in what john kennedy believed, that a rising tide lifts all boats. we believe everyone is better off. host: overall, do you believe the u.s. tax code needs fundamental reform? guest: we would love to see fundamental tax reform host: what would that look like? guest: i think the principles of transparency and taxing income once and only as close to the source as possible are the best principles for determine what the base should look court and what the rate should be, which in my view is flat. the movement over whether we should have a sales or flat tax, i think that is a basically
obsolete 1. we should have a flat tax in the short term, and if we ever repealed the 16 , which have a sales tax. at a flat rate on a broad base, -- if we ever repealed the 16th amendment, then we should have a sales tax. we have a long way to go to get rid of things like the capital gains tax and the death tax. there is a lot of double and triple taxation now that causes huge distortion, and there is a lot of hidden taxation, for instance with the corporate tax, which gets passed to individuals. there is a lot of room on tax reform. we need to start by holding the line all all these tax hikes at a scheduled for january 1. that should not be an end goal. we need to talk about broader tax reform. host: is there any country that does it better in terms of
taxing appropriately to support the kind of government that works, encouraging prosperity for businesses, etc.? guest: there are about 25 countries globally that have the flat talks. -- the flat tax. they've been great in economic responses to the foreign investment that floods in. hong kong, the flat tax is very efficient. that has been deleted and that the center of the world. host: berkeley springs, west virginia, car of on the republican line. caller: i have changed my allegiance from the republican party to the tea party. i have a warning for all these folks we elected to congress. if you do not do something about shrinking the government at lowering the debt, you will not be there long. i would like to say something about your first topic, about this country being exceptional. yes, we are an exceptional
country, but we have organizations in this country that are chipping away, like the aclu. they are the most dangerous group in this country, and they are chipping away at what has made us a great country, and i am hoping one day the "washington journal" will add a number for the tea party, because we are a growing organization and we are only going to get better. thank you. host: let's pick up on the last comment. what do you see as the future of the tea party along with the republican party overall? guest: i think the caller is exactly right. the tea party is now a potent third force in american politics. it is not loyal to the republican party, per se. in the election, the tea party activists came out and did a huge amount of work to defeat
democrats, but they did that because they were so concerned about the growth of government under democrats, not because they trust republicans, who did rather poorly on the same measure of fiscal responsibility when they were in charge four years ago. i think the key party activists were optimistic that republicans really get it this time and will deliver on fiscal responsibility, but they're watching carefully and closely. if republicans do not deliver this time, if they go back to the same business as usual on the things like year marks and overall federal spending, or any of the other key fiscal issues, the tea party will turn on them. there is not much question about that. they are loyal to ideology, not to party. host: "the washington times" leads with an opinion piece, "michael steele must go." does your organization have a concern about this? guest: we do not get involved in
that at all. from what i have seen, michael has done a fine job. that is a decision for the committee to make, and has nothing to do with us. host: how about leadership inside congress? "the washington times" front page -- do you have a position bachmann vs jet had -- jeb hensarling? guest: pattison that we do not weigh in on. i think she did a fine job. host: the policy interests after their success -- akron, ohio is
next. mike, it independent line. caller: good morning and thank god for c-span3 i have four questions, if you could answer perhaps to the dope or three of them. first of all, how can a grass- roots organization support trickle-down economics? i can see why people like you and dick armey and the cooke brothers do, but the rank and file just boggles my mind. number 2, all of you are aware that the british tea that you were drinking was bought and paid for by china. third, can small government, in such a large diverse country, with so many big businesses buying up smaller ones and the strongest military in the world should be before and by the people? my last question, will the tea party become the tail that wags the dog of the gop? host: thanks. grassroots and trickle-down economy?
guest: this is not a radical new idea. john kennedy understood that a rising tide moves all boats. it creates more opportunity, more jobs, and i think that is a formula that will work, unlike what we have been doing with failed stimulus spending and big government regulation and intervention the the market. people believe in the free enterprise system. host: number 2 was british tea paid for by china. guest: i will pass on that. its coat is a good subject to talk about china's overall. -- it's a good subject to talk about china overall. guest: it is not stable for the long term. it will reorient towards domestic consumption and they will raise living standards, so they will stop being as export-oriented as they have
been. they have to manage that in a way that will not ignite inflation domestically, which will be a major challenge for them. when they do that, but we'll have a challenge in the u.s. because we will not be able to run such an enormous budget deficits. foreign demand for treasurys will not be able to support it at that point, and i do hope that we do not get a bond market crisis. i hope that we cut spending in the interim. so that when china does restructure, which can withstand that. stay with china, the treasury secretary has been trying to pressure them with regard to their monetary policy. what are your views on the policy of that? guest: china has to manage a very difficult transition to a domestic consumption without run away inflation. i do not think pressure from the united states is helpful for that, and it is also dangerous that we threatened trade retaliation, because we could ignite a trade war. i think that we need to back off
a little bit. host: you talk about the tea party and the gop earlier. the test of a small government with a large military? guest: i think the defense needs to be on the table for cuts, but some conservative groups think you need to spare defense. i think if we're serious about cutting spending, everything needs to be on the table. there is a lot of waste, a lot of unnecessary weapons programs, and i do think that needs to be on the table. that said, we cannot cut the fence and only defense. i think is reasonable for republicans to reject that from the white house. it needs to be part of the answer but not the whole answer. host: "the washington post" reported that americans for prosperity spend $1.3 million on campaigning this year, 96 percent of that to republican candidates. we're talking about policy objectives with phil kerpen.
this is dale on a republican line. caller: thank you for c-span. three quick points. one, we need to get back to where we are supposed to be -- and god we trust -- in god we s.ust on our monetary fund' if we do not trust in god, we are going nowhere. number two, you made a point about defense spending and you had several callers talked earlier about how great other countries were. one of those reasons those other countries are so great is because our gross domestic product expenditures on their defense -- they spend less than 3% on their gdp on defense because we are defending them with power bases. that is a true point. -- with our bases. that is a true point.
the washington monument -- that will take you back to -- and i am not a religious fanatic, but i am a believer. and god is what made this country great host: thank you, dale. god in american politics? guest: well, there are a lot of very religious people engaged in the political process. i think that is a good thing, but i think the basic principles that we need to have in government, the principles of limited government, of government staying out of our lives, our principles that are really universal. people that are secular and religious ought to be comfortable with a government small enough not to interfere with whatever they want to do in their private lives, so i hope that we can build a consensus for the types of libermalimited government politics that we would like to see. host: everyone who looks at the situation with the u.s. federal budget and our deficit and debt
talks about the impact of an aspect of it. there is an editorial in open with the new york times", now that -- in "the new york times," specifically, what will he do for up -- from the policy perspective of your group, entitlement programs, what is your prescription? guest: i think paul ryan's road map for america's future, really the only serious attempt at solving the entitlement problem while keeping an overall government at a manageable size. i think that needs to be the starting point for a conversation on this, and i believe it will be if mr. ryan is the chair of the budget committee in the house. i think in the long term, we have got to get back to personal accounts for social security. that is the only option that can give workers a better deal than what they have right now.
cutting benefits and raising the retirement age and taxes make an already bad deal for workers even worse. the real solution, the one that will get people to build a nest egg that will give them a prosperous retirement is to slowly transition into a system where money is invested and gets a real return for a better retirement benefit. host: martha, democrats line from flint township, michigan. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a question, but then i would like to make a statement. what is your position about unions and minimum wage and all those kinds of gains that unions gain for the worker? guest: i think there was clearly a need for labor unions when they first arose, and they did enormous amount of good in improving working conditions and the lives of workers in this country, but i think they have got away from that and have become largely political activist organizations that support democratic policy objectives without regard to
what actually benefits workers. in many cases, they have pushed companies into bankruptcy and out of business by having such over the top the man's -- over the top demands. but at what happened in the airline industry. that has become a real disconnect between unions and the interests of their workers, and that is why they are looking to force people to join who do not necessarily want to join, by changing laws like these so- called employee free choice act. union leaders need to take a hard look at what they have been doing and offer real value to workers so they would want to join rather than trying to force people to join and be largely a political activist organizations. host: martha, my apologies. i pushed the next button and you had a statement. this is josh, cambridge, new york, republican line. caller: i am a libertarian, but i lean more towards republicans
and liberal democrats because i think liberalism is a brain disease. you are a really sharp, smart, a brilliant guy, and i cannot agree more with all the things you're saying. what do you think about getting rid of the federal reserve and with this inflation of the american dollar, which clearly caused the great depression? also, i know a lot of tea party years, and they are genuine nice guys. it is not that we hate barack obama and we want to tear our government down, we kind of understand that there is a left- right paradigm between republicans and democrats, being two different wings of the same bird, being powered and funded by these big corporations. it is basically fascism when the corporations sell them to , hi.overnment and say h they take trillions about tax
dollars and dump it to the bankers' hands. i can littoral remember news stations going up to banks and saying, ok -- i can literally remember news stations going up to banks and saying, are you giving out loans? and they say, we reversed our banks, new offices, new windows. and they're going, the government never told us how to spend that money, and they still were not giving loans to all these people. we paid back all the bad loans whether we like it or not. we pay off our debt to them. host: let me jump in. thank you for your call. guest: i think monetary policy reform is enormously important. i agree with you that the fed intervention in policies have made things much worse than better. they think they can eliminate the business cycle, and there intervention has caused enormous asset bubbles and collapses. the housing bubble was a product
among other factors, but primarily a factor of excessive money creation, keeping the rate as low as it did for as long as they did. now they are doing more of the same, and it will create another bubble. we are repeating those same problems. i think we should look at monetary reform that gives the fed a much narrower mandate, grow the money supply at a constant rate of increase and stop trying to manage the business cycle. i would like to see monetary policy reform be on the congressional agenda. i know there are some republicans who agree with that. host: a, from yesterday, "pelosi delivered." the need a response. nancy pelosi has been not only a master of the house but in moving force for generations to come. the gop that demonized for will not succeed in the undoing those
changes. with a legislative toward a force from somebody who plainly believes that the purpose of politics goes beyond serving the self-interest of politicians, from the stimulus that averted a second great depression to wall street reform to the transformation and expansion of college student aid, polizzi and the president have written more landmark legislation that anyone in nearly half a century. harry reid did his best in the sclerotic senate, and a critical moments change squeaked by the republican blockade." guest: he is right. nancy pelosi and the democratic congress passed a takeover of the industry, created the most powerful agency in the pro- government, the consumer protection financial bureau, which has sweeping powers to regulate about every financial transaction anywhere in the economy. the past the health care bill that in my view gives politicians and democrats more control over health care than
patients and doctors. from their perspective, these accomplishments -- from my perspective, outrages -- are likely to last for a very long time in for bob goods are not able to somehow undo that. it will be very difficult to undo that was brought about in the white house because he can veto a repeal of these measures. i think the democrats are paying -- are playing a long game here. obama said we are going to take our lumps this cycle, but we're playing and long game. margaret thatcher was never able to take on the national health service in britain for all the other privatization that she did because the national health service is the third largest employer in the world, after the chinese army and the indian railroad. it creates a huge political constituency, and we will see the same thing here if they're not undone pretty rapidly. all that could come down to the 2012 election if barack obama does not budge on any of these
things. we are in a very high-stakes environment for the long term, and these programs may stand for the long term, and they may change american life. it is hard to disagree with that. as much as i disagree with these policies, they may in fact really alter american life for a long time. if they do, certainly they to polizzi, who believes in big -- certainly nancy pnancy pelosi, o believes in the government, accomplished it. we'll see. i would not count on it. i think we need to keep the heat and the pressure on congress to revisit this as well. host: about 10 more minutes with phil kerpen from americans for prosperity. rachel is next on the independent line. caller: yes, we know that china
helped fund the wars in afghanistan and iraq. but then you find out that bush made deals with china so they could mine the gold in afghanistan. our soldiers are over there risking their lives so someone can get rich off bad deals that we made. to think we are over there protecting these commies and our boys are putting their lives on the line -- what do you think about that with your tea party? guest: i am not familiar with this issue. i do not know about any deal that was made with china about gold in afghanistan. foreign policy is really outside our area anyway. host: this your ass, "what do you think will happen with the working programs -- this view were asks -- quote what you think will happen to the working programs?"
guest: i think we could do with many fewer federal workers. you could do it with retirement incentives, simply not replace departing workers. we have right now in the federal work force the same thing we have in the private work force, which is a lot of baby boomers who are close to retirement. we have a historic opportunity to reshape the federal work force in a way that will require a few if any layoffs. i think there's a way we can transition to a smaller, leaner, more transitional government that it regulates less without having mass layoffs of federal workers. we happen to be in the fortunate position where a lot are due for retirement. host: darcy, democrats lied. caller: good morning. my concern with the tea party -- d'arcy, democrats line. caller: good morning. this country will not begin until every american comes together to make it great.
my concern with the tea party -- if you have to go on a job and do an interview, they ask a lot of questions. the tea party did that on a lot of candidates that they chose. i understand about -- what you do not research or anything, you did not research on health care where the next year 85% of the money would be returned back to the customer if an insurance company does not use all that money. you keep saying policies. a lot of americans do not understand policy, period. you have to point out policies that you do not like. i feel that you guys were not around when bush -- the tea party needs to stand up for what they really believe or what they actually want, and that is all i have to say.
thank you. guest: we were around and we were major critics of spending during the bush years. we did a national ending expressed or. -- express tour in 2006. we were critical of spending under president bush. we got a lot more adherents over the past couple of years as the fiscal problems have accelerated, but we have been out of this -- we have been in this for some time. the tea party activists have dug into the details of these policy proposals and legislation that has passed. i know many activists actually read the health care bill, they split it up in some groups to read different sections to understand what was in there, which was more than members of congress did before they voted for it. something like the medical loss ratio -- i think most tea party activists understand that regulation that restricts profit restricts capital formation, the restrictive lot of economic growth that benefits the economy overall.
it is not that they do not know about provisions like that, it is that they do not agree that as a proper role for government. i think the understanding of legislation, especially health care legislation, which creates hundreds of new federal bureaucracies, can interfere with patients and doctors. that is the real crux of what people objected. that is really understood by activists. i personally think they are right in their opposition. host: in addition to his role with americans for prosperity, our guest is also an opinion columnist for fox news.com. i am wondering, since one of the races you target was a brick boucher of it -- was rick boucher -- net neutrality dead? guest: i think that was really
about cat and trade. -- about cap and trade. he had an interview in the roanoke times last week where he said that there are these signs all over the district at -- it is unfair because i have a four- step model process to explain my vote. when you need a fourth step process to explain a vote, you will have to trouble getting that message across. that was a bad vote and i think cap and trade had a huge setback. on net neutrality, the most significant step tuesday was the aggressive change campaign to become a forward left-wing organization. they had a pledge to support net neutrality, signed by 95 candidates. all 95 candidates lost. they went 0-95 on people who thought that was an important issue to sign a pledge on. that is an enormous political
signal that there is no grounds wel supportsl. i hope that chairman genachowski is paying attention to that and will not disregard the will of the people and congress and do it by backdoor reclassification. host: greg, the republican line. caller: susan, you are my favorite host for one thing, and the man that you have on there today did not, nor did you, answer the question as to what was on the top of "the washington -- the washington monument. the man that was on there, we could have used them in the house to filibuster. he is great. thank you. host: text for the call. -- thanks for the call.
do you know what is on top of the washington monument? guest: i think it is a wiwinged liberty. host: who most influenced your thinking? guest: my long term mentor was steven moore, who now works for -- and host: are your parents conservative? guest: my father was conservative, my mother was very liberal. host: next call. so i went on the website, and he was against the president from day one as far as his policies when. there was a meeting in june of this year where the oil people,
the natural gas people, you had al people in the shipyard people -- so the richest of the rich got together in june, and they were planning on how they were going to handle the 2010 elections. they are going to meet again in january for the presidential elections, so of the 200-some people that were there, every last one of them were millionaires and billionaires. do you know anything about this? guest: yes, i was at the meeting that you are talking about. it is an off-the-record meeting, so i cannot speak about the content that was discussed, but i can tell you that the idea of donors on the right and court meeting and talking about ideas and policy priorities is really
not nefarious and it is really nothing new. types of meetings like this have gone on for a long time across the political spectrum. there are a number of problem once on the left, with groups like the democracy alliance and other umbrella organizations. i do not think that people who have money should be excluded from getting involved in the political process. ine ideas that they believe an a. the ideas that people can get out there and make their decisions about the ideas, we had a $4 billion election cycle here. it was about $2 billion on each side. and that every idea on every side got out there. democrats and left-wing organizations outspend republican and right-leaning organizations in house races. people voted for republicans anyway because they agree with the ideas they were hearing on the right. it is not something to be feared, it just means that all the ideas get out there into a
marketplace of ideas, and i trust the american people to select the ones they agree with. host: that is it for our time. thank you very much for being here this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: we will be back with our next guest, michael kinsley. in-his weekend on "booktv's depth," jonah goldberg, editor at large of national review online, discusses the conservative movement and the next wave of leaders on the right. join our conversation with your calls, emails, and tweets sunday
at noon eastern on "booktv." >> this year's student cam video documentary competition is in full swing. washington d.c., through my lens. upload your video before the january 20 deadline for your chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. there is $50,000 in total prize as per the competition is open to middle and high school students' grades 6 through 12. for all the rules and how to upload your video, go online to studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: hello, michael kinsley. michael is now a columnist at politico. we have seen him over the years in various posts as he has been commented on this town for years. i tell people that you argue
against the concept of american exception was in but did not expect that did not explain your reasoning. guest: well, what is to explain? i was trying to make a point in this column not that america is not a great country, but that the concentration on it being the greatest country ever, and people's insistence on that, as a negative side, which is that americans sometimes think this gives them a free -- exceptional as a means they have a free pass, and we can invade any country we want, ignoring the u.n., various treaties that we have signed. and we can spend as much as we want and run up a government deficit, a national debt that people will be paying off for generations, and that we are not
exempt from the rules of mathematics, among other things. host: how are you processing what happened on tuesday? guest: well, there is not a lot to process. it is rare that an election sort of leaves the pundits with nothing to say, so clearly people rejected -- i think wrongly, but it is a democracy -- the obama agenda, or the parts of it that came up in the first two years, mainly the stimulus and health care. host: why do you say wrongly? guest: because i favor both. host: what do you think the stimulus has done? guest: well, you pour $800 billion into an economy, and jobs are created.
there is a debate going on about how many jobs were created, but it has to have helped. some people think it was not enough, and some people think it was a necessary at all. it was unnecessary at all. i think the street keynesian thing, you put money into the economy, and that was supposedly the lesson of the great depression. i think it was -- well, i think we had to do it. it started out in a very bipartisan way. the bush administration was gearing up to do something like that and had started doing it. i would have done it differently. i think the idea of taking the money and cutting the fica tax -- the social security tax for
employers and employees -- it would have been a tax cut, which would have made it hard for republicans to oppose it. that fight the tax is a tax on the decision of a worker -- that fica tax is a tax on the decision of the worker and an employer to create a job, so it would directly improve the jobs picture. so that would have been my preference. but no one asked me. host: let's stay with the u.s. economy. alex franklin is sitting on two separate panels. one is with pete domenici. she is also a big part of the big debt commission. both are due to release reports. given the current state of politics and the disagreement between democrats and republicans on what programs are important, how do you see the work of these commissions
influencing things? guest: commissions can do two things. they can take something that has to be done that ought to be done that they do not want the -- that the congress of people do not want to support and sort of give them cover, as they say. and then it can also sometimes give cover again to put decisions off that they do not want to make. this is the first one, and, you know, it is a little bothersome, sort of anti-democratic, the idea that on a really important issue we should ignore politics and let a bunch of older wise men and women make the decision for us. but if it works -- host: a two-part question, and then we will go to calls.
how do you feel about the state of our country today? guest: there is a piece i wrote that reflects -- well, i am a pessimist by nature, i suppose, but i'm also pessimistic because -- about our country a little bit because i do not seem to be willing to grapple with certain problems. you know, i even the national debt and the entitlements and everything -- if you add it all up, it is a few percentage points of gdp, and it would put -- if we could do this, which we cannot -- if we could take 5% of gdp and just take it away and use that to solve all these long-term problems, it would push us back to -- i do not know, i have the spreadsheet from yesterday. it would push us back to our
life style of 1987 or something. or 2007. life was not bad in 2007. it should not be beyond us to solve all these problems. but i sort of worry that it might be. host: where do you see us, the trajectory of the next two years? guest: well, nothing is going to happen legislatively, but the economy seems to be coming back a little bit. that is the question. is it going to be another double dip? i do not know it, let's ask the pessimist -- what is the one bright spot -- i don't know. host: let's ask the pessimist -- what is the one bright spot for the country?
guest: technology. you're using an ipad, i say. i think there will be great things come along that will improve our productivity. host: i use that to look up questions that the viewers were talking about in the last segment, which is what is on top of the washington monument. i think the caller was probably -- on the internet, it suggests that all four sides of the obelisk at the top of the washington monument have different inscription's. guest: i was puzzled by that. i thought he meant a statue or something, and i was pretty sure that there was not. host: welcome to our conversation on this friday morning with michael kinsley.
caller: good morning. michael, i am very disappointed in the american people and the way they voted midterm. what has me most upset is, i guess the fraudulent projection that the tea party and the republicans put forth on the american people. by that, i mean that the tea party claimed to be against the spending, and i do not know what happened to them, but it was bush and republicans that were all spending for eight years and they put nothing on the books. they pay for nothing. they ran up the debt, a drop in obama's lap, and then they blamed obama for what they had done. i have one more point to make. this issue about bailouts -- tax
cuts for corporations have been going on since the 1980's with reagan. we do not know exactly how many millions of corporations filed for all those tax cuts, and a tax cut is a mini-bailout. if they are against bailouts, then they should be against those tax cuts, and they have not even paid what was due on the cut that they originally got. host: thank you very much. we have to go. guest: she makes a fair point, i think, which is that a tax credit or tax cut for a corporation or an individual is essentially a subsidy to them. that gets a lot of people riled up, but it is true. i think a lot of corporations took advantage of that, as they should, for their shareholders.
if we allow it as a country. took advantage of everything they could. host: how do we stimulate jobs? guest: well, as i was saying, i think the way to do is pure keynesian -- put money into the economy and not try to have this little special break and this little special program. the democrats like programs, and the republicans like tax cuts. and both of them cost money. i liked alice rivlin cost idea -- go to the problem, which is creating jobs, and lower the tax on the decision to create a job, which would be the fica tax. host: we are also getting mixed messages, that consumer spending has dropped, and therefore there
are not companies producing things that we need to buy. how do we both spend in order to prop up the economy and savor properly? guest: it's a tough problem, but it is one we bought ourselves into. host: how so? guest: well, by living beyond our means and running up this large government debt. reagan said it, and he was basically right. an individual cannot do it indefinitely, and neither can the government. having said that, reagan did not go act on it. but i guess with the help of newt gingrich's congress, reagan did. and the technology, which also helped bail out the economy last time. they did it. so it is doable.
host: ohio, matthew, republican cecum i have one question for you. last week politico ran an article about sarah palin canceling states with john handy and marc levin -- with sean hannity and mark levin, and it turned out to be a lie. is that your company's policy to lie to the american people? guest: well, i work for politico, and i will look into it. it's certainly not the policy to lie. host: what you think about sarah
palin, her immediate future? guest: her immediate future is to make a bundle of cash. her long-term future, i think the bundle will get smaller and smaller. i do not think she has any political future. host: why not? guest: well, for a variety of reasons. the establishment republicans wish she would go away, and also the press i think, which created her, is going to get sick of her. the story always has to change. that is one of the cardinal rules of the media. and the media also tends to take sort of exciting scenarios and exaggerate their likelihood. it is very exciting. as a journalist, i would love it if she ran, but i think all of the speculation now is just --
host: on friday we always wait for the labor department numbers. the most jobs in october with education and health-care sectors leading the way. but the unemployment rate by a households remains at 9.6% for the third straight month. the labor department said friday it survey of employers showed a net gain of 151,000 jobs last month, the most since may. wall street and now -- wall street analysts expected a smaller gain. guest: would you call that, a be-plus report? the -- host: i have an ongoing twitter feed here. a number of people who follow you regularly have been tweeting questions to ask how you are feeling, how you are doing?
guest: that is because i have parkinson's, and i'm doing pretty well, i think. host: someone mentioned a cutting edge treatment and wonder how that is going. guest: well, i had brain surgery five years ago, and has gone very well. and thanks for your concern. host: kalamazoo, michigan. republican line. caller: i would like someone to explain to me with all this rigmarole why is that we do not want to tax the malta million people -- the multi million people that have millions and millions of dollars, but we always want to cut the middle man, a senior citizens, and what they have worked for otherwise. when i got on the job force, i had no choice, i had to pay
social security. it is not my fault that the government stole from social security and put us in danger. why is it that they do not tax the big shots? is it because they get money in their pockets so they can do this outlandish parties and stuff, and they are afraid to tax the billions of people that they owe that much money so they will lose their support so they can get back in? money talks, and most of us, the more money you can put in, not taxable, into whatever party is, i am disappointed in all of them. host: a couple of things there -- first of all, the future of social security and the influence of money. guest: my view is basically the caller's view, that money talks.
i agreed with the supreme court on citizens united, the case that sort of unlocked all this money, big corporations and unions have free-speech rights. but i believe in the first amendment and i do not think there's anything you can do about that. but there is no question that money talks. guest: on social security, its future? guest: well, the republicans are going to try to revise privatisation, which i think it's a terrible idea. i would encourage them to try it. that's it. host: you wrote a column in october about daniel patrick moynihan. why were you thinking about him?
guest: they published a book of his letters and notes to himself. he was the senator from new york for many years, and before that he was an intellectual professor at harvard. although not a very professorial type. this book is wonderful, and it really captures him that makes you think who in the senate today could produce something likethis, a life's work this? who in the senate today is sort of an interesting person with ideas? host: what is the answer? guest: well, i could not think of any in particular. host: do you think the american political process to attract different types of people, or has society changed? guest: running for office must be so awful, and i think is
going to tend to attract more and more people who are just sort of narrow the ambitious. host: while we are talking about great political figures, do you have a president during your lifetime to look to to say that this -- guest: the one that works best, i have to say, is clinton. i would not say his use of the presidency was 100% admirable, but he did do a lot of good. host: next call from michael kinsley. good morning, waned. teacup it is an honor, mr. kn -- caller: it is an honor, mr. kinsley, i have been falling you for a number of years.
guest: do not say how many. caller: it seems to me in the last election, you had a lot of people voting republican, voting right wing, and it just boggles my mind that they are continuing to vote against their own interests. these are people that i'm sure benefit from things like social security, social security disability, medicare, yet they are electing candidates that will go up there and try to cut those programs, undermine them. i think they are also going to benefit ultimately from the health care, the president paused health care reform, and yet they are against that. -- the president's health care reform. and yet they are against that. what do we need to do to get the message out to these people that they are indeed not voting for people that will represent their interests? i will take my response off the air. thank you, michael. guest: you are welcome. thank you. it is a puzzle why intelligent people disagree with you.
and also why they would act against their own self-interest. but throughout people -- throughout history, people have. the medical reforms, unfortunately, there is a problem with timing. the good stuff has not had time to affect people, and i think -- well, if the republicans try to repeal that, i think that would backfire. host: next is laguna woods, california, mike on the independent line. seek out good morning, susan. good morning, michael. i used to enjoy "crossfire, quote and i read your paper, the reason one on american
exceptional was. once -- one thing that struck me as out of town with "crossfire" and your service for the "l.a. times, up was the term "teab agger," and it pointed to the jon stewart comment, that america works every day except for the politicians. since "crossfire" struck me as very civil, lively fun, it has generated quite a bit since the argument ad hominem, character assassination. it struck me that it happened with the transition from where it was liberal versus conservative, to democratic
operatives begal and carville, to conservatives. i could look at my watch and predict within 60 seconds it one of them, -- either one of them, were they on the show, would have -- it is immediately character assassination of democrats versus republicans versus liberals and conservatives. host: civility of debate on television? caller: on cable. guest: well, cnn sort of killed crossfire. john stewart was very influential in this because he went on "crossfire" and sort of
sandbag them by getting very serious and saying that "crossfire" was wrecking america because it was not a civil debate. i think in retrospect, maybe "crossfire" looks better. i thought crossfire was a vigorous debate that rarely got uncivil. as to this word "teabagger," i have gotten blindsided by it. i was not intending to insult anybody by using that word, although i was very critical of the tea party movement. but i was not aware that "teabagger" itself was an insult. host: beyond the cnn and local
qualifier," of the discourse on tv -- fox bested all of the news channels, getting a higher rating than the networks for news coverage. what about -- then cnn and msnbc for news coverage. guest: it is not a bad arrangement. i think fox news was a healthy development. i'm going to get in trouble for this. basically honest in that they are out front right wing, except that they then say fair and balanced in the end, which is ridiculous. and msnbc came along, and they tried -- i worked with microsoft when that arrangement -- of originally it was msnbc and microsoft together, and they struggle to find a format that work and lo and behold they
found it and it is being overtly liberal. i think it makes for good tv. host: you live in both washington, d.c., and washington state? where do you vote? guest: washington state. host: the project -- >> guest: that was nice. host: cameron, a republican. caller: thank you for taking my call and the morning, mr. kinsley. i have enjoyed your debate over the years. and i will say you are recovering and barely noticeable and keep of the good fight. i first wanted to debate you a little bit when he said there is sort of a zero sum game between tax cuts and government spending. i think the reality is if there was not so much government failed spending, the tax cuts would not even be an argument because we would not have the big bill to pay at the end of the month. as an example, the post office was established in 775 and they had 234 years to get it right
and it is broken. social security was established in 1935 and they had 74 years to get it right and it is broken. fannie mae was established in 1938 and they had 71 years to get it right and it is broken. war on poverty started in 1964, 45 years to get it right, trillion dollars confiscated every year, broke. medicare and medicaid establish 1965, 44 years to get it right, it is broke. host: i will stop you because we understand a trajectory of the remark. what is the bottom line? caller: i wanted to point out if you look at things by the history and the facts and not the political side, you can see that what the left has done to the country is build up the tax debt and it has got us nothing. host: let's have michael kinsley respond. guest: i am actively working on a piece now on what the government does right and what it doesn't do right and should lead to the market. the post market -- post office
is a good, small example. it is very dispiriting to go into many post offices. and i do think that that is the kind of thing that private enterprise does very well. delivering goods and services efficiently. what the government does well is writing checks. and these checks go to middle- class people, mostly, not for the poor. i mean, i could go through your list of others -- fannie mae is -- was always the scam. we had a piece in slate in 1997 saying that it was a scam and that it was inherent government guarantee although they denied it. and then they get in trouble, and of course, the government has to bail them out. >> one of the other items was the war on party. that leads back to your discussion of daniel patrick
moynihan who was an influential thinker in that time period. guest: he was labeled a both impish when welfare reform came along, trying to figure out where he stood. it was important that he was one of the first important thinkers about it. host: welfare reform is something -- first of all, it came during the clinton administration after the republicans took control of congress and it is something people -- republicans, in particular, are pointing to right now as an example after a big election how parties can come together to make change. what do you think about the welfare reform laws that were changed in that time period and the effect on society? guest: i have not followed that, i am ashamed to say, but my impression is that we no longer carry on about welfare of the way -- it is not robbing people
all the way it used to. it could be because issues come and go. but i think it is probably because of some of the things that they didn't like about it and were eliminated. host: does that suggest anything for the period we are going into? guest: yes, if they are going to find one thing they agree on both parties will be better off, i think probably, but i don't know what that would be. host: 10 minutes left with our conversation with michael kinsley. philadelphia. john, democrats' line. i think have to push the button. my thought. warren, ohio. mark, go ahead. are you there? caller: i am here. host: you have a question or comment? mccaw i have a question, and i am hoping michael with his expertise can shed some light on maybe what the future will bring. i think the initial posturing from both boehner and obama do
not show direction for cooperation working together. if we don't continue to build an infrastructure of manufacturing, i am curious as to how we will grow and come out as a phoenix from the ashes of our recession. guest: well, that's the question everybody wants to know the answer to. the manufacturing base, i don't think that reestablishing that is necessarily the way to go. i think we have to find ways to educate people and train them to do the higher level jobs, because they're always going to be people in distant lands who will do these manufacturing jobs cheaper.
you know, someone might have said at the turn of the 20th century, how can we live without farmers? they provide what we eat. but, in fact, farmers were -- i don't know, one third or something of the economy now and now it is one percent or 2%. host: this is a philosophical question from twitter -- guest: well, capitalism is a system that is supposed to turn self interest into the general interest. and it works very well. in that sense, he is right. host: philadelphia, here you are now. john, democrats' line.
the caller: when the republicans start bringing again about privatizing social security, i want you to write a column on what happened to the nra employees, the people who were retired -- enron employees win monday 401k was worth 400,000 and next was zero. what were they living on? fast forward to today. the supposedly evil nancy pelosi pushed through the house against a republican in transit since a bill that would have made it more difficult for american corporations to send american jobs overseas. it would have made it more beneficial for them to bring jobs back. the bill went to the senate and the republicans killed it in the senate. there is in the evil nancy pelosi, supposedly evil. right wing free-market
capitalists that got us into this economic tsunami we are in today. and it was clanton and phil gramm and the white house at the time -- clinton and phil gramm. what they are able to do, the evil free-market capitalists, they are able to convince the completely of this rusticated american public to build a gallows that the capitalists used to hang them. all you have to do is look at pennsylvania today. what did they do? it put in the senate a u.s. senator for six years that guy pat toomey, the club for growth pat toomey. whenever the pennsylvania voters get, they deserve what is coming to them down the road. guest: he referenced giving the rope to hang themselves. a very clever twist on it because he is saying the capitalists do that to ordinary working people. i think that is from trotsky or linen or someone, he said this is what capitalists would do for
communism. i don't know whether -- i am not going to get into whether that analogy makes sense or not. host: talking about people and politics, you wrote about eliot spitzer and remarking in a profile suggesting he had not read a novel in many years. guest: he says it to the person writing a profile. host: what are you reading? guest: i just finished "freedom ," the jonathan franzen novel that is getting all the publicity. other than that, i like trollop. it's good you do, after all these years? guest: it is just about politics. there are a lot of very heavy 19th century novels. he is not that.
host: the next call is from charlotte. calvin, independent line. what is on your mind today? caller: i want to tell mr. kinsley that i hear the tea baggers complaining about that particular word and it seems destined to me that nobody brings up the fact that they have no problem saying obamacare. i think that is just as much of an insult. guest: i think that is a good point, but could anyone explain why that is offensive? truly, i am curious, and it might -- nicknamed tea baggers? host: westwood, new jersey. caller: the fellow answered the phone who says to me, what would i talk about? what i wanted to talk about was that something we could agree on. what we could agree on is that life is good.
life is very, very good. tuesday, the turnout for american people, life is very good. on the abortion issue, which is a life issue that is very important to me, 30% said it was very important. more than 20 percent said they were pro life. the people will vote on tuesday were largely pro life. the pro-death people, which killed 52,000 babies. if we even chile are successful in killing all of -- if we are successful in killing all of the pro-death people there will only be pro-life people left to vote and that will be that. now, as far as tea baggers, it is insulting because the bag is something you throw away. obamacare, what is wrong with
that is de stripped out conscience rights, the stripped out what bart's tupac wanted, and lippen steve -- stepped out what bart stupak wanted. but here is the good news -- like as good an america has become a pro-life nation. hallelujah, thing good. -- thank god. guest: well, life is good in america. that is certainly something to keep in mind. with many people having terrible troubles. but for most americans, this is a nice place. host: our final call for you, michael kinsley, comes from deyton, rebecca, who is a democrat. you are on. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to know what's social -- what social security has to do with veterans and
widowers getting a cost of living adjustment? i talked to someone at the v.a. yesterday and in social security does not get a cost-of-living adjustment for 2011, it also in turn means that v.a. beneficiaries do not get a cost- of-living adjustment, either. i would also like to know, i have been taking social security for years and years. i don't know why it is such a big surprise it is in such a mess. my question on that would be, i mean, people come into the united states every day. they don't pay into social security but they can still get social security. is that true or not true? that is the end of my -- guest: my impression is that it
is exactly opposite. illegals come here and they work, and social security is taken from their wages but they never get to collect, either because they have been thrown out of the country or they are afraid to file for it, or what ever. so, i think you have that wrong. as for the cost of living adjustment, the cost of living didn't go up. the cost of living has been basically level in the past couple of years. so, that's why you don't get a cost of living increase. host: in our next segment we will look at the results in the state houses where republicans may historic gains in state legislatures this year. so final question, what does the 2010 election means for the future of liberalism and the united states? guest: gosh. you know, these things come in waves. that is the term they are using,
a wave. and they will see a wave the other way. when clinton got elected, i couldn't believe it. through my entire professional life -- it had been reagan and then bush the elder. and then suddenly democrats mattered again. that was nice. so, this, too, will pass. i think. host: michael kinsley, thank you for spending friday morning 1 "washington journal." we will be right back and out -- as promised our final segment will look at the results in state legislatures across the country.
>> this weekend, biographer nigel hamilton profiles the 12 president-elect is since world war ii -- their personalities, motivations, achievements, and failures. he is interviewed by a presidential historian. in this weekend on book tv on c- span2. >> saturdays, landmark supreme court cases on c-span radio. >> we always call this a voluntary statute. there is nothing voluntary about the bible reading. >> in part two of the abington school district versus edward schempp. he felt student should not be required to read from the bible before class. friday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span radio. washington, d.c., 90.1, nationwide xm channel 32 and
online at c-span radio.org. "washington journal" continues. >> louis jacobson is our guest from "governing" magazine and staff writer for politifact. what we will do is look at results in state legislatures. here is the headline from a piece you wrote. historic gains for gop. give me the scope. guest: well, really, it measures up to the gains from 1994 and from 1974, the post-watergate year. we have 19 gop takeover is so far. that could grow up to 22, i believe. actually, these often take longer to resolve because he had multiple members running. it recounts and even party switches can delay things. at least 19 for the gop.
one democratic chamber turned into a tie. zero democratic takeovers. and there are still three that are currently democratic held that you could not let to the gop. it could go up to 22. >> and the governors? guest: very volatile year. in some ways, a great showing for the gop, particularly in some of the early key states that are fairly large and swing states. you have the gop taking over pennsylvania, you have ohio, wisconsin, iowa. as a look forward to the redistricting. they gained a total of 12 chambers. flip a total of 12 chambers. but actually the democrats did fairly well, too. they successfully flipped -- it looks like five chambers. just came in this morning -- little bit of a florida situation with some recounts.
but it looks like the democrat is in a relatively good spot there. it had been a former gop state in terms of the governor. the striking thing about the election in terms of governors is if you add it up altogether, including the state of rhode island flit to a third-party candidate, and if you add it all together it works out to be a total of 18 flicked chambers out of 37, which is more than half. i can tell you more about why it is. host: to set up the conversation and invite them to take part. i will put the numbers on the screen and our twitter address and e-mail address. if you voted or switch your boat and made a decision to support a different party at the state level, call us and talk to us about why you did that, what was behind the decision making. an analysis of what happened in
your state legislature or governor's race, the time to focus in on that. and we will talk to louis jacobson about the implication of gop-controlled in the state houses. the policy front, especially fiscal policy, with some mistakes having fiscal issues, and second, redistricting, another aspect. let me, with that, returned to you on the implications of this. guest: i think you set it up really well. in the purely protocol sense, we are looking at a redistricting year coming up. the census will be finished shortly and the state breakdown will be announced probably in december. that happens every 10 years and the redraw lines but that the state and federal level for congress. not every state is affected because some have a nonpartisan system of drawing lines and others have made a single district, or maybe two, so it is not very possible to change how the lines are drawn.
but there are certainly a lot of states, particularly gaining and losing seats depending on population trends. the way it works is, if the census finds out your state is getting a larger share of the nation's population you will get additional seats, sometimes even more if it is really vast. in the past few decades, generally speaking, the sun belt has gained and the northeast and midwest has lost. those sorts of patterns will probably hold true for this coming year as well. but it is to know for sure in a month or so. host: ed gillespie heads up something called the republican state leadership committee. if you go to their website you can see that this is something they were actively involved in targeting, raising money, soliciting members and sending money to state races. when her republican saying, especially those involved in the
tea party movement and allies, we are in this for the long haul. talk about their level at the state level and the affected might have had on the races. become definitely effective. -- guest: definitely effective. a tough year for democrats given the state of the economy. but i think the total number of seats, 600 across the country. the amazing thing is even in some of the states where there is already a strong gop leader, you saw some fairly significant shifts. texas had a fairly even legislature -- sorry, i should say house chamber, about three or four seat margin, if i recall, and that group -- grew quite dramatically. in terms of the state legislatures, it really was a broad based shift. it is striking because you don't
necessarily think that a generalized anger with the federal government would necessarily translate into state contests but it certainly seems to this year. host: democrats have a similar state legislature committee. the energy level between the two -- how does a translator on the screen, as a look different? did the democrats get outmaneuvered? guest: you know, it is hard to say for sure. i think there definitely handicapped by the situation with the economy and the fact it was the first midterm of a democratic president, and the democrats held the senate and house as well. it was always going to be a tough challenge. to put it into context a little bit, i did three different takes of a handicapping of all 50 state legislatures. i did my first one around july of this year. at that point, i had found two striking things.
already at an early stage i found there were more chambers and play, largely democratic chambers, then basically more at that time than any time in the last five sake -- cycles i had taken a look at. usually in the past four cycles, including some fairly big wave cycles like 2006 and in 2008, you would see is split roughly equal. some gop chambers were at risk, some democratic chambers. but starting in july, first time i did it, was that strongly tilted toward democratic chambers totally at risk. very few gop chambers. i think the die has been cast at least the past six months or year or two.
host: state legislatures, there were seven republican house pickups. colorado, indiana the let's put that on the screen. cavallerano, indiana, iowa, michigan, montana, ohio, and pennsylvania. there were six a gop house and senate pickups. both legislatures. alabama, maine, minnesota, new hampshire, north carolina, wisconsin. aforementioned republican state leadership committee. 16 democratic-controlled legislature. let us look at the. arkansas, california, connecticut, delaware, hawaii, illinois, kentucky, maryland, massachusetts, nevada, new york, new mexico borrowed island, vermont, washington, west virginia. ironically our first call comes
from washington, d.c. carroll, a democrat. go ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to know -- this to me is a sad day in america, ok? but i would like to know how many tea party, tea baggers, or whenever they want to be called, gained in the state level and the senate and if they are going to stand true to what they believe in -- they want to do away with education and privatize social security and they want to bring back -- do away -- or do away with state tax. what is amazing to me -- middle- class bill even have -- don't even have to estate tax.
something i don't understand. poor people running around here saying what the republicans saying, do away with the estate tax. host: thank you for the call. of the 600 seats picked up by republicans, have you done analysis for tea party? guest: it is a little bit of a slippery term because some people may have not been affiliated with the tea party, or casually. i think it is definitely fair to say that the degree of energy from the tea party helped the gop in a lot of these states. at least in certain areas. i should say there are a couple of chambers vulnerable it that the democrats were managed to save. nevada senate, washington house, the illinois house, colorado senate, delaware house. all of those i had at risk but they did pull out. a state like delaware, for instance, folks think of the christine o'donnell campaign, which was a challenge for the
gop on election night -- turns out they lost it by 17 or 18 points, i think. that actually may have helped the democrats. it will cut both ways the probably on balance is was a good thing for the gop because they got large energy out of it. host: they write about this in "usa today." gop engineers historic shift. candidates sick about 650 democratically held seats -- candidates talk about 650 of the democratically held seats. a momentous year in american history. los angeles, california. republican. joe, go ahead. caller: yes. i am calling you from of the land of free and not. let me explain -- fruits and nuts.
let me explain something or maybe you can explain. we had a budget that was recently submitted. in this california budget they had a provision that they will get $5 billion from the federal government. they approved the government -- budget with a 5 billion gap and a contingency plan the federal government would provide them with the $5 billion. now that i see that the republicans have basically swept the house, where do you see california with its crazed communistic tight republic type policy. what he thinks -- when you think they would handle the $20 billion gap? there are a lot of angry unions involved in california politics. will the state senate and a lame duck session of congress provide california the bailout?
host: we were showing "the new york times" this morning. california shifted and so did brown. guest: i can't speak to the details. and general, obviously you will have a new very important role for the gop in washington. they made it pretty clear that they don't like the stimulus and a lot of the other obama policies. could we see changes on how the stimulus is done in going forward? entirely possible. of course, we still have a democratic president and senate. they certainly cannot unilaterally change it. but you could definitely see some changes coming. i should say about california in particular, that as a state where democrats did quite well. it has generally been a democratic state in the past two or three decades.
going into it maybe six months ago, it looks like it would be the best chance for the gop in california and quite a long time. they had a strong gubernatorial candidates who i guess ended up spending -- cs -- she spent $160 million of our own money. -- on her own money. and a strong statewide slate and they ended up being creamed basically. brown won by six or seven points. and i think they lost every statewide office. although it is possible the ag race is still too close to call but i think the democrat is ahead. so, we clearly have a case where it was very strong but not reach everywhere in the same strength. host: our next call is from new york. they won the governorship in the
dark and what about the legislature? guest: the spill have a very strong hold on the state assembly but they don't know who will control the state senate yet. that was a closed chamber last session. it evolved into a party flip during this session and there and it seemsut its like it will be similar. i don't know who will prevail. host: tim is watching this from oswego, new york. independent. caller: the first thing is the new york state legislature is a disgrace, both parties. they are horrible. and until somebody can take care of that situation, we are screwed. but my comment was i did vote for -- everybody a vote for this year, even if they were the majority candidate that one, i
voted jiging -- the republicans still have a lot to prove. but one of the things when i was listening to you, it is my understanding that 22 states passed the balanced budget amendment and only 11 states more need it to become an amendment. is there any sign of hope that with this republican takeover in state legislature and governorships that they may do it? >> it sounds intriguing if that is true. sometimes you have to pass all the states needed in a given time period, so i don't know if that is still valid. i could certainly see that as a possibility. you have a lot of states that are newly gop-controlled in the state house and senate and governorships, and there's a lot of energy. something the tea party i think would support. it is a plausible idea. it is just a guess. host: "the washington times"
highlights minnesota, home of the democratic farmer labor party. guest: interesting case. of the 24 chambers, i think, that i raised it as in play, or 25, i captured all but three that actually flipped. there were three that i said was not in play and a flip. one was the chamber and the state of minnesota. [laughter] so, yes, it did surprise me. i thought the one chamber would flip and i did not think both. at the same time you had the democrat, mark deyton, currently leading in the governor's race -- host: one of the two governor's races still not called. a three-way in minnesota. guest: yes, correct.
he seems likelier to win because had far more votes than say senator al franken was when two years ago they had a long recounts. he has a fairly large margin of comfort but it is not official yet. it was a general anti-incumbent tide apparently because fully was a gop governor and democratic state house and senate and now you would have the same thing. it seems that the voters seem ok with a divided government in that case. a fairly interesting point is there was a definite anti- incumbent theme in terms of the governor results. a total of 18, and looks like,
seats flipped. more than half. existing because it is a very similar number to 2002, which was the eight-year -- eight years since then and it is an echo election of that. what happened in 2002, series of budget crises in the states. voters were frustrated in terms of governors and it through 17, 18, or 19 out. states who are historically democratic lead gop governors and states generally -- the flip of that. and now those seats were generally opened this year, and they fled. host: this story by dow richardson in "the washington times" that suggest that state republicans in minnesota credit their success of campaign message of jobs and economic
growth and says amazing when the republicans johnson of message resonated in a state that has experienced relatively low unemployment compared to other missed work -- miss western states. -- midwestern states. sandusky, ohio. fenty as on the democratic line. a lot of interesting races in ohio -- betty. caller: i voted democratic. which, i guess i lost on all of them because we now have a republican house, senate, and a governor. host: why do you think that happens? caller: i don't know. i think voted against their best interest, which is my opinion. the thing is that today i read in one of the local papers, kasich said a statement saying if you don't agree with us, get out of a the way. a right to work state, abolished
income tax. he already said the school funding is not possible. he is going to change all that. where are we going? cordre was helping people with foreclosures and he is out and now we have dewine only worries about getting rid of health care. everybody voted against their best interest, and my opinion. guest: this brings up an interesting point. obviously the gop field like they got a pretty strong mandate, particularly in a lot of states like ohio where they want the governor and state house and senate and they will probably act on that. it is not popular in either two or four years, voters could throw them out again. we already had three consecutive change or wavy elections. 2006 when the democrats swept in, 2008 when they got 60-seat
senate majority and the obama campaign one, and now the gop swings back in 2010. i could entirely see it happening again in 2012. we don't know yet. if the gop is a smart they will try to enact things that are popular and pick their fights. if they don't, then there could be a backlash. host: there is a twitter follow critical to your analysis -- guest: there is definitely a gop wave across the country and a lot of places. and they get a huge amount of credit for that. they certainly have the opportunity, and they succeeded in a lot of places. it is striking that at least the
governorships -- not so much for congress but for governorships, you had i think fiber six states that would gop held blue states -- five or six states that were gop held or blue states. if connecticut works out what we think of them, democrats swept all six. it is not that it was a total anti-incumbent wave everywhere but i think there was an undertone, to use the same metaphor. host: do you agree from as " a from minnesota republican party chairman. local products -- local politics was not local these -- this year. guest: in a sense it is hard to parse the wording in that, is the state of the economy a local or national issue. you could argue with both but the gop did it a good job of seizing on the frustration with the obama and the democratic
congress, their policies, and virtually everywhere did better than they did certainly in 2008. host: -- guest: good question. i had them either tossup or lead republicans. i definitely had them in play. i see this as a case of a southern state where the democrats have historically been in power going back decades and decades, but slowly losing ground to the gop first in federal races, in the presidential race, senate races, house races, and to the state house and senate level. i think it was going to happen sooner or later just given the general trends of voters in that
state. but it was certainly a strong year for the gop. host: roseville, michigan. amanda, a democrat. caller: give me a minute. i get tongue tied when i am nervous. just try to explain to the democrats and liberals why there was such a way, is because if you are a republican, a conservative, and you know what obama stood for prior to him winning, and the democrats being in control since the end of 2006 and you saw what they did and what was produced and then obama came in and swung way to the last, republicans and conservatives don't want our country fundamentally changed. in a few years from now people are going to thank the tea partiers from the for sale in
the country because we did not want the country to become what it has not been although the democrats have been trying to change it for the past 50, 60, 100 years. we are trying to go back to the fundamentals of what this country was founded on a and a wave of that was swept through, something that will continue because that is what we need and that is what we want and i am very surprised that dingell is in in michigan and john conyers is an, corruption, corruption in the city of detroit and the surrounding cities. one more thing is that -- like as said, we don't want to change. obama represents a marxist socialist -- i don't know what you want to call it but that is not what america is and that is not what we stand for and the democrats, the liberals who want to say in that we are racist and all of that -- that is not what it is. that is because we love america and we love what it stands for,
how we were founded and we don't want those things to change. host: thank you. guest: certainly a lot of voters felt that way this year, and i think that is showing up in the results you saw. but there are lots of other voters who don't feel the same way. i almost see in two or four years what the cases. host: this is what the governors look like post-election. two are in play but at this point 29 republican, 18 democrat, and one independent. shelby township, michigan. tim on the democrats' line. you are on the air. caller: good morning. after that call from roseville, have to tell you, you have to change your call and my to democrat, independent, and parakeet. the best they can do for intellect is just a repeat what they are told on fox news which is owned by rupert murdoch, a rich kid from austria who inherited a business from his daddy.
what happened in michigan is republicans controlled both houses in lansing for 22 years and with their good buddy as governor of a tax cut michigan completely out of business and they tapped into the rainy day fund so when he was term limits if he moved out to california and jennifer granholm came into a state that was completely bankrupt. both houses controlled by republicans that would not work for her. they would rather see us lose our jobs and those are homes than to work with someone else. finally, in 2007 -- 2006, if you say 2006 is because you are a. 10. -- . 10. democrats were finally starting to take over the house and here we go, they elected all of the republicans again. right now the state of michigan because of the tax cuts -- it
costs you $536 a year to maintain your vehicle because the roads are so bad here. in order to fix the roads it will cost an additional $1 billion on top of the cost of fixing the road and when you drive down the road and you look underneath the bridge there is plywood to catch to the broken plight -- concrete from hitting your car. guest: i cannot talks this of the woods to the michigan roads situation but there are a lot of governors this year that will face serious problems. states gets hit especially hard because they are squeezed between -- having a balanced budget forced on you and a tax revenues have been down quite significantly due to the state of the economy. anybody taking office right now will face a load of problems. it is not a good situation to
be impaired if they can stick it out and the economy improves over the next couple of years they will probably do fairly well. that is what they saw in 2002. the class of 19 new governors who changed parties in 2002, most of them, not quite all, but most of them did get a second term because they caught the upswing of the improvement in the economy. so, even in states like kansas, oklahoma, tennessee, you saw democrats getting a second term in states like rhode island and connecticut and so for -- forth. democratic states use of gop governors getting a second term. so much is timing. a look bad right now and it might be bad depending on the economy, but if they can do well the next couple of years there is a pretty good chance a lot of these guys will get a second term. >> looking at governors. republican pickups and the 2010 election.
iowa, kansas, maine, michigan, new hampshire, gillette me start again. new mexico, ohio, oklahoma, pennsylvania, tennessee, of wisconsin, wyoming. sorry that we did not have the graphics for you. i what is one of those days of a rematch? guest: yes. not quite a rematch. when the second chance at governorship. a former governor and the state of iowa, he served, i think three terms as a gop governor in the 1980's, early 1990's. he was facing chet culver, one of the few sitting incumbents to be ousted. he faced a very tough economy and just didn't pull it out. pretty much decided a few months ago.
never manage to come back in the polls. i think people chopped up to, here's a guide, there were good times, let's give him a chance. >> in maryland there was a rematch between sitting government more and o'malley and bob ehrlich -- martin o'malley. -- going into the cycle it was thought to be a fairly competitive race. he held the governorship for four years. well known. but this is the case you did not see the wave crest and the more liberal states like maryland. o'malley, i did not think people ax and a love and adore him but they felt more comfortable with a democrat. host: texas. sherry, republican line. caller: good morning to both of you. i am sorry i sound so congested. i am getting a cold this morning.
i called in because i am registered as a republican but i usually don't like an independent. i pick of the person and their record. but not this year. not this year. i voted straight republican ticket. and it was just to sound a message to washington, to democrats. if we don't cut federal, state, county, and citied -- city government budgets by 30%, we are all going to be destroyed and devastated. and this country will never be able to recover from it. it is better to cut 30% now and take the hit and suffer the pain then to lose 100% down the road. and it is not too far down the road because the can as only going to get kicked another couple of years, and we are going to be in a really serious trouble. and i just don't see any possibility of the democrats and
republicans hearing our message out here. it is like we are talking to the wind. cut the budget. cut the spending by 30%. everywhere. at all levels of government. so at least we can save 70% of what we build up in this country for the past 250 years but is 70% saved is better than 0 percent of the states. host: thank you for your call. in the governor's race in texas, it was bought earlier on to be competitive with the houston mayor competing with the incumbent. but there was quite a spread in the end. guest: there was. just a really gop state in a really gop year. >> what does the legislature look like? guest: strongly republican. one chamber that was once close was now strongly republican. bill white, the democrat, very good candidate in a different
election environment he could probably prevail. but not this year. just the shape of the electorate and how frustrated they were with the national picture and a frustration with democrats. it was a very tough climb in the end. host: "the new york times" features the texas governor's race and right below it a story about florida where voters chose a ceo who is prepared to make cuts, at the wing that last caller. i am wondering what kind of legislature has there -- and guest: which state? host: florida. guest: scott. of all states, florida might be the strongest republican tide of any. not only did a fairly unpopular candidate scott wind fairly narrowly, by a point or so, but the gop won every single state
office and lived four seats in congress, which is the maximum they could probably do. so, it was just a real, real gop tide in this state. now, the challenge for here is i think, you know, a lot of voters and politicians agree in their heart of hearts that they need to cut. where did they cut, though? it is difficult because the public likes in theory to cut but in practice may not like what cuts were proposed. that is why it it was going to be tough in the next few years. everybody knows some cuts are going to have been made but it will be a real political fight, making sure voters are willing to go along with the cuts they're calling for. host: rick scott profiled in "the new york times" today. this is what they say about the 57-year-old newly elected governor in florida. venture capitalist with stakes
in health care, technology, and manufacturing companies. biggest campaign promise was 700,000 jobs in seven years. the state is fourth in population, and the biggest challenge as a governor they say is creating jobs and turning around an economy destroyed by foreclosures and decades of reliance on both real-estate and tourism. that is red spot, the gov.-elect of florida. -- red spot, the gov.-elect of florida. the next call is davis, california. this is peter on the independent line. caller: hi. i am wondering how many midterm elections actually swung toward the left in the last 20 or 30 years or so? host: the state or national level? caller: state or national. guest: 2006 is a great case in a point.
six-year fatigue with bush. a lot of frustration over the war. and the democrats gained seats quite significantly. i do not have numbers on top of my head about governorships but definitely gain did both, the democrats did. i think the democrats also had a good year in the first reagan midterm at the depths of the 1982 recession. i don't know exactly how many seats they gains and the federal or state level but there certainly have been. host: another new yorker. kevin on the democrats' line from kingston, new york. caller: i just have more or less a comment. you know, you see like what the elections that everybody -- then voted like a republican. -- they voted, like, republican. the republicans have put us in this position we are in right now. for people to go back -- i
guess when obama -- with all the agenda as he was trying to put forth -- i mean, when he started as president of the united states, they always voted no on everything with him. they never were trying to be cooperative or be bipartisan with anything. from the beginning the republicans said they would say no to every agenda he brought forth. as americans, we should stick by it or tried to look at or find common ground. we are so extreme on both ends, democrats and republicans, that we are not finding common ground and they are doing it for political gain. look at what happened with the midterm elections. their job, i guess, they succeeded in what they wanted to do but what are they going to do going forward with america? are we still going to be stonewalled, the promises they are setting forth? they won in these elections camouflaging themselves or coming through this tea party movement. they came back in and they gained in these seats. i think they continue to
deceive the american public. their theory of this trickle down economics has never worked for us. the eight years with bush. they made the rich richer and the rich took the money and ran and that is why america fell into the debt that it is in my now. i mean, obama came forth with a lot of good agendas and things to try to get us on track again. where would america be if he did not help out, the certain stimulus plans to have that he made for the american public so that they could have, given unemployment, he did extra money -- eight so we have to jump been for a response from mr. jacobson. guest: one point the caller makes is probably valid, which is that the voters were definitely frustrated and they were angry this year. and since the democrats controlled chambers of congress and the white house and majority
of governorships and a thin majorities of state houses and senate, they definitely took the brunt of that. but if you look at some of the polling, it seemed like voters broadly and not necessarily enamored of the gop, either, but they are the out party and it was time for a change and with a fairly high degree of unison singing did the other guy that shot. even though they don't necessarily agree with all the policy position but they were frustrated. host: "the orange county register" has a story about the prop. 25 debate. here is how brian joseph writes this morning. in a year of big republican wins nationwide, democrats here bucked the trend, regaining the governor's office, and a growing majority in the assembly. democrats will have won every
single ounce -- constitutional office in california this year but for democrats who control the legislature, nothing tops the passage of proposition 25. the have and comments? guest: don't know much about proposition 25, afraid to say. host: and "the washington post" talk about the school vouchers in colorado. our last call is from cleveland, tennessee. caller: we are tireds rhetoric. we are tired of people by king instead of trying to do good for the country. i have been a democrat for 42 years. i voted republican this year. i will never go democratic again i will never go democratic again