Skip to main content

tv   Mc Laughlin Group  PBS  September 11, 2010 5:00am-5:30am PST

6:00 am
from washington, the mclaughlin group. the american original. the american original. for over two decades, the somewhere in america, there's a doctor who can peer into the future. there's a nurse who can access in an instant every patient's past. and because the whole hospital's working together, there's a family who can breathe easy, right now. somewhere in america, we've already answered some of the nation's toughest healthcare questions. and the over 60,000 people of siemens are ready to do it again. siemens. answers.
6:01 am
seaman's answers they aren't always happy with me. they talk about me like a dog. >> that's how they treat him says the president. mr. obama exhausts organized labor. he fumes at republican opponents and their alleged negativism. >> yes, we can. remember that was our slogan? their slogan is, no we can't. [ laughter ] nope, no. no. >> 50 days to go in the name of the game is blame. blame the opponent.
6:02 am
keep the focus on him. for the incumbent president, the strategy is offensive. blast the republicans. the party of no. >> when it comes to just about everything we've done to strengthen our middle class, to rebuild our economy, almost every republican in congress says no. >> as a punitive positive yes merger, embraced by the democrats, mr. obama calls for $50 billion of new spending. infrastructure on roads, bridges, runways, but spread over many years and fully paid for, but how the $50 billion would be produced was not explained. this was not a stimulous proposal and chance of passing congress seemed to be minus zero. on thursday, the president called for other money measures, including investment tax credits, emphasizing restriction development, the cost to be met by closing so- called opholes of you guess
6:03 am
it, corporations. >> question, by the way, the word stimulous is apparently now not used. the president's job approval rating is low. historically so. did this week put president obama back on an upward track? pat buchanan. >> no it did not, john. there's no doubt he was in campaign mode and spoke more eloquently there. he mentioned john boehner and attacked him by name seven times and nobody in the country knows who john boehner is. secondly the mosque issue and the issue of the burning korans was a tremendous distraction all week. third, his proposal, some of which are interesting, credits like that. they are too little, they are too late. frankly some of his rhetoric, they treat me like a dog is getting pity me, it doesn't come off well. >> what is the political part
6:04 am
on obama's part? >> you have to put a face on the opposition and mr. boehner is a pretty good face. he has been in the congress since 1990. he was part of the gingrich revolution in 1995. he was video taped on the house floor handing out checks from the tobacco industry to members while they were discussing ending tobacco subsidies. he advocated in cleveland a few days before the president made this speech. he is advocating a return to 2008 spending levels and to the bush tax cuts. so what is different between what john boehner who would be the speaker if the republicans gain power and what george w. bush represented. so the president is trying to draw a clear contrast. it may be too little, too late. but it's one of the few tools he has left at this point in the game. >> boehner is what, one of 12 kids? he is an honorable guy? >> he -- >> kennedy was a big pal of
6:05 am
boehner. >> he has policies that got us into the ditch and he doesn't have any new ideas and he smokes like a chimney and spends time in the tanning bed. >> listen. >> he lives on the edge of a golf course. >> exactly. the reason now obama is turning his gunfire on to john boehner is that for years he has been demonizing president bush. that is no longer working. that doesn't have traction with the american people anymore. nobody knows john boehner, frankly nobody cares, even most republicans don't care about john boehner. interestingly, he could be speaker of the house if the republicans gain control, but as of now, look, john boehner this is a wash. the point is that he has been targeting -- obama has been targeting president bush for a long time. what is ironic and interesting now is because the economy is in shambles, because his poll numbers are low. 41% job approval, he is
6:06 am
reaching out to president bush. the small business tax credits, these were all bush endorsed policies, horror of horrors, but they were true. president obama is now former budget director, peter orszag made his very first public statement in support of extending all of the bush tax cuts for everybody. so i find it very ironic and interesting that it doesn't matter. i find it fascinating that once again we are getting an acknowledgment that bush was right. >> is there any other reason why he left the white house? wasn't there a lady? >> christine romer left. >> they said they want to get off the sinking ship? >> certainly the sinking ship. >> you think so? >> the economic team has -- there has been some on the economic team who have been making specific arguments extending the bush tax cuts. trying to reign in the deficit
6:07 am
and been ignored. >> will you straighten this out? >> this gets back to the original question. has president obama done enough this week to change the narrative? well he started. he has 50 days to go. if obama can get back into the kind of campaigning mode that we all remember from 2008, he can turn thisgot much to run on he doesn't talk about the healthcare achievement. he doesn't want to talk about his stimulous package, although it did alleviate some of the worst of the downturn and doesn't have much promise of the future except two more years like this. he has to run against something. he is running against a strong man. the only thing he has, he can't stand on his own record yet because he and the record is ba >> he is trying -- he is trying to draw a contrast with the republicans and boehner is pretty clear about wanting to go back to george w. bush.
6:08 am
and yes -- excuse me, i want to finish my point. the economic proposals are proposals that republicans would like, but is this republican senate going to support them? no. >> let me in here. exit question. we are going to spend a lot of time on politics. exit question. are obama's economic proposals a case of too little, too late for the midterms and about 50 days from now? or have they come back in the nick of time to save the senate and the house democrats? >> there's a couple of excellent proposals in there as monica said. also his own senate is not going to support him on the tax cuts, the bush tax cuts. >> too little or too late? >> those are important things. he's not going to get it. it is too little, too late. >> too late anyway. >> they aren't going to get them through, john. >> it's too little, too late to transform the economy by election day. it does expose the fact that the republicans won't support proposals that they're for and
6:09 am
it does set the stage for a lame duck session after the election that if the economy is in dire strengths, people may do something for the country. >> you can pile on the republicans for resisting this, obama is getting most of the resistance from his own party. you have a growing number of democrats in the senate and house that do not want to go down a more spending road, bigger government, the $50 million bill. the resistance is coming from his own party. >> the blue dog democrats disappearing from obama. >> like senator bennett in colorado. >> how many are there? >> 54 in the house. >> how many democrats are there? >> there are 240. >> 257. >> and 40 blue dogs? >> yeah. >> you want to answer the question? >> yeah, i think it's too little, too late. obama is trapped in doing
6:10 am
neither one thing nor the other. he has gone a full scale stimulous which democrats should do nor as he gone the other way. >> there's too much issue two, democrat wipeout? >> are democrats in the house and the senate facing a title wave, one that will sweep them out of control 50 days from now? washington street talk says yes. but don't blame the congressional democrats. blame obama and he deserves it, historically speaking. in politics it's a given that when voters cast their ballots it's on the basis of what the voters think of the president. that's what counts for how they vote. without exception, president's approval rating lagged below 50%, the dividing line behind congressional losses for the president's party and huge one, lose big at the ballot box.
6:11 am
so says independent analyst and correctly so. this is obviously bad news for the democratic leader. in fact, president obama's approval ratings are tanking. in april of 2009, the president's approval rating was 72%. one year and five months later, his approval rating is 45% and >> question, is this shaping up to be a wave election? meaning come november, we'll be waving good-bye to familiar democrats. i ask you eleanor. >> i don't think the president's approval ratings are in free fall. he's in the low 40s, which is better than where ronald reagan was and bill clinton was in their first term at a comparable time and they both won reelection. it is a wave election. it's not about the republicans. the best thing, maybe the only thing the democrats have going for them is a weakness of the republican candidates. candidates like sharon ankle in nevada, kim in colorado are
6:12 am
hurting the ticket on down and the anger that's in the country and the distrust of political leaders is not only aimed at the democratic party, also aimed at the republican leadership. all the energy is on the tea party side of the sector. >> do you think democrats are going to turn out in number or they will be out flanked by the republicans? >> the new people obama brought into the process in '08. young people, minorities, they are disappointed. they aren't energized and we learned sadly that obama is not leading a movement, he is a solo operator and those groups are probably not going to show up. the people who are going to show up are the angry rights. >> is that the reason why this could be a blowout in favor of the republicans because the democrats won't show? >> oh, if all the people who voted for obama in '08 showed up, they keep the house -- >> all the energy and fire on this election is on the tea party, the republicans, and it's not antiincumbent in a
6:13 am
sense. it is antiwashington, antigovernment, and that's taken out some republicans in primaries, but come november, it is going to be focused on the democrats. there are republican party and something like 68 of them belong to the democratic. it's a category 3 or category 4. >> monica. >> big component in this election are independents. it's not the tea party per se. it's not the republican base that is energized. the democratic party and obama hemorrhaged the independents. and what happened is that eleanor mentioned president reagan at a lower point in his turn. the difference is that reagan was a conservative leading a central right country and policies were moving in that direction. obama is far to the left. he's not taking the country to a ditch. he's taking it straight off a cliff and the american voter is mad. exploding deficits, out of control spending and 10% unemployment. >> you can't beat something
6:14 am
with nothing. this won't be like 1994. there isn't a contract with america that newt gingrich with the republicans before. i mean, i think it's a curse on all of it. >> i disagree with that. the people in 1994 did not vote for the contract with america. it was an anticlinton vote totally. this year, it's antidemocratic and antiliberal and antibig government. >> that's why obama only begun to fight. it's not about the republicans and they are just basically standing back. they aren't going to do anything except reverse to bush. and i want my favorite slogan, my favorite slogan for the republicans is, government can't solve all your problems, elect us and we'll prove it. >> is this going to be a referendum on the liberal wing of the democratic party? >> pelosi, reid, obama. >> the liberal wing of the
6:15 am
economy. >> is this -- he has not tried a solution. >> oh, morton. >> come on. >> 6% of the entire gross national product. >> that's not enough. mexico is celebrating its 200th year of independence. two centuries and there's good news. it has a $1.4 trillion economy. the 12th largest in the world. mexico is a vital business partner with the united states. to whom it trades 80% of its exports. mexico has a modern service based economy and it is expected to grow by 4% this year. but 18% of mexicans live in poverty as compared to 12% of americans. 5.5% of mexicans unemployed as compared to action party mad strengthening the economy a
6:16 am
priority. another priority for him to end the drug war. president calderone blamed the united states' appetite for drugs, and route to dealers in the u.s. drug war violence on the ease of buying deadly weapons on the u.s. side of the border and moving them across the border. the president says 80% of the 20,000 weapons purchased annually by deadly gangs were purchased in any of the 6,700 gun shops along the u.s., mexico border. president obama has deployed 1,200 national guardsmen to secure or border and pledge $1.4 billion in assistance to the government. borders want more. they are calling for u.s. combat troops to fight alongside mexican border units to end the violence if mexican
6:17 am
police cannot police itself, the border hawks say, the u.s. should the fight within mexico itself. >> eleanor, do you think those democrats are going to flee to mexico? >> it's a good segway. go to c not mexico? >> mexico might become a fail state? >> u.s. joint forces command said there are two countries dangerous and could become failed states instantly. pakistan with nuclear weapons. >> when did they say it? >> the beginning of this year. >> well, you see the numbers that were produced on the screen. not so bad. >> there's no way to stop this terrorism unless you frankly -- unless you do something about the drug demand in the united states. >> you favor the idea of integrating american policing forces with a military or civil within the community of those resisting? try to clean up the crime? >> i don't think we want dea
6:18 am
agents or american law enforcement officers in the middle. no. i think it's a crazy idea. >> we need to own up to our responsibility on the demand side and also the fact that our weapons manufactures are shipping all their weapons. we are the arm supplier for mexico. >> what's your point? >> can we keep a sense of proportion here? mexico has a lower murder rate than brazil or venezuela. >> or washington, d.c. >> or washington, d.c. it's 11.6 per 100,000. >> 1,500 were killed last year in juarez alone. they are having gunfights. >> it's a police problem. it's not an insurgency. >> hold on. >> bring the american troops home from afghanistan and iraq and they will be on the mexican border in ten years. >> the last president said it is time to legalize drugs. >> from this complacency you
6:19 am
are now exhibiting, by the secretary of state, hillary clinton, who said that mexico is apparently facing an insurgency. >> she's wrong, it's not. >> it is not an insurgency? >> that takes care of that. >> doing better than the u.s. economically. >> i disagree. >> what's that? >> what obama said as soon as hillary had spoken, he interviewed a spanish language broadcaster saying no insurgency. whoever says that is wrong. >> what do you think? >> i think this is a serious national security issue for the united states. in 2007, president bush met with felipe and they agreed on a strategy. mostly military, military equipment based. barack obama came in, he embraced the same strategy. calderone deserves credit. what he is doing is expanding the strategy to include law enforcement reform, to try to eliminate or reduce the corruption there and also in the judiciary. >> exit question. >> what works in our strategy
6:20 am
with columbia in the 1990s needs to put in place. >> how long did it take? >> 20 years to eliminate the cartels. >> i thought it was more like six or seven. >> it took a long time. >> how many years before they get control of the situation? >> they aren't going to get control until what martin says happens, and that isn't going to happen. >> this is about greed. they won't get going more than half a billion eggs so far. >> half a billion eggs. 500 million eggs recalled. the commotion was caused by salmonella. salmonella kills about a thousand people per year in the u.s. the bacteria is found in
6:21 am
dairy products. if ingested, salmonella affects the digestive tract. it is also a national security problem. food safety is in fact a terrorist dream. large scale food poisoning could immobilize a nation physically and psychological. congresswoman, rosa delara, house panel underlines the point. >> not all of the dangers threaten the health and safety of americans can be found in containers and airport check points. we have seen real threats posed by food contamination. >> is it too much for a single agency to handle? president obama says reductively, yes. >> many of the laws and regulations governing food safety in america have not been updated since they were written in the time of teddy roosevelt. also because our system of inspection and enforcement is spread out so widely among so many people that it's difficult for different parts of our government to share
6:22 am
information, work together, and solve problems. >> mr. obama's administration earlier call for a 23% increase in the fda's total budget and congress gave it to him. 34% of those fda dollars will go to food safety. >> question, should the fda be split up with one concentrating on drugs and pharmaceuticals and the others to the agriculture department. that way take food out of fda. give it to agriculture that can move around to their separate divisions and handle it properly. food is big. >> i think you can make an argument that food and drugs should be separated, but i don't like the idea of taking it away from an independent agency and putting it into a department. >> why? >> because the department of agriculture is a holy owned subsidiary of the big meat producers and the big egg producers. >> you want that to grow by
6:23 am
keeping food out of there? >> i don't want a regulatory agency in the belly of that beast. i think you need to keep it separate and give it more regulatory -- >> food is enormous. also you have water. what about poison? >> eleanor is exactly right. you don't want to take a regulatory agency and put it over to a place which is in bed with big agriculture, john. you should separate it. one of the problems you have is we don't produce all our own food anymore. a lot of it comes in from all over the world. >> this nation is going downhill. if you want to exceed to an existing -- rather than try to correct it. >> make it an independent agency. don't put it over there. >> tackling the 41% of american food that gets wasted. those are official figures. >> we have enough. >> you had over 1400 people get sick because of the salmonella here. there was a breakdown between
6:24 am
the agriculture department and the fda. the agriculture department was there at this site and they were there to grade the eggs, slapping grade a on all these eggs. the fda was supposed to come in and monitor what was going on. the agriculture department kept issuing reports to the fda saying dead bugs on the floor, standing rainwater, and the fda didn't do their job. >> let me give to this martin. do you think that congress would be opposed to taking food out of the fda because congress likes its committee ships and subcommitteeships? you follow me? >> i do indeed. congress also likes the campaign donations that they can get. >> correct. >> also i think that this congress would not give anything as long as president obama proposes it. they would have to propose it themselves. >> now sony blair take this it has now been nine years
6:25 am
since the atrocities of september 11, 2001. in the flux of events, financial, economic, political, social. the on going loss of that day can recede in memory, but not for the families, the relatives, and the friends of those who died nine years ago. for them, every day is a remembrance of their loved ones loss and particularly so, this difficult weekend, the group stands in solidarity in their sorrow and their determination to see justice done for their loved ones. you want to add to tha pat? >> the unity we had as a nation and the people then has evaporated and dispated and back to some of the old divisions. >> eleanor. >> i think sometimes the political leaders exploit those divisions. i think americans do stand united on the question of 9/11, but a lot of those feelings are
6:26 am
raw, as we've seen in the debate around the islamic cultural center in new york. >> i think it's very important not to lose sight of the fact that this was an act of war against the united states and not to insight of the true enemy we still face. >> mort. >> i'm heartbreaken of the solidarity that stayed with the u.s. it is gone. >> bye bye. if. for such a small word it packs a wallop. if i live to a hundred. if social security isn't enough. if my heart gets broken. if she says yes. we believe if should never hold you back. if should be managed with a plan that builds on what you already have. together we can create a personal safety net, a launching pad, for all those brilliant ifs
6:27 am
in the middle of life. you can call on our expertise and get guarantees for the if in life. after all, we're metlife.
6:28 am
and the skilled craftsmen >> "next morning we came to
6:29 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on