Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]  CSPAN  June 23, 2009 9:30am-10:00am EDT

9:30 am
point. you brought up the issue of prescription drugs. the president announced an agreement with senator baucus to save $80 billion over the next 10 years. when you're talking about the cost of health care reform, how does that fit into the equation? guest: i think had we known at the beginning when medicare and medicaid first can a bailout, had we known the future role that drugs were going to play as the therapy for almost every illness we have now, i don't think there's any question that drugs would have been part of the program at that time. but as science has advanced we have come to seek the drugs play a larger role. this is the one of the most
9:31 am
controversial issues. we are just at the very beginning of health care reform. i don't think anyone right now could say where this will go. it is as if we have entered a vast forest and we are about two steps into it. we have hearings that will go on all summer. we have all of these interest groups coming in. i don't think we can say what will happen on drugs and bring down those costs. it will be a month or so before we can even see the shape of this. host: let me go back to sunday morning. do you tweet? guest: yes, we have a little tweet thing we put out on the show and we put a headline or two there.
9:32 am
guest: well, fred it sort of moves slowly. that is no criticism. i sort of talk slowly. he talks even more slowly than i do. host: john from michigan says -- guest: i would hope so, but the answer to that right now is not in the immediate future. i have never understood why. i think it should be one hour, but it is just working its out on the schedule and in our ranks with affiliate's. so far we have not been able to get that done. it would make an amazing difference if we could be on for one hour. host: how has the passing of tim russert changed your approach? guest: it has not changed our
9:33 am
approach at all. we will not change will we have always done. we will not try to fix something we do not believe at this point is broken. but i missed him a great deal and we were great friends personally. we had been close friends for many years. our seats were together out at the nationals ball park. we talked a lot of politics while the team was playing baseball out there. for me, the passing of tim was a real personal loss. he really had a tremendous impact on the sunday morning programs. simply because he did it right. he played the game right. nothing fancy, but he just did his homework and asked the right questions. he was very persistent. tim russert was how you can be aggressive in questioning, but
9:34 am
not necessarily antagonistic. we get a lot, and i am sure many other shows do too, because of these opinion shows many people do their version of objectivity -- from their point of view. it is not objective unless you agree with their particular perception. when i have a republican on i get criticized by the left for being too easy. when i have a democrat on, vice versa. it is the same, you will never please everybody. host: the next call is from california. caller: hello, my question has to deal with the news coverage
9:35 am
of a lot -- a lot of the corruption going on in politics. some of the stories aren't covered enough, others go on and on. you only hear it is an ongoing investigation of the charlie rangel thing, for example. who's not been fair on his taxes. i don't know who the government official was, but he plainly stated that by the end of last year we would know everything we are to know about that and here we are six months into the year -- and not just picking on him, but you have the others like blagojevich of illinois, you have a correction in the new
9:36 am
mexico governor because of alleged wrongdoing. i could go on and on. quite frankly, there's probably corruption on both sides of the auto, although it seems to be the hierarchy of the democratic party. yes, i am biased because i am republican. i think that the republicans are the lesser of two evils. guest: sam, i share your frustration, but in this case at the ticket has much to do with the media as much as with our legal system. lawyers have got and sophisticated in good a dragging things out. these things can go on for years. that is what this is all about. this is not something i think we
9:37 am
in the media can do much about. we can keep pushing. we can do our own investigations, but it is the legal system and it the length of trials that i think is causing the frustration you are talking about. host: by the numbers here is a statistic since 1985 that the number of u.s. newspapers with reporters, down 72%. guest: this is one of the great concerns now. it really worries me. will newspapers survived this technological revolution? frankly, the outlook is not good. we must have an independent press. we must have independently-
9:38 am
gathered information. it is more expensive to produce his papers. not just the price of print, but finding revenue to support these expensive enterprises. with the coming of the internet newspapers have lost most of their want ad business. the question will be, can newspapers find the revenue to support these very expensive enterprises? nobody has yet figured out a way to raise enough money to sell enough display ads on the internet to support will recall a newspaper. it makes no difference if eventually they will be printed on paper or read online. a newspaper is an enterprise large enough to have reporters who cover city hall every day.
9:39 am
who covers the county courthouse as a beat. who cover the police department and are there every day. the costs a lot of money, a lot to have a washington bureau cover capitol hill every day. so far and newspapers have not really figured out how they can do that or raise the money. i am very worried about this. i cannot imagine a democracy that does not have independently-gathered information. host: mike is on the phone from green bay, michigan. caller: good morning. bob, i appreciate your career so much. you have covered presidents kennedy to obama.
9:40 am
in a high-turnover business i wish more news outlets understood how valuable your experiences. as i have searched news about iran, elizabeth palmer is the only reporter i have seen able to stay there. on the matter of the health-care issue in american al i have done some research here in wisconsin where we have talked to bury farmers about their health care, many paying $1,500 per month, $500 deductible. milk prices are down. these people are so important. healthcare is a very serious issue, yet when you ask them what they think are some solutions, well, they do not want national health care because they do not want the
9:41 am
government involved. i think that is the success of certain conservative talk-show hosts scaring people away from that solution. what we do not know all about is how national health care works overseas in some countries like australia. is it a good program, or not? i think we need to follow up more on that in the media, on television and get the word out. your comments on that? guest: i think you make some very good. and i think you will see stories -- there have been a lot frankly, over the years, but now we are avenue time here where barack obama has said "i want to reform the health-care system once and for all," so i think you will see stories like that. it comes down to what it always has. should it be universal? should every person have health care? should every person be required by the government to buy
9:42 am
insurance? should the government furnish that health care? the bottom-line issues which are totally unresolved and there is no real consensus -- how are you going to pay for it? should there be this government- offered interest to compete with private companies? until those two questions are answered we will wilnot know the shape of health care reform. maybe by the end of summer we will see at least the outlines of that. host: who in american history would you want on the show and what would be the first question of that person? good morning, georgia. caller: good morning.
9:43 am
one month before our presidential election president bush and senator john mccain said the economy was strong, but my husband and i and many americans knew our economy was suffering even a few years ago. doesn't it seem strange that the bush administration and senator john mccain were clueless about the condition of our economy until it was close to election fought day? guest: well, i guess the first thing we should have done was talk to you and your husband because you got this right. i just say this in joking. i think this coddle lot of people by surprise. it was not so much that people were operating outside the law, but people were operating inside
9:44 am
the lock and the government was caught flat-footed by this. we are all paying the price. president bush and john mccain and many others who were calling themselves expert said things were okay. host: good morning, from fredericksburg, virginia. caller: i will mention a couple of things quicker. you said you can get your eggs any way you want them in this age of technology. you cannot get conservative opinion on several channels -- when we talk about the mainstream media we're talking about these three major
9:45 am
networks, not cable news. every sunday i spend all day watching you. but you have george stephanopoulos, a democrat. you have at the round tables. every time there is the round table there is george stephanopoulos who is a democrat, three other democrats, and one conservative. i have never turned on your show weekly where bob schieffer says we're done with our guest now and it is time for the round table. there are three liberals and one conservative. there is no where i can go unless i go on the and annette to some freaky website. let me be clear. as far as a powell goes, colin powell says he voted for carter, clinton, and obama. people like me who are real
9:46 am
conservatives and republicans did not vote for those people. someone with a track record like that who voted for carter, clinton, and obama is not a republican, my friend. guest: well, colin powell says he is republican. so if he says he is republican, you can save you are and people can challenge that or not. he says he is a republican. john mccain says he is republican. tim pawlenty, the republican governor of minnesota says he is a republican. be that as it may you have the debate going on right now for the dousoul of the republican party. it will continue even after someone emerges as the leader of the republican party. the party is in about the same state as in 1964 after lyndon johnson won a landslide victory
9:47 am
over barry goldwater. people said we will never see the republican party again. four years later the people elected richard nixon. you will see these various points of view about what a republican is in for the party is going. eventually republicans will select their leader. if they will be successful as a party bringing in support you will see them coalesced around the leader. but at this time, and it is too soon now, obviously, there is no identifiable leader of the party. as for the round table's, i do not have much to do with george stephanopoulos.
9:48 am
and who he decides to put on his program on sundays. he has the same relationship with me. he has a program, i have a program. we have conservatives on our roundtable. david brooks of "the new york times" is a frequent visitor to the show. he is one of the best columnists today. i simply do not agree with you. i would have to say, there is so much out there right now that you can get it anyway you want to. to be truly informed person has to depend on more than one source of news in getting their information. host: you sat down with a former vice president a couple of weeks ago. guest: several people have asked me how it came about. it was simply because we were sitting around one day wondering who would have. i suggested calling dick cheney.
9:49 am
i said he has made a couple of speeches here. apparently, he has decided he wants to begin staking out positions now which is rare for someone who has just left the vice presidency. i called him and he said sure, he would love to do. it is a good example of what i tell young journalists. never assume someone to answer when you ask. that begins with calling people and is simply asking if they want to be on. i called don rumsfeld the other day and asked him and he said not right now. that is what journalism is all about. stain on the phone, staying in touch with people. when dick cheney came on the broadcast, when i asked him that question that got so much play, when i said colin powell said
9:50 am
rush limbaugh is hurting the republican party, but rush limbaugh says the powell ought to get out of the party, how do you come down, mr. vice president? in all honesty my guess was that he was not going to answer that question. i thought he might give it an amusing dodge, might be artfully side-stepping. without blinking an eye he said, when it comes to republicans i have to go with rush limbaugh. i said really? i was taken aback. people wrote about that and be interviewed for a couple of weeks. they are still writing about. that is journalism. do not assume you will note the answer when you ask someone a question. just ask the question. host: this question comes from oklahoma. caller: good morning, my question is, with the medicare question -- health care for
9:51 am
everyone, is there any way they could extend down the medicare to people from 65 to 60 and then every year ago down to cover everyone. those who want to stay on private plans and those who want to be on medicare plans could be. guest: i will give you an artful side-stepping of that question. i simply do not have the technical expertise to give you an answer to that question. that is part of what is discussed in this great debate on health care. but i am not the one to answer that question. host: here is a message from twitter. guest: i think we need to do some stories about how these
9:52 am
programs run and work. i'm not sure everyone would agree they have failed. having said that, it is worthwhile for us to begin doing stories on how these other countries handle host: health care steve from illinois, good morning. caller: yes, i would like to ask if and when bob plans to retire. guest: i did not bring my guitar this morning. host: we have that on our website. it is available on a space line and also on view to. -- it is available online. guest: i announced i would
9:53 am
retire a couple of years ago and then did not. my boss said to me, don't you want to watch one more political campaign, one more presidential campaign? the more that i thought about it, i really did. that is the best advice i got. i would not have missed this last campaign for anything. i will hang around cbs for a while and keep doing "face the nation" for a while. i do not know. i have no plans to retire. i hope that when i start drooling someone will get a big hook and excuse me. my wife is in charge of that. when she thinks i'm not up to it anymore she will be the one to say it is time to move on. so far my health is good. i am having a lot of fun. this is not like work to me. this is what i wanted to do when
9:54 am
i was a little boy. i grew up and had the chance to do it. so i think will keep doing it for a while. host: a few more minutes with our guest, bob schieffer. caller: a quick answer to the woman calling and saying that bush said the economy was strong. he said the fundamentals of the economy are strong. everyone made jokes. obama made jokes. two months ago obama it came out and said the fundamentals of the economy are strong. that was just to counter the woman who called. guest: well, i think you are right. i think that is what he said. the fact is that the economy was -- the fundamentals were not as strong as even he may have "suggested." caller: and then two months ago obama said the fundamentals of the economy are shown.
9:55 am
how do you feel about the coverage of health plan and not one minute even went to the republicans and abc just flatly refused. guest: i will let others make that judgment. have discovered over the years when i comment on what my competitors are doing it always comes off as self-serving. people will make up their minds about that and a lot of other issues. i will let others make that judgment. host: we are getting a lot of it e-mails from one fell. he says you are his favorite texan, hands down. guest: i get that a lot. i have a close association with the journalism department attcu where i went to school. -- at tcu. it is the most meaningful thing anyone has ever done is when
9:56 am
they named the journalism school there after me. i get down to texas at least once or twice a semester to work with those kids. i go down to four with probably six times per year. i will not begin inot -- i willo back their full-time when i retire. but i have a lot of friends there. i still call for worth home. washington is where i live. caller: good morning, i would like to ask mr. bob schieffer what he and others of the journalistic community can do to help establish a better quality of discourse on these sunday morning programs where one can get away from the shallow cliches and argument for the sake of argument. a conservative commentator
9:57 am
having the same stale, generic commentator as a liberal, democratic commentator. secondly, how can we get more voices of authority, actual experts to have comments on the issue at hand instead of the same pundit commenting on this wide swath of issues no one can really fully grasp. guest: i think, melissa, that we do a pretty good job. i think is in the morning is different from any other time on television. i would take issue with the premise of your question. i do not think we are shallow. i think we do a pretty good job building into issues. we are not perfect and never will be, but i am proud of the job we do. host: in the the course of history is there one individual you would want to interview? guest: the people i would like to interview or the founders. i would love to go back and talk
9:58 am
to those who founded this country, washington, and jefferson. this remarkable group who came together. these great minds that all happened to be in one place at one time. the great advances in humanity have come about when a group of very talented people wind up in one place at the same time. the greeks on the hillsides of athens, and then our own founders. i mean, the more you find out about them the more fascinating they become. stop and think about this. we take the american revolution for granted these days. think what was bound to happen. i think a was thomas paine who said it will happen -- and island cannot rule a continent. but that was not necessarily the case. when america broke away from england which in that time was the most powerful country in the
9:59 am
world it was the first time that a colony had ever broken away from another country. the first time. we forget that. no one thought it was a done deal. no one thought it would just happen, that it was bound to happen. it was a very difficult thing to do and had never been done before. yet it happened. i would like to talk to john adams and thomas jefferson and ask, did you really think it would happen? because they did not. they thought there was a good chance that they would all behanged and they made jokes about the one guy who signed the declaration of independence who was very heavy. they said he was lucky to be so fat. those are the ones i would like to talk to, and also of course, abraham lincoln and franklin roosevelt who had a remarkable sense of pols.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on