tv Mc Laughlin Group PBS December 14, 2011 6:30pm-7:00pm PST
issue one, newty. >> this may be the most important election since 1860. eight years of barack obama would be a disaster. i am going to ask you to be with me, because together we have to stand shoulder to shoulder. >> newt gingrich is less than a month away from the first contest of the republican presidential season, iowa. january 3, the iowa caucus. the former republican speaker of the us house of representatives has a 14-point
lead in iowa over mitt romney. gingrich, 31%. romney, 17%. gingrich is now the number-one choice of the republican party. but that doesn't mean that all republicans are pleased with gingrich. some republicans who served under gingrich when he was speaker of the house don't like him at all. in fact, they have recently slammed him. here's new york republican congressman peter king, chairman of committee on gingnd security committee on nd security he's too erratic, he's substantive. >> here is the current oklahoma senator and former u.s. congressman from oklahooklahoma second district, tom coburn, md. >> i'm not inclined to be a supporter of newt gingrich having served upped him for four years and experienced personally his leadership. i found his leadership lacking. >> question, why not more of
newt's congressional colleagues support his candidacy for president? >> the folks who name the best seem to like him the least. they found him to be an undisciplined, untrustworthy leader in the 90s. and the fear that if he is republican nominee, he will lead the party to a calamitous defeat in election that is very vulnerable. >> everybody in washington has a story about newt gingrich, some have 10 stories, and his republican colleagues tried to overthrow him but in this is classic confrontation between what is left of the establishment republican party and the rank and file. so you have one candidate that the rank and file doesn't like in mitt romney, and mitt romney may very well have a grass jaw, and then you have gingrich, who basically the establishment doesn't like, and he lives in a glass house. he is so vulnerable and so -- it's fascinating but if they don't stop him in new hampshire, it's hard to see
where they do stop him. and that's where you see all these establishment republicans trying to really hurt newt. but -- >> voters don't care -- [everyone talking at once] >> it doesn't matter what the establishment thinks. look at the polls. he is winning over the hearts and minds every voters. he's trouncing romney now. the worst possible moment for rom flee and the best possible moment for him. so it may not matter at all about the attacks with people he's worked welcome what matters is it he'll win the pry merits. >> why were you there at the meeting are romney? but romney there physically. >> yes, he came and talked to the examiner and told us he thought he had a chance at still winning the nomination but a long-term marathon. he feels he can pick up enough delegates to win the nomination. but the polls even the polls for states further down the road like colorado, gingrich is still beating him by double digits.
>> you talk about consensus, in politics. >> he suggested that he was better at building consensus as a business leader, ran the olympics, former governor, and suggested gingrich in his past experiences as speech of the house is less able to do that. so he's not accusing him that way but certainly his surrogates are. they're calling newt a bonker that won't be someone who can lead washington and pass new laws. >> you asked romney why he has disappeared from the scene for all practical purposes? >> he said that he wanted to limit his exposure because if he gets out there too much in the early days, people will get tired of him. so now we're going to be seeing a lot more of him. he'll be doing talk shows, more campaign ads, take the gloves off. that's what he suggested to us. >> he thinks they might run out of material -- they got 11 months to go before the contest? >> he said he -- to get tired of him. >> this is really going to be a -- boring process.
we haven't even hit january yet, february, march, april, may, june, july and on? >> i don't know why you think it's boring. i think it's fascinating. >> but how long will it be that. >> who knows. this thing is unfolding in ways nobody predicted. you've had herman cain, did anybody expect that? michele bachmann to the top for a while, everybody thought jon huntsman would be a successful candidate. he isn't. so who knows how it will play. we'll get the first taste of it when people actually vote instead of just polls. >> okay. gingrich's opponent pointed out to some extent here are attacking the former speaker's personal history. namely, his three marriages and affair with a congressional staffer in the 1990s, who later became his third wife. mitt romney to distinguish himself from gingrich. >> i think people understand that i'm a man of steadiness and constancy. i don't think he'll find somebody with more of that's an
beauts of . i've been married to the same woman for 25 -- excuse me, 42 years. >> that's a moving ad. >> this election year is about wealth and equality, and about job creation, and i don't think it's really about family values so much, because if it was he wouldn't have newt gingrich vying for -- he is the front- runner, but vying for the nomination. plugs the fact christians who make up a large part of the iowa electorate love a story of redemption. newt can say he is converted to catholicism. he is close to his children and his grandchildren. and mitt romney after all is a mormon, which is still kind of a conflict with certain voters. >> the voters remember about newt gingrich, why he excites them, the last time he was in power he led a revolution a republican revolution, and that's what people want now. they want a new republican revolution, so the guy who ran the last one. >> they see him as an historic
figure, which isn't true. and they're willing to forgive a lot. >> but he also is a fountain of good ideas. some of people may not think so, but they're serious ideas, and he expresses them with a kind of historical context that gives it a lot of credibility. and this country i think is locking for somebody very different from what we now have in washington, and her here is that difference. >> have you heard the republican jewish coal 96. >> yes, i have. >> do you know mr. romney spoke to them no. >> yes. >> when did he say? >> it went over very well. i paid for that particular constituency who was very supportive of israel. he said that would be the first country he would visit. he is being very supportive of israel. this is a very important issue for the american jewish community. went well since three see obama as being less in supportive of israel. >> did he say he would continue to support the national interests of the united states house it in israel? >> absolutely. >> and that went over well? a lot to romney? >> no, absolutely. why not? we to have national interests
in my judgment, in terms of our alliance with israel. >> also support for his campaign? >> oh, no-no. when you say -- what do you mean support? >> you think he's paying for his entire presidential campaign? >> who, romney? >> yes. >> of course. >> no, donations -- >> oh, sure. >> they're all looking for contributers, john. there's no mystery in that. i don't know of any one of them that -- particularly from that constituency. >> yes! >> so is gingrich some of is obama! >> they've all done it. >> and it's no like romney and gingrich with israel. but with romney, he's willing to say anything with president obama if he thinks he can make an in pact, choosing obama of -- accusing president obama of appeasement. it's. kinds of bomb throwing language that newt usually uses. the president came right back and said talk to the folks around bin laden or the terror network and asked if i'm an
appeaser. >> you agree there's no daylight in the israeli position of romney and gingrich? >> i don't think there is. >> let's get that straight, the israelis don't have a position. they don't take a position on domestic politics. what is the jewish community here feel? i think they'll choose -- >> i'm talking about foreign policy. >> one candidate got a cool reception was jon huntsman, because they don't -- he is quite astringe russ support for -- >> ron paul? because his stance without -- [everyone talking at once] let scale fend for itself. >> he is scoring at the top of the heap. >> he's doing very well in iowa so we scant discount ron paul, particularly in iowa. he is really thrown his resources in there. more than almost any other candidate. [everyone talking at once] >> romney's work for him. >> exit question. i let this run over. it's part of my zero meaning
zero likelihood, 10 mean certitude, you got that? >> i got it. >> there is a probability that newt will win iowa less than a month away? >> it is more likely than not, much more likely than not at this point. >> i think -- [not understandable] ron paul is the upset special, very organized, he has enough money, writing tough ads against gingrich. that might be your -- >> vote going? >> a lot of it going to -- but committee had hold it between now and -- >> the vote in iowa is kind of soft for gingrich and it does depend on getting the vote out. but he'll finish in the top one, two, three and the showdown with romney will be new hampshire. if gingrich can come close to overtaking romney in new hampshire, then we've got a real long war, and as susan
said, in a war of attrition -- >> want to give me a number? 72 a number for what? [everyone talking at once] >> win iowa? i think i agree, 60, 70%. i'd agree with that. out of 10 to take iowa. >> but in permanent? >> if he -- wins iowa and into some new victory in new hampshire, if he gets south carolina and florida, where is romney then? >> i know, i know. but he's got to carry iowa. >> i'll give it an 8. >> an 8? >> yes, i think gingrich will get stronger, not weaker. >> hi to vote up -- [audio not understandable] he is raising a lot of money which he didn't have before. he'll have a much better organization. he's the one with the momentumt teddy. >> in 1910, teddy roosevelt
came here and he laid out his vision for what he called a new nationalism. our country, he said, means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy, of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show that th >> president obama gave a major speech in the heartland this week. in kansas, same town where in 1910 teddy roosevelt called for a new nationalism against cartels and against roosevelt's new nationalism was labeled a "square deal." >> now for this roosevelt was called a radical, a socialist [laughter] even a communist.
but today we are a richer nation and a stronger democracy because of what he fought for in his last campaign. and he 8 hour workday and minimum wage for women. [applause] insurance for the unemployed. and for the elderly. and those with disabilities. political reform. and progressive income tax. >> question, did president obama sound more like teddy roosevelt or hugo chavez? >> oh, my. >> socialist. >> he was no longer president, running against for president and he lost. so the idea that was a great idea for him to channel this speech, i think if -- it's hard to -- he keeps going to this -- and fairness to him is raising taxes on a certain segment of the population. i don't think that's really a popular idea. [everyone talking at once]
>> worst speech by a modern american president since jimmy carter's speech. if you read that over and over, the last few decades we've done this wrong, the last few decades we've done that wrong. what is re arguing for is a reverse allege of 30 years of economic politics, light regulation, which saves this country in 1980 from the abyss. he's saying get rid of it. >> and the other thing is he's trying to channel the frustration and anger this population which now is -- lodged against his administration, and blaming it on the path. and taking -- as if he had no responsibility for the economic problems we are having today. his government is the most incompetent government we've had may long time in terms of exactly their public policy dealing with the economy. and he cannot escape that. lets me finish, okay? here's a man who introduces a health care bill just when the whole country is focusing on the economy, it's his health care bill. he expands the coverage, doesn't take care of reducing the cost of the bill, and --
ucla berkeley did a study and showed that this kind of regulatory insecurity has cost two million jobs to this economy. that's because this man was following what he wanted to do, regardless of where the country was. i can give you another half dozen examples of that. utah >> would you say he's a dock winaire? >> yes, very committed to a big central government policy? >> absolutely. level of government involvement in the economy that has completely undermined the confidence of the entire business community in what he's about. >> there's another view on this pan and there's another view in this country. first of all, comparing him to chavez is totally out of bounds. >> funds everything. >> socialist he would have nationalized the banks, we wouldn't have the insurance companies in the middle of health care reform, and we wouldn't be sitting foreign troops abroad. we would bring them home. so he's not a socialist.
he's appropriately channeling teddy roosevelt because this is another moment in american life where the barron elements of the population is doing exceptionally well, and other people are not. and you have a real sense of lack of fairness. they just released a survey that people on medicare are saving money because of some of the reforms they've put in. >> up 15% this year. >> the plan has not yet -- doesn't go into effect until 2014, when there will be competition insurance companies can -- [everyone talking at once] >> that's very easy to redistribute. just take it and give it to someone else. eventually run out of other people's money. no ideas for that. >> we've already redistributed wealth upwards, and all the numbers showpeople of my -- and frankly more represented in the
country than on this panel -- [everyone talking at once] >> as a declaration of the coming campaign against a republican congress that has cynically tried to block every job creation measure this president. >> one at a time! is president obama getting? >> what kind of -- >> ratings popularity. >> he's been on the class war populace -- [everyone talking at once] low 40s, going nowhere. [everyone talking at once] america has a wide population. in 1968, lynden johnson was faced with a vietnam war. and he decided that he would not seek a second term. and he went on television and said, i will not seek nor accept the nomination for another term in the office of presidency. >> right. >> do you think obama is entertaining anything like that. >> no. >> if the polls continue to
drop. >> no. >> and say beyond the -- below the level. >> having supported him and voted for him, i wish he would entertain not running for a second term. i don't think there's a slightest chance, not at the slightest chance in heaven or hell that he will not win for a second term. >> you think he can take an international route? because he knows the heads of state. he like him. he does work for news those international settings like honolulu. [everyone talking at once] taking on the problem of our debt in the united states, being a not a byproduct but being part of a much larger phenomenon, namely, the whole planet? [everyone talking at once] why can't there be a convocation that will stay in existence, from energy and have mandatory power to do something or face up to it?
>> i believer that obama does not have great credibility with reducing debt. he has great credibility for increasing our debt and deficits but not reducing it. so i don't think he's the best player -- >> diplomatic samples -- getting the fruit of the wisdom -- >> john, john! [everyone talking at once] >> if we get out of our situation, if there's not an improvement in the world economy -- >> we are very dependent on and what is happening in europe -- >> that's part of the war! talking about china. >> the only person who fancies himself president of the world, president obama will operate in the system he's in. he's up for the fight. this is the month that unemployment dropped a lot of the other numbers like durable goods and the things people now talk basketball, the economy is looking better. romney or gingrich, this president is in very good
position. 92 world federalist society? >> i think so. >> i think that's -- you know, they claim that there is such a thing ago world federalism. do you think that's ridiculous on its face, that sovereignty can never give way to that kind of federalism? [everyone talking at once] >> great deal of difficulty getting the government in a state of great crisis, giving b for ny plan b? >> i had expected it to be a better day for good news for women and access to emergency contraceptions, and different than very disappointing day. >> susan wood is a former official with the food and drug administration. she's talking about the morning after pill, the pill that has been called the plan b pill. plan b is a pill that can be
taken within 72 hours after intercourse to prevent a pregnancy from occurring. supporters of plan b call it emergency contraception. opponents call it "the abortion pill." a battle is raging over plan b. and president obama this week stepped into the middle of it. his cabinet office namely health and human services announced this week that women under the age every 17 would be prohibited from buying the contraceptive plan b unless they had a prescription from a medical doctor. ie, no over-the-counter sale for young women. health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius says that women under the age of 17 run the risk of of using plan b as a regular form of birth control. that usage would drastically increase hormone levels in women, increasing the risk of infertility and cancer.
>> okay. so much for the health and human services cabinet of president obama. now we have the food and drug administration, the fda, which is independent, unlike health and human services. the fda rules that plan b should be sold to women under 17 years of age, without a prescription. that ruling of the fda was overruled by the white house in an unprecedented decision. mr. obama said that notwithstanding the food and drug administration, the plan b may not be sold to any woman under the age of unless they have a prescription.
question, did the secretary of health and human services, kathleen sebelius, tee up this whole hhs versus fda clash as a -- for mr. obama to vet out of the stadium? in other words, sebelius versed the fda and mr. obama got to make a conservative values statement to connect with parents that want women -- >> you're hitting on the fact it's good politics, especially going into an election year. because a lot of people out there 30 it's common sense that you wouldn't want ungirls to have access to this, and i think she makes a good argument on the health side. the truth is this isn't about 10 and 11-year-olds. i think one percent of them are sexually active. it's about 15 and 16-year-olds, and more than half of them are sexually active. and so on the merits, the fda made the right decision. but politically, going into this campaign, it would have opened the door to a issue that
the republicans could use against the president as the father of -- these young girls, he also would like to believe that if you don't allow this kind of access somehow you're keeping this protective bubble around your children. so it's a popular decision i think in suburbaamerica. >> on the merits it's the right decision, because there's no evidence that these sorts of products do anything to reduce the rated of unplanned pregnancies. it's like. when you wear a seat belt when driving a car, it makes people drive more recklessly than if they didn't have the seat belt on. and on the political side, i'm sure he's very concerned about pre-teens, especially those pre- teens living ohio -- i'm sorry, the parents of those pro-teens in ohio and michigan and key voters in the election. >> there's no substantiation about the pharmaceutical merits of this pill? >> oh, yes. >> no, does not reduce it, it encourages kids to have more
sex. there's no evidence. [everyone talking at once] >> dosage costs $50 per dose! >> $50. >> $50! i mean -- [everyone talking at once] >> you have eight kids? >> my kids want find $50, they buy a video game. >> tv show. >> i don't know if he was teed up necessarily, that sophisticated an effort, but certainly a good move on his part to say that he endorses a decision, because like -- if this was another wedge issue, focused on the united states in recession as well in 2012. >> eleanor? >> berko will come through and europe -- and the u.s. economy will get better leading up to the elections in november. >> newt gingrich will maintain his double-digit lead into the
IN COLLECTIONSKCSM (PBS) Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on