at the white house. contrary to democratic claims, there was no historical precedent replacing the -- for placing the census under the control of political operatives on the white house staff. according to former census bureau director bruce chapman who directed the census bureau from 1981 to 1983, under president reagan, he said, quote, the white house and its congressional allies are wrong in asserting that the census in the past has directed to the -- reported directly to the president. directors often brief presidents and their staff but as a former director under president reagan, i don't know of any cases where the conduct of the bureau was directly under the white house supervillings the -- supervision. that includes president clinton in 2000, bush 41 in 1990 and carter in 1980. the obama administration has since back tracked and attempted to down play its role regarding the sent sulls. and to his credit, the current secretary of commerce, gary locke, has expressed his intention to not seek contro

the white house? what is your reflection on the way this omb is operating in the context of this very aggressive agenda that ron talk about? >> i think omb in many administrations is kind of an agent for institutionalizing change. we all believe in change. i think omb is the implementation arm of presidential policy. you have an unbelievably hard working, visible set of creative policy people throughout the white house, throughout the various agencies, but how do you get this high level policy thinking and policy pronouncements, how do get them to move the permanent federal government? it is a long process of turning a cruise ship around, in some ways. omb is a cabinet level agency, but 95% of its opponents are career. in many ways is the center of translating the president's priorities into administration policy. it does that partly through the budget. does it through the regulatory review process and through all of the legislative clearance works. whenever an agency has to speak to congress, and pro

white house's confidence with the flood detainee's the [inaudible] on that same subject has the white house or president had any discussions about taking [inaudible] >> i think i believe we have had discussions with the government and have had discussions of different levels with the saudi government about the program and about detainee is that are some that have been transferred and psalm that are still held at guantanamo bay. obviously, i think the president believes and has said repeatedly he is and when to make the decision on anything related to guantanamo that would threaten the security of the country. but i don't want to get into any death about those discussions. >> [inaudible] >> discussing guantanamo definitely

from the white house rose garden to the white house briefing room, press secretary robert gibbs will answer reporters questions. live coverage expected to begin shortly. you're watching c-span2. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] you're watching c-span2 waiting for live coverage of the white house briefing. >> this press briefing expected to begin shortly. the senate is expected back at 2:15 eastern for more work on a bill that promotes u.s. tourism. that legislation would create a nonprofit corporation to attract foreign tourists while providing information about entry requirements. that's expected to start again, the senate back in again at 2:15 eastern here on c-span2. >> doesn't smell like somebody just cut the grass? [inaudible] >> president lee talked about these measures of policies that he and president obama had agreed to talk to the other members of the five party talks about new measures and policies on north korea. can you elaborate on what he meant by that and what they agreed on? >> i don't have anything additional on that in terms of what went out abou

a live look at the white house briefing room. the white house briefing is scheduled to begin momentarily. we will again for just a moment. it appears it may be ready to start. we will look again for just a moment. the white house press briefing coming up momentarily. while we wait, and looked at this morning's court "washington journal." financial times." she hopes for a v-shaped recovery. the u.s. economy will feel a substantial boost from the obama administration's emergency spending package over the next few months. christina rohmer has warned against tightening monetary and fiscal policy before career is well-established. she is the chairman of the council of economic advisers. she told us in an interview that 2 is more -- that she is more optimistic that the economy is approaching stabization. she comments that as the opposition republicans step up their attacks on the stimulus, it has not prevented unemployment from hitting a quarter-century high of 9.4%. that is from yesterday in that interview in the paper. this is on the

any reaction from the white house? >> i do not have anything specific on that. >> when the president made some comments around the smoking and tobacco act, i noticed the president did not refer back to his personal experiences with smoking and struggles. i wonder of smoking continues to be a struggle for the president. >> the president would likely tell you as anybody would that has smoked or been addicted to smoking that it is a lifelong struggle. >> is it a daily struggle? >> his days -- i think that is covered. >> he mentioned the cairo speech and the lebanese elections. i wondered if you made the connection between his speech and what has happened in lebanon and iran in terms of the election. did he take credit for what is going on? >> i think as we have talked about in here, i do think that the reaction around the world to the president's speech, particularly in the muslim world has been i think beneficial. to our efforts at recasting ourselves in the world. i think we were certainly heartened by a the large turno

had a friend in the white house when the president was engaging them on the recovery plan. now they are very upset about the white house not crossing the picket in line to talk about that. is a good of the holding neglected for one city? >> no, i think the administration has denoted pretty clearly that obviously we have worked with officials at a city, county, state level particularly that relates to the recovery plan, but i think as the statement from a says clearly, not a policy to cross the picket line. >> so and i'm going to go hypothetically but i want a real answer. [laughter] >> a little contestation. >> is that a real word? here is the deal. if the conference was in another city, would in the high profile white house official have attended if it were in another city that did not have any --? >> let me see if i'm accurately paraphrasing your question -- if there wasn't a picket line that we would uncrossed what we go? >> in another city? >> again our policy is we don't want to cross the picket line so there is not a picket line in smith will then that is where the co

. >> host: what about the white house? >> guest: president barack obama sent me a letter last january and he committed publicly to this process. so we haven't heard officially other than that letter plan hopeful that the president will support this process. we are demanding space process in afghanistan, iraq, iran, how come we will do it with 4 million u.s. citizens? u.s. citizens act we have always been willing actually to defend or democracy. actually there are more active in the armed forces than all states but one proportionally speaking so in that sense i'm hopeful the white house will support this effort but i'm cognizant of the fact congress has to take the lead of the stage and because there is so much more going on. >> host: let's hear from the calls. first is on the democratic line, butch from jackson, wyoming. >> caller: yes, good morning. the discussion about the puerto rico status territory. number one, we've got. health care should be a right, not a profit. number two, we should discuss taxing church property

will there be a package coming from the white house? does the white house have to wait for a cbo, or is there a figure in mind? >> well, i would say this, a couple of things. obviously, in the original budget that the white house submitted was a significant down payment toward health-care reform. i think over $600 billion. it is a 10-year period that included changes for the taxation of charitable contributions for those at the very top of the income scale as well as the president outlining what we have talked about here, which is restructuring aspects of medicare and medicaid that are inefficient in the system, particularly, i think, the biggest example was medicare plans that pay private insurers extra money to do what they already should be doing in the form of sort of a middle man payment. i think the president will in very short order outlining additional ways -- outline additional ways in which efficiency can be brought to the system with achievable savings and even in a greater way enhance the already robust down payment. >> any

joining us from the briefing room of the white house is linda douglass. good morning and thanks for being with us. guest: good morning. host: the overall question seems to be, who is going to pay for this and how? guest: the president has put forward a proposal for $950 billion which will make it possible for people to have more affordable health care. right now, the rising cost of health care is absolutely crushing families and businesses and government, state government, federal government'. there will be an initial installment. no president has already laid out six and a billion dollars in federal health care -- $600 billion in federal health-care spending as well as additional revenues that will be designed to provide an opportunity for health care for all americans that will begin to emphasize quality and care, your relationship with your doctor, as opposed to simply quantity of )sometimes even mindlessly done without any regard for what is best for the whole patient. this is a small, initial investment to improve health care for all americans, make

been at the white house staff secretary. we know which one is harder. you have to answer which one is more fun. and when you are done without, last year i think at this conference i think if you asked anybody in the audience, there was probably everyone assumed that if a democrat was elected president, president obama was elected to office, he would close guantÁnamo. he has pledged to do that. that seems to be somewhat more difficult and he might want to reflect on why you think there's been so much resistance to that, particularly on capitol hill. but i think most of the people in the room would have thought that he might have abandoned military tribunals in favor of moving the prisoners at guantÁnamo through the criminal justice process, through the uniform code of military justice. and that you are in their really grinding and working on those issues, i would have asked it to greg but i know you have been involved with the. explain a little bit about why the president chose to stick with military tribunals at least one

white house website is farsi. i talked to the white house about that decision. they said that they wanted iranians to read it themselves. the larger picture is that president obama does not want the united states to become a major element in the debate as long as the ruling clerics a iran say that this is a western- sponsored demonstration, that is one thing, but if it becomes overt and the demonstrators themselves see the united states calling for regime change, a loaded term in that part of the world following the iraq war in becomes more complicated. it answers the united states into something that would complicate the demonstrators' cause. host: guest: let's go to the phones. -- host: but the to the phones. caller: i would like to talk about the history ofiran. we overthrew the government in 1973 by the cia and we install shah was a mass-murder. look at what we have done to those people? what you talk about what is going on ingaza, send all your news people there and to what is happening to those people in gaza. we spent $500 million to destabilize the irani

between reporters and the white house. the white house pre-arranged this thing. that is why many journalists were upset with this. even though it was well- intentioned on both sides, i think it is not exactly the right venue for that. >> we always see the president reading off names of people he seemingly preselected. guest: yes, and the ap knows it will get the first question that almost every press conference. the white house and the ap often know what that question will be. host: how do they know this? guest: because what is going on in the news that particular day. iran on that given day was a top agenda item. the one thing that is getting lost here is that nico asked a difficult question. he did not give a response as to whether -- under what conditions he would accept a ahmadinejad. he was able to ask the question that the regular press was and a position to ask because of the type of work that he has been doing. it was not as soft-ball question. host: will we see more of this? guest: i don't think so. host: our repu

here at the white house? >> i don't have that figure. >> i'm curious why -- >> i don't think that's. >> no, that is the case. in the doughnut hole there's no cost. >> right. >> that's a benefit to the seniors. >> no, but again -- >> that's how it's been explained to me. >> i think as i said as i said earlier some portion of this will go to the pharmaceutical industry making good on the savings proposals the president has outlined to make healthcare more efficient which will impact the amount that the government pays. the president i think outlined almost 100 billion in savings through efficiency he would like to see as a result of the pharmaceutical industry, so i guess it's somewhere between zero and, say, $100 billion. >> direct government cost, though, does that mean efficiency within a private sector? >> no, it's -- the president can't lay on the table to save money the government doesn't pay. that's the whole definition of cvo store built. this isn't part of the 2 trillion. this is part of the $948 billi

the white house this week so can you comment on the resolution? >> obviously we welcome the resolution and believe that despite the question it echoes the words of president obama for about a week. i think -- >> you hope they don't use violence and directly, it may be a small difference but it's a big difference to some people. >> i think president was clear on monday in the rose garden. >> he said he was troubled by bye violence. he didn't directly criticize them for doing it. >> that isn't the way that i read i have the same right here. i think when the president sits in the oval office and says that he's deeply troubled by what i've seen on television, and the american people are rightly troubled by that i think when the president discusses as he did with president lee something has happened in iran and there was a question on the kind of antagonistic postures toward the international community that have taken place in the past and there are people that want to see greater openness and debate and democracy. i stand strong with the universal pri

things to win back the white house. unfortunately, nobody knows what they are. well, al from knew. he understood that it would take a different time a democrat -- a different kind of democrat. if you have forgotten what the political wilderness was like in those days, just take a look across the aisle at the sad state of today's republican party. we can't feel too bad, after all, they did plenty to earn it. republicans have lost back-to- back land sides in 2006 and 2008. they do not have the courage to challenge old orthodox is and interest groups. they would rather hold on to old approaches then embrace new ideas that work. and even though their ranks are shrinking fast, they cling to the same old approaches that are sure to strengthen -- short to shrink itheir party. it is a big reason we decided long ago to be done with all of that. [applause] today, the democratic party is stronger. we're eager to help push the obama administration's reform agenda, and we're thrilled to have a democratic party in the white house so

have now been the white house staff secretary. we know which one is harder. you have to answer which one is more fun. when your done with that, last year i think at this conference, if you ask anyone in the audience, probably everyone assumed if a democrat was elected president, he would close guantanamo. he has pledged to do that. you might want to reflect a little bit on why you think there has been so much resistance to that, particularly on capitol hill. most of the people in theoom would have thought that he might have abandoned military tribunals in favor of moving the prisoners at guantanamo for the criminal-justice process through the uniform code of military justice. now that you are in there really grinding and working on those issues, explain a little bed about why the president chose to stick with military tribunals -- explain a little bit about why the president chose to stick with military tribunals. >> first, i just have to say it is amazing to be here and to be on this side of the microphone. it is the first time i

nine years ago, he leaves the white house. his last week he put the monday ue meant he saved it as the last minute while he was in africa.,ú half fired over alaska lands argument he started and fired pincho. roosevelt gets in daring to turn back even a portion of the legacy.

white house on many of those topics. >> does the president feel that, does the white house feel, there needs to be more of a public campaign, that the american people need to be -- >> people saying we're overposed. [laughter] >> does there need to be more of a campaign outside the white house? you brought back campaign letters today escaping the notice of nobody in this room for the first time. does he feel like he needs to go out and storm the country? >> no, i don't think we need to storm the country. i think the president will continue to use the opportunities that he has at the white house and on the road to talk about what he thinks will make america safer and stronger, ensuring that we get healthcare reform, and i think if you step back and look at some of the significance of today's events, you've got the pharmaceutical industry and the largest group representing seniors in this country who 16 years ago weren't at the table but were on the other side of the political debate, and i think that represents progress and important steps towards real reform. i would say -- i'm saying w

in the white house. the fact that i was fighting on pretty much prevailed and it was clear in those final days of 1995 that by standing up the way we did, forcing the republicans to shutdown the government, at both preserve a lot of programs that lot of us cared about for a long time and in -- it ensured clinton's reelection in 1996. i remember walking into the oval office on the last day of that year, clinton was eager please or angry with me on alternate days that entire year but on that day he gave me credit. that felt good too. >> i want to ask about the worst. that would go on for 3 hours. we are too many years since then, a lot of things have changed for us, family, children, different jobs. but we have faced different kinds of stress. i was wondering, when you recall those days with the president, particularly the bad days, when you think about it now, what is worse? receiving a temper tantrum from the president or one from your daughter? [laughter] >> we are going to leave this program and take y

win back the white house. unfortunately, nobody knows what they are. well, al from knew. he understood that to lead a party out of the political wilderness would take a different kind of democrat. today we have a different kind of democratic party because of what al from and that great new democratic president bill clinton accomplished. if you have front what the political wilderness waslike in those days, just take a look across the aisle at the sad state of today's republican party. [applause] >> now we can't feel too bad. after all, they did plenty to earn it. but it is still a sorry sight. republicans have lost back-to-back landslides in 2006 and 2008. they don't have the courage to challenge old orthodoxies and interest groups. they would rather hold on to old approaches that don't work, thnt embrace new ideas. they cling to the same old approaches that are sure to shrink their party faster. my fellow democrats, we have been there and al from, bill clinton and all of you are a big reason we decided long a

health care reform take in the east room of the white house. abc projected reasonable requests to include opposing voices during the infomercial. matt goes on to write in this paper, with this sweep of obama's policy decisions and growing skepticism about his agenda, and biased reporting is especially border. rather than covering eight nights in personally, the media should further investigate these issues so they can better inform the public. there will probably have their turn to do so once their obama specials are over. i would your reaction to that? linking, nebraska, a republican caller first. caller: god bless america and the love affair with the media and barack obama goes without saying. i think it is worse than that given the struggle they seem to have. it is as if the white house red's the script in the morning. the exempla wanted to give it is held the presses in the sanfo situationrd where some point there will browbeat him out of office. -- that is the simple i want to give. the did not do that to bill clinton. host: new orleans on

white house are now back in the schwarzenegger term. [laughter] do you think we're watching kind of a do-over here, a chance for some of these folks to advance the policies that may have gotten lost under clinton? >> it's a great question. yes and no. i mean, yes in the sense that, listen, on health care and this is one of the reasons -- i took some criticism during the campaign because after the 23rd debate where we heard about the difference between hillary and obama on whether or not to have an individual mandate for health care, i moderated a debate where i didn't ask about that because basically a lot of my feeling was, you know what? if either one of these two wins, they're going to end up creating something like what has become the consensus democratic health care plan over the last 15 years, and sure enough that's exactly what's happeningment -- happening. so i think there is a real sense on health care in particular this is a moment where what wasn't achieved back in '96, '95 at least is possible, the stars may be aligning this

we have the family event at the white house this evening. there's a funeral for one of our members who is prominent in the discussion on the interior bill. so we're working out the schedule. yes, ma'am. >> [indiscernible] had less than two days to review final version to the [indiscernible] before it was voted on. -- giving americans at least a week to review the full version of the healthcare bill before it is voted on? and also will you commit to submitting the final version to the crowe's. >> we will abide by the regular -- or you heard the questions about having the healthcare bill out there a week in advance. we have -- we will have the regular order in terms of the appropriate amount of time, 48 hours in advance for amendments, -- another day before you can take up the bill. but this bill is something that has been unfolding before the american people for a long time now. the areas of controversy are well-known. the issue of a public option is probably the most significant debate that we will have in the house on the legislation as i s

chip, sure you don't see much of him in the white house. john mccain on the other hand loved reporters, spent hundreds and hundreds of hours invested in those relationships and i think if you pull political reporters in washington, john mccain would win the personality contest by 1 million miles, but that is just to say that whatever perceived by yes there is and isn't based on relationships or based on president obama cultivating it because he has done the opposite. >> wim these were surveys taking of voting action -- >> i would say regarding the came -- mccain he was well liked i should say in the media because he is that kind of guy that will come back and talk a long time. it probably work to to his advantage some but he didn't get the nomination. >> i covered mccain during the campaign and obama right now and she is right, obama doesn't talk a whole lot to us one-on-one, and mccain did but it is a double-edged sword for mccain because of the one hand we like and as a person and he was great to talk to but he put his foot in the mouth s

on the senate and the house held a very dramatic press conference at the white house at 12:30 in the afternoon saying that they were going to reestablish the pay-go rules for future spending. that new programs would have to be paid for. and then that house leadership went back up to capitol hill here and on the same day passed this cash for clunker bill which wasn't paid for and violated the pay-go rules. the hypocrisy of it is so extraordinary that it can't even be described. but that's what happened. and then in order to protect this bill which was an unpaid for violation of the pay-go rules, they stuck it in to the conference report to fund the troops. how outrageous is that? so a pay-go point of order, which might take down this whole bill, isn't appropriate to me. but it is appropriate to make this very targeted point of order, which will only eliminate the cash-for-clunker language. the policy of cash for clunker is debatable. maybe it makes sense. maybe it doesn't make sense. but it certainly shouldn't have been put into this defense bill which is necessary for funding our tro

it hasn't mattered which party controls the white house or the senate. the paybacks and the bickering have been thoroughly bipartisan. republicans are still seething about the way judge bork and justice thomas were treated. democrats are still seething about the way the republican-controlled senate blocked or delayed some of president clinton's judiciary nominees. republicans complain that the democrats seeking revenge oppose mainstream and well-qualified judiciary nominees of president bush. i will tell you as an independent observer that both parties are right. i think president obama and the democrats who now control the senate should recognize that excessive partisanship can fuel fire. it certainly has in the past. and republicans also need to recognize that fact. i think it's time for democrats and republicans alike to join with administration and try to stop this war. an impartial federal judiciary should be the goal of both political parties. the appointment of the most qualified nominees available should be the goal of all americans. the long del

one interesting thing in introducing one thing is that the president has focused, and the white house as a whole have focused on her experience and quality cations, which i think represents a change from what president obama spoke about during the campaign. you will recall when asked what quality he would look for the president said -- candidate obama said -- empathy. it was interesting because empathy is one of those words that on its face certainly has a neutral or favorable connotation. who could oppose the justice who has empathy? but what was interesting is that he was using it in a careful sense or signaling to his supporters he would appoint a justice who would reach certain outcomes, liberal outcomes in a lot of cases. when 2 president was talking about empathy he was not talking about empathy for the crime victim or the taxpayer. he was not talking about tax empathy for the property owner. the white house has back shelved emp think and switched their focus now where it should be. her experience, her ability, her qualifications. now one interesting thing in rolling out justice

the dlc is an important policy think tank for what we do at the white house. thank you for being involved in an import organization. if nothing else, making sure bruce has an answer when i scream at him at 11:00 at night. thank you. [applause] >> thank you so much, i know you have a country to run. thank you for fighting the good fight and thank you, on behalf of democrats everywhere, thank you for m m m m m >> in "washington journal" tomorrow morning, we will discuss with azar nanisi, and hear about president obama's plan of markets, hear pr jed hensarling and luis gutierrez, "washington journal" is live. >> how is c-span funded? >> i have no clue. >> i would say some government grant. >> i would say advertising. >> our taxes? >> how is c-span funded? 30 years ago america's cable companies created c-span as a public service, a private initiative, no government mandate or money. >> there was testifying before the senate on tuesday in an oversight hearing of questions of guantanamo bay. this is three hours. >> good morning and i was talking with senator session

>> what is the white house's position? if a freshman wants to reject [unintelligible] are they still in good standing with the white house? >> we have dealt with members of both parties on some votes they have been with us and some boats that have not. the president in speaking with every member of congress would make a strong case for a supplemental bill that provides the necessary funding that our troops need in iraq and afghanistan. important money and that relates to our ongoing diplomatic efforts. in an important country like pakistan. there are a lot of important and strong things in that bill that, given the preparations that every health professional knows has to be undertaken between now and what is expected to be, another outbreak of h1n1 in the fall, there is important funding in there for medical treatment. i think everybody believes it will be necessary next fall. if people take a look at whether it is money to ensure that our troops have what they need, the diplomatic efforts that we can match the rhetoric wi

it enjoyed the white house. [applause]

it was obviously a good thing for the white house to do to get this conversation going to the american people. host: the issue of health care came up with george stephanopoulos yesterday. let's show you a bit of what they had to said. >> i do not -- i want to show you something that president- elect barack obama said during the campaign. >> i can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family, making less than two under $50,000 per year, will see any form of tax increase -- making less than two under $50,000 per year, will see any form of tax increase. -- $250,000 per year. >> the president said what ever has to be done cannot add to the deficit. we have issues with our budget. we do not want to add to our deficit. this will have to be paid for. 2/3 of the expense of this under the president's's plan and proposal will be done by transferring money within the health-care system from medicare, on wasteful spending, and so on. we are talking about the final 1/3. he has proposed a plan that would keep with the promise he has made to cap deductions for the wealthiest americans on their taxes.

we beg judges for the white house and coordinate the rulemaking in the department. in terms of policy, in terms of legislation, policy initiatives, olp is known as the think tank of the justice department. in the reagan and registration, for example, they came up with the legislation which resulted in the current federal sentencing system. they dealt a lot with death penalty issues, hideous issues, and came forward with an original meaning of jurisprudence. in the clinton administration, they spearheaded anti-terrorism legislation in the aftermath of the oklahoma city bombing. spearheaded the violence against women act. and the brady bill. in the bush administration office, -- the office initiated the patriot act. if there is something that -- you talked about state -- state secrets, whistle-blower is another issue we are working on. we work with different components within doj and also different agencies around the government. so really balance out and work through and negotiate these institutional interests. the criminal division at doj has different interests tha

the congressional budget office and the white house, they are trying to manipulate figures to hide the truth, the reality of the way things really are. you need more money, washington needs more money, a tax increase, to say carbon dioxide is a pollutant is a joke. just come out and say we need more money. guest: let me say to this debt, and again, there is not a penny of tax in this -- let me say to this gentlemen, again, there is not a penny of tax in this legislation. it is a pretty independent office, and the analysis that issues is not done for the partisan advantage of either political party. as steve was indicating a moment ago, the congressional budget office, this nonpartisan agency, says that by the year 2020, the average effect of cost on the typical american family is going to be $175 per year. the environmental protection agency, look me with the near- term cost is going to be up until that time, says it is between $77 and $111 per year for the typical family. . at the white house, the president meets with members of congress to talk about immigration issues, this after hi

the fourth component is the white house has hired -- the white house has hired acorn to participate in the census. now, over 400,000 fraudulent registrations turned in, admitted by acorn, i suspect significantly more. i never met someone who admitted to such wrongdoing and admitted to it in the full magnitude of their wrongdoing. they always try to minimize. so at least 400,000, and now the president who has worked for acorn in two compass its, hired acorn in at least one capacity, now hires acorn as another capacity to help with the census, to help count the people of the united states. now, if you want to direct what goes on in america, if you want the power of this country, there are two ways. through the ballot box and influence the election so you get your people in these heats here and in the seats in the senate and in the white house where there is tremendous power. that's one component. another component is through the united states census. what does it do? well, the constitution requires us to count the people every 10 years. not by a formula. actually counts the people. it ta

this is his second trip to the white house today. [laughter] it is a day that marks an historic step toward the changes we seek, but i think we'll have to of knowledge this is only one step. among the steps we have not yet taken it is to repeal of defense of marriage act. i believe is discriminatory and interferes with states' rights, and we will work with congress to overturn it. we have work to do to ensure that government treats all citizens equally, to fight injustice and intolerance in all its forms, to bring about that. i am committed to these efforts and i pledge to work tirelessly on behalf of these

you mentioned a meeting coming up next week at the white house. tell us a little bit more about that meeting, how that advances the issue. guest: well, gay advocates in washington had various national organizations had called for a meeting to discuss their concerns. and initially we were sort of gin a run around. but i heard yesterday that they had been invited to a meeting at the white house to discuss these concerns. and that's all i know. i was not one of those invited. i'm just a local activist, a group that focuses on equality under the law here in washington, d.c. and of course in d.c., we have a special relationship with the u.s. congress. all of the laws that we pass in d.c. have to go to the hill for congressional review period. and congress has to approve our annual appropriations bill. so we're in a special case. but our national advocates will be meeting in the white house and i expect all of these things we've been discussing will be on the agenda. >> do you know if the president is going to be at this meeting? >> i don't know that. i

the gopac to when he was in the nixon white house -- they go back to when he was in the nixon white house. there were stories about how he would talk with his hands. he was very good on the hill in terms of his performances. but he had terrible strains with a number of key members of congress that did not serve him well. it was one of the greatest paradoxes about his time. one thing that puzzled his closest aides most was what he did not seem to make more of an effort and was not able to get along better with the key members of congress. sometimes, he seemed to almost purposely alienate them. i think it was one of the major factors that contributed to his downfall. host: sylvester is on the line from florida. go ahead. caller: i want to know if donald rumsfeld was president now, how would he respond to the iran government and protesters? guest: this is purely speculative of course. for all of his toughness and plainspoken aness and directnes, he also had an inner compass when facing dicey situations. he had a sense of how far to go and when not to go too far. was secretary of defense he w

if the white house itself shows more than activity and language and town with the streets of teheran, that is a good progress, and we encourage and appreciate that as well. >> you mentioned that some elements of hamas in iran are defending the region. my question is what about hezbollah? there are some elements of hezbollah in iran. second question, what is your opinion about mousavi exactly? >> well, the regime will obviously have the ability to call upon proxy's it has set up for -- from years ago. hizbollah in lebanon, for instance. speaking of hezbollah, there are elements that are recruiting, as far as the venezuela and colombia members for hezbollah. can i call them back for additional help? evidently, they are doing that in some cases. it has been reported that hamas elements have been called by the regime for suppression inside iran right now. it is no longer question of any particular candidate, it is about the sanctity of the ballot box and sovereignty and the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. the fate of people like mr. mousavi lies, in my opinion, as it clear demarcatio

the white house. he had a pony in the elevator. a pet badger he picked up on this trip in the picture above where he would feed potatoes and corn milk. he did not have one dog. this man had six dogs all the time around him. all night if little stocks to pick up in south dallas -- colorado would sit on is not. he inherited a love of animals that he inherited from his uncle robert roosevelt. in 1860's was the number-one expert on fish. the road a lot of books about canada, ontario, fla., while the florida, which was big to roosevelt. it became part of the family tradition being a conservationist. >> did you try to convince harpercollins published a 1000 page book in this economy we are living in right now? >> my vision is to do a quartet called "america in the age of conservation goals scored with the first volume on teddy roosevelt. they don't like to promote multi volumes because people feel it's the first volume. we're not marketing it that way perce. i wanted to do something very definitive. i've al

i'm sure you do not see much of him in the white house. john mccain, on the other hand, los reporters and spent hours and investing in those relationships. --loves reporters. john mccain woodwind the personality contest by a million miles -- would win the personality contest by a million miles. whatever perceived bias there is, it is not based on relationships are based on obama cultivating it, because he has done the opposite. >> these were surveys takinen on journalists and their personal voting preference. in 2000, mccain was well liked in terms of the media. he is that kind of guy. he will talk to for a long time. we did he will talk to you for a long time. it probably worked in his advantage, but he did not denomination. >> if you look at mccain and obama, she is right. obama does not talk to as a whole lot, but became did. it is a real double edged sword for mccain freewheel like him as a person and he was great to talk to, but he put his foot in his mouth. -- it is a real double edged sword for mccain, as we like him as a person. he

every agency, every office in the white house. it will probably come a little bit from everywhere. >> do you think the project is going well? >> the recovery act is a great example. we have the most unprecedented level of transparency with regard to the spending and recovery. it is obviously a huge project, there are websites created for every federal agency, there is recovery.gov, state and local grants, it is an extraordinary effort. where we started given where we came from is huge. >> we have twitter going in iran recently. >> a couple of very important concepts that are really new in terms of political culture, would be transparency and collaboration. they are very consistent with technology concept, and they do characterized what is happening in terms of collaboration across agencies and in terms of transparency when we talk about executive order, we talk about the is the executive order. the ethics executive order. in terms of transparency -- >> you work for an administration which was going the other direction. claiming ex

we knew from the white house weeks ago that the white house thought the stimulus would create or say 600,000 jobs this summer. we knew there would be a ramp up. what is the point of this big splash today, the president and vice president had a detailed briefing? this -- do you think that you are off message? the you think people are losing confidence in the stimulus? >> part of it is to outline the exact details with which jered just want you to the 10 slides to talk about the projects that we are going to see created and what is going to be taking part in the next 100 days in the history of the recovery. it is in congruent to say it is hard to ask if we planned this -- if all this out as planned, how could it be in response to criticism? are you infering that on the 136th day -- i do not know if it was a hundred 36. >> i am trying to figure out -- what the strategy is when you talk about -- >> the president always thought about ensuring that people understood where we were on the road to economic recovery and the steps that the administration was on to take in order to improve the e

barney frank was running a prostitution ring in the white house -- not the white house, but in the capitol building there. bill clinton did his indiscretions in the white house. so, let's stop this. the man made a mistake. i forgive him. i think he is a good man. and he should not, not, i repeat, not resign to these evil people who are saying that we are for moral values. of course we are. who should be? host: thank you for your perspective. also this morning from "the washington times, " he referred to bill clinton people appeared during and after their pursuit of president clinton on impeachment charges the for a sexual liaison with an intern, several republican luminaries and not as dave, also, and elkton affairs and cling pro- life leader henry hyde, former house speaker newt gingrich and former rep bobolink is -- bob livingston who resigned just before assuming the speaker chair. mr. sanford voted in favor of three of the four articles of and be against it in -- mr. cullen. he was in the house of representatives before being elected. geraldine is joining us on independent line from mo