Transcripts For CSPAN2 After Words 20240622

Ground but when you dont you have to sort that out politically i got elected to continue to do what i was doing the also to allow us to have enough time now all the states are emulating that around the country. [inaudible] [laughter] what is the question . [laughter] i am optimistic there is a growing consensus to push the views of the political system that people are getting free and frustrated that they see the need for a new message to go back to the place to be reform at the heart of what we believe and if you do that part then you will be carried by the American People not just one elected official. [laughter] we cannot wait until 2016 to change the direction of the country. It has to start now. [applause] one more question. I am a recent immigrant here. [applause] i am wondering what about the children of illegals . What about the finish there is education . Then they stay here or leave . Right now the law is the president doesnt have the executive power but it is unchallenged but unilaterally has suspended the period of time for the students you are describing but it doesnt offer a permanent of solution to this with a path to citizenship for those to break the law the children cannot be penalized for that im not sure youre talking about anybody that you know, you are under those suggestions that are discussed right now of the person that you described in that relationship over time to get a ged. Does that answer your question . Good luck. [laughter] [applause] on behalf of everyone here thank you. [applause]. They take into account, a stark site. We partner with our cable affiliates to explore the culture of various cities. The key entry into the city as the cable operator who then contacts the city. In essence is the cable industry bringing us there. Word looking for great characters, you really want your viewers to be able to identify with these people that were talking about. Its an experience with the program that we are taking people on the road to places where they can touch things, see things, and learn about not just the local history but the national story. If someone is watching it it should be enticing enough that they can get the idea of the story but also know that this is just in our backyard lets go see it. They have viewers say oh yeah i know that place just for watching our peace. The mission of cspan from all of our coverage leads into everything that we do. You have to be up to communicate the neck message about the network in order to do this job. It stunned the one thing we wanted it to do witches build a relationship with the city in our Cable Partners and gather some great programming for history to be. Watch the city store at the cspan network to see where we are going next going next see her schedule at cspan. Org cities to her. Up next on cspan twos book tv rick santorum, nile gop president ial candidate talks about his book a blue collar conservatives, recommitting to america that works. In may of 2014 he spoke with tucker carlson, mr. Santorum argues that the working class has been abandoned by democrats and republicans. Rick santorum thank you for joining us some up the book. Theres a whole group of people in america that is being ignored, left behind, not included in the discussion for either party. Particularly though i would argue the Republican Party and thats ivory call blue collar conservatives, folks out there that are working people, most dont have College Degrees, folks that really still understand the value of work and the importance of work and responsibility. People understand the importance of family and faith, i believe in freedom and limited government. You say a lot of those are conservatives Republican Voters and in many cases they are not, all lot are not voting at all because they dont really see either party talking to them about concerns they have in trying to create an opportunity for them to live the american dream. You look at the democratic party, they talk about these voters a lot, in fact they talk about how they can get them certain things like free healthcare, subsidize health care, increasing their wages with minimum wage increases, a whole laundry laundry list of things that government benefits that they are trying to help, but of course most of these folks dont want to be on a government program. They want to work, they want jobs that are wellpaying jobs that create opportunity for them to support themselves and their family, that sounds like more of Republican Voters. Republicans the economic message, we have seen us the year, we talk about economists, were wrapped up in the rightness of our petition we talk about balancing the budget, cutting taxes for high income individuals to create jobs, and cutting government and particularly a lot of benefits if youre the average american listening to this economic plan you say, where my in that plan . What are you doing for me, people who are seeing their wages stagnating and not seen increases and thats really who this book is written for. For republicans to understand why they are not succeeding in getting these of boats. Host its perplexing because some of these voters seem winnable by republican so why wouldnt they be talking to and about workingclass voters. Guest because it really requires you to not say macro but micro, thats a very difficult thing for republicans, the id on economics is a rising tide lifts all the votes. I agree i agree re rising tide lifts all boats unless that boat has anr hole in it, then that rising tide is a very dangerous dangerous thing because when the tide rises your boat sinks and you are not in a very good situation. It depends on how high the titus. So you have a lot of people have holes in their boats to people who dont have skills and not having education, maybe having a drug or Substance Abuse problem, maybe having palms at home are difficult families, theres a whole laundry list of things and all of us have some holes in our boats. There are Many Americans who dont see this rising tide necessarily helping them so what i have done in this book, what i tried tried to do on the campaigns address areas where bluecollar america, where average americans can see some direct economic benefits and there some opportunity for them thats why talk a lot about specific sectors of the economy where large portions of these types of workers will find employment that is actually going to be family sustained employment in the areas of energy, manufacturing, and related industries. The focus on the other side because its not just economics, one of the problems is culture and families and communities breaking down, so we talk a lot about the importance of marriage and the family as a part of building that held the american dream. Host pres. Obama has talked a lot about income inequality and its rise, is he right and should republicans be echoing that . Guest the question still bear out the rhetoric, the fact is things havent changed, but they havent gotten better and i think thats really the issue. Relative to europe and canada the opportunity of mobility in america is not as good as it is in some of those countries. While the idea that there is this exploding gap of income equality is not the seri blown up by the fact, the fact is there are Serious Problems in america that need to be addressed and there are people in america who are not getting ahead. Instead of arguing the debate as to whether we are better or worse, lets just focus on the fact that millions of americans out there who are not seeing their quality of life improve and what can we do to address those. There there are things we can do, everything from looking at the economy, looking at the culture, looking at education. One of the things i talk about in the book is providing vocational education, career tracks other than crew tracks that lead to college. 70 of americans dont have College Degrees and that numbers and going to change much. What are we doing to provide the necessary skills and high to provide the necessary skills in high school, as well as Technical Schools after high school to provide the skills necessary for people to work with their hands as well as their head. Spee1 how did all this happen . What happened to happened to workingclass america to rule america hasnt the rising stock market is obviously on fire but it hasnt helped a lot of people in the interior of the country, what is it . Guest its a variety of things, the economy has changed we have a much more globalization, open market when that happens. Theres competition from overseas, and overall the argument is an illegitimate argument to be made that america does better when we have that competition from overseas and crashed on prices because prices are lower for everybody. Competition as we all know is a good thing, globalization is a positive but is also a negative if youre the person who is losing their job as a result of this competition. I make the argument that look im not against globalization, i understand the Global Economy but we have to be understanding of the impact case by case of agreements and other agreements we have to the american worker. I voted for a lot of tree grade agreements, i didnt vote for nafta because i thought it would be very devastating more than it would be helpful. In my opinion thats been borne out at least it hasnt improved the situation for america. We need to look at freetrade agreements and the fact that america is not being competitive because our taxes are higher, we have the highest tax in the world, we have a hostile Regulatory Environment in this country that has gotten worse under this administration, look at the litigation environment here, look at the educational gaps we have here, look at the training for manufacturing and those types of jobs. The role of government has played in making its on competitive is pretty profound. One of the reasons i wrote the book is because america manufactures can be competitive in a Global Economy if the government creates a level Playing Field visavis our competitors and so i have a laundry list of things that go through in the book that talk about how we can do just that. Host its early hasnt helped him america manufacturing, you almost never hear anybody complain about that, why . Guest because most people arent in manufacturing, they havent lost their jobs or are getting lower paid jobs. Its a very small percentage of americans are actually participating in manufacturing, substantially less than it was before. If you are professional or someone who works in Service Industry and youre looking at getting something for substantially lowerpriced because its been manufactured overseas, youre, youre happy to go to walmart. But as you know walmart is now very focused and we ran a bad campaign for the last year upon there trying to move things back here to america and try to encourage manufacturing here in this country. I think those were benefiting greatly like walmart from this globalization, and having these products made oversee, see the benefit of having these products made here. Theres a famous conversation a famous conversation that occurred between henry ford and Walter Reuther and the head of the union that ford had to deal with, he was walking through the plant and showed reuther a machine, he said this machine is going to replace how many of your workers. Ruth responded while thats great but how many cars as this machine gonna buy. So thats really the tension here that yes we can replace workers with foreign competition with automation, but you have to have wages to buy these products here in america. There is an understanding now that walmart and many others that we need to look to how we can be competitive. Im not looking to reap the game, if you look at the proposal in the book theyre conservative and orientation, theyre not big and subsidies, their tax cuts, regulatory cuts, regulatory reform, education which government is heavily involved in. Things that we can do all consists of what i called with conservative politics and conservative philosophy that give us the opportunity to be competitive. Host why not rigged the game, what why wouldnt the u. S. Government to all its cant help america even at the expense of other countries . Spee2 will first of all you have trade rules they have to deal with, we do deal globally so when it comes to trade laws thats one area where i dont get into that much because we start linking with trade laws to use have retaliatory efforts on the part of the other countries particularly china. So i think you have to be very careful that you structure it as a level Playing Field and you do a consistent with the trade laws that are in place and the limitation of what those countries can do to favor manufacturing of one country over another. Host you dont it mention immigration in the book, if you persistently high on unemployment you have usually dont have a labor shorter, why would you import 1 million lowwage workers from other countries into our country every year . How does that help . Guest i do talk about the importance of having a trained labor force but youre right, certainly with ilLegal Immigration, ilLegal Immigration is anything that we would do in my opinion that would solve the problem of ilLegal Immigration by bringing in any form of amnesty to these workers will flood label markets in this country with more lowwage workers. We have an immigration policy that is today fairly generous immigration policy and we need to in examine that policy and see how it impacts the american worker, where we are bringing people in from, what are what are the skill levels of the people we are bringing in, and settling factor that in when it comes to the labor markets of this country. I dont thing we do that candidly, we have done it in the past is something that immigration policy has dealt with throughout the course of American History so its not something we should be afraid to do, we should look at it from the standpoint of the people in this country making sure they have the opportunity. My focus is not an immigration policy per se, i think there is a point to be made but i specifically didnt want to deal with the whole concept of ilLegal Immigration because to me, look barack obama had two years as president of the United States with complete control, super majority control in the house and senate could have passed any illegal Immigration Law that he wanted and he never proposed a bill. To me that says this issue is not of political issue, it is a policy issue, it is a purely political issue. It its an issue that the republicans in the mama wants to use to drive a wedge between republicans and hispanics. So my position is we do not play that game. This is what my position has been, first and foremost let secure the border, lets take this problem of say 12 million Illegal Immigrants from this country and make it a finite problem, a resolvable problem. If you dont control the border to the point where you wont have another flood of it immigrants then you create another problem because you now have 12 more Million Immigrants in this country because you have granted amnesty to the existing group. From my perspective lets have a discussion, and i just did on ilLegal Immigration and how we mess that up to make that work for the country but leave the other immigration aside. Host no one admits to liking ilLegal Immigration lets just take the legal sigh, the democrats are for it because these people become citizens and become democratic voters, the republicans dont like it because they get rich from cheap labor. But why is it good for the average person working at walmart in the middle of the country why is it good for him to have to compete with someone from another country who just got here who will work for much lower wages, why second from question mark. Guest one of the reasons is Legal Immigration is a good thing is because our country isnt growing. We are now below replacement rate of the population in this country. I think there is something to be said legal immigrants do bring a vitality to this country and so Legal Immigration is still a positive thing, but for for immigration i dont think we would be growing. I think theres lots of room in america and if we want to be a country that continues to grow and expand that the positive thing, i think is a positive thing for market, so yes of these people competing for jobs yes, but they are also consuming. If they are working and buying products, i dont see i dont see that is necessarily a zerosum game if you people come here legally and do so in a way make sure that you are getting friday of workers and skill levels to be competitive. They are also consumers and i dont think thats a bad thing. Host so if im an employer and hire someone, and immigrants are not, and im paying minimum pay minimum wage, no one can live on that. So the slack is taken up by tax payers in social welfare programs that we have, the taxpayer pays for that person in effect to be able to live. Why should employers get what is in reality, subsidy for taxpayers. Guest will the cheap labor is labor based upon what the based upon what the labor brings. Its not we have made the decision that if someone is making a certain amount of money we are going to provide support for them, income support, food stamps or whatever the case may be. That is a decision that is separate from the business decision. I dont think were subsidizing cheap labor i think were basically saying that this is the value of businesses said that cheap labor brings to the enterprise and if we are driving up the cost of that by higher minimum wage laws which president obama is proposing, which i oppose, then what we are doing is driving the cost of labor up which will result in unemployment and loss of jobs. Host theres a study that came out this weekend that show the top 25 Hedge Fund Managers made for themselves about 29 billion last year. Twentyfive people made 29 billion when you when you hear that whats your reaction . Guest my reaction is the capitalist system works very well for people who have resources. In fact president obamas world of economics is one that encourages that, why because he has pushed forward all of this policy that favors favors and provides backstops for people who take big risk and at those risks dont come true than the federal government backs them up. We have created a tremendous opportunity for wall street to do very, very well in this administration and not a particularly strong effort to help main street are smalltown and rural america. Im not surprised to hear those numbers, that is part of the american dream. I have concerns that when you look at the tax on capital versus the cap tax on labor, what ronald ragan attempted to do in the 1986 tax act was to state backed up and say if you want less of something tax it, if you want more of something subsidize it. We subsidize the b of the via visavis labor this is exactly what we suggest just by having low Capital Gains tax. In fact republicans would say were eliminated Capital Gains tax than what youre going to do is say please keep investing in capital, keep investing in things because youre going to get a huge subsidy for doing so. If you invest in labor and employee people then youll accomplish the same purpose and get a return on your money and youre going to be taxed heavily for that you will have regulations, it it will be costly for you. So what ragan didnt 86 was a lower that to 28 , you had labor and capital being priced at the same thing for the standpoint of taxes which encourages investment of labor and employment. Today, we have a tech structure with 40 and Regulatory Environment and Obama Administration has created you have an economy that greatly favors capital over labor and that is why youre seeing high unemployment rates persisted. Host it also sends a message to the tax code that we dont value work. Your sucker if your work, why would you work for a wage when youre paying twice the tax rate of someone investing money. Guest yes about the secretary Warren Buffett is making millions and paying 15 tax on it. The secretary although she gets a nice salary shes paying 40 at the top rate. It doesnt make sense. Im someone who has been very blessed, i love to work on my work hard, i get very little in way of investment so i cant remember the last time i paid a gain on capital investment. I have a fair amount of income coming in for labor and guess what, i get taxed to the hilt. So you just have to work that much harder. You have seven kids you have no choice but for a lot of people they just they whats the the point . Why am i doing this . So it is a discouragement for a lot of people. Host at a certain point out your risk social instability question mark. Guest the point they are making is when you have people who are making huge amounts of money like Hedge Fund Operators and they will all get taxed at 15 , for the quote work they did. If youre working for that Hedge Fund Operator and youre the secretary or the administrator, youre paying 25 to 40 depending on your income and you say will how is that fair . I would make the argument, ronald ragan made the argument that it really isnt fair. We fair. We shouldnt be rewarding one over the other and part of the approach in the book, i dont really get into it in detail with a conference of tax policy, what i approach in the book is lowering marginal rate is more effective than increasing the demand for labor. A big part of what im suggesting is taking tax code simpler and lowering that marginal rates is very important. Host your famous as a social conservative and youre described that way yet this book does not really tackle abortion or gay marriage for example. Neither one is in the index why is that . Guest well im not as social conservative because im one of the conservatives who are willing to talk about these issue. Most conservative when these issues come up they dive under the table. So its sort of funny that you are known as a social conservative because the one of the few folks who answers questions on the subject and is willing to articulate a vision. In this book we do talk about a culture, i do as we mentioned earlier the importance of the family and marriage as an economic good for society. The word economy comes from the word which means home, home is the first economy, its the first hospital, is the first school, its the first everything. It is essential foundational Building Block of society. Family as an important part of the economic wellbeing of our country and that we as americans are losing this foundation Building Block. 40 of children are being born outside of marriage. If you look at the numbers, im sure you know these, you go into a prison of america and you find that 85 of the men in the 5 of the men in the prison were raised in homes without a dad. We know the social consequences of large segments of society where children dont have dads work where marriage is impossible anymore. Its not a positive thing, economically for those families or for the country generally. So the question i dress in the book is what do we do about that . Is there anything that the government, or Public Policy can do . The answer is clearly yes there are lots of things we can do. They are important they are important for us to do if you look at the left who, in their sincere compassion to help people were struggling, particularly single moms they structured all these programs that depend on you not being married. Im sure thats not the way they designed it but that effect is and i use this example in the book, in wisconsin if you are single mother with two children and you are earn 15000 per year working parttime you get 38,000 in welfare benefits. In welfare benefits. If you get married, you lose them all. So if you get married, your your husband would have to make 50gram plus a year to get married well im sure thats possible but its not highly likely. What happens is we created a marriage trap. We created barriers for marriage for the very people who its important, and for many of them to have a stable and relationship with a man if it helps with raising other children. Instead what we do is encourage that mother economically either not to get involved or if she does, have a very dangerous relationship with having a man live in the home and of course you know the most dangerous relationship about the mother and the children of that mother. We are doing things that are destructive of families all in the name of helping people when in fact we have to change these incentives to create incentives for people, or at at least stop the barriers for marriage. Host president clintons has every single time call for people to get married as a solution to poverty but why dont republicans talk about this question mark i cant remember the last time a republican candidate talk specifically about tailoring policy to encourage marriage. Guest i do, and i did. I did in the last election i talked about it i talked about that woman in wisconsin and i campaigned in wisconsin. I actually use that repeatedly. I have, you may remember i wrote a book in 2005 called it takes a family, it was a direct response to humility Hillary Clinton when she said it takes a village. I do believe families the Building Block of society and marriage is essential public good, not just with the work thats been done by Arthur Brooks and others who talk about the issue of happiness and look at studies over time of what makes people happy. I addresses in the book, its not even close, mary people are by far happier than single people. They have better economic prospects, their children do better educationally, they do less drugs, less crime, all sorts crime, all sorts of societal benefits. Youre right, republicans have been downright hostile to embracing that a talking about that because they dont want to be seen as moralized. They dont want to be seen as telling people how to live their lives, no one is telling anybody how to live their lives, what we are saying is any more than what were saying you shouldnt smoke, the government all the time is same messages coming out saying smoking is bad for you or texting and driving is bad for you, or hiring veterans is a good thing to do. We recognize certain public goods and as a government, and as as a society we get behind them. What i suggest in the book is the popular culture, talking holiday hollywood, the news media, entertainment industry, educational industry, industry, educational industry, in fact Public Schools and private and colleges, businesses, labor this is something we should all agree with. We want to develop a positive marriage culture in america. Host so do you think its a fear of seeming unfashionable . Anybody who has googled note the numbers are and you think they just dont want to see them. Guest they dont want to be seen as moralizing, i guess when i talk about it that the pushback i get. Like what are are you telling people that single moms are bad, im nothing anybody as bad im saying were in a situation where marriage is failing. Its failing as an institution and one of the reasons we are seeing an attempt to redefine it is because we sort of lost what it is. It is important for us to reclaim marriage for what it is and not just the romantic relationship between two people though it is certainly part of that its not just a contract where people receive benefits because that relationship, marriage is unique and provides a unique benefit to society which is the joining of a man and woman together who are the only two that can have children that are their children and have the natural mother and natural father raise those children. I do that in a home that is supportive. It does bring something unique and it is a good for the public to have children raised in that environment, it is also a very important good for men and women, not just for happiness but for a whole host of other reasons where that relationship has benefits to men and women. I dont think theres any reason to shy away from it, in fact what im hearing and seeing as many of the left are recognizing this, there there seen the statistics that came out in the last six months where you had all this talk about income equality and every single study that talked about income inequality came to the same conclusion. The number one factor that overcomes income equality is marriage. If people get married before the have children, if people who are married stay married that it in fact results in a better Economic Conditions than someone who is either single or a single mother, singled at her divorce. Host your say were attempting to redefine marriage i think maybe that debate is all over do you think in 20 years that gay marriage may not be the law of the land. Guest i think this is a very similar debate that went on with abortion. Forty years ago the Supreme Court came down and decided that abortion was right, abortion was legal, it was a public good, something good, something that should be pervasive and accepted. If you looked at this generation of young people, i think according to most of the polls i have seen, the youngest cohort in the poll are the most prolife right now. Right now youre recognizing that just because the court said it so, just because it was something affirmed or approved by the Supreme Court doesnt mean that society is going to accept it at least not in the case of abortion is not true. You taking a human life and more more people are recognizing the horror of taking that innocent life and are pushing back. I think the same thing will happen with the issue of marriage. As i said we have lost the definition of marriage because we have lost what marriage is. I think its going to take may be losing something is in the consequence and not then the consequence of to realize maybe we have made a mistake here and pull it back. Host it seems like you have a real problem with libertarians, i i remember you are on fox a few years ago and called ron paul, quote disgusting. In the book you take shots at libertarians what objections do you have . Guest i talked called him about his attacks on me, he was saying things that were ridiculous and out right lies about me and my record. And i called him disgusting. I dont think ron paul personal is disgusting what he was doing was. I do have concerns about the impact of libertarians on the conservative movement because i dont think its consistent with conservative thought. I think the idea that libertarians and im not talking about libertarian conservatives because there are conservatives who are little stronger on some of these issues in particular leave the issue of constitutional limitations and i respect that we have been very healthy debate in the Republican Party to the role of government and what the government does to the issues of privacy, i think those are important issues. Libertarian conservatives that are not a big concern but libertarians and folks who pretend to be libertarian conservatives are trying to change what conservatism is. There have a lot more problem than from their isolation view of how we approach national security, i think we have seen in the last five years of the Obama Administration white isolationism in america is taken a backseat would mean to the world into our own security. The best example of why wont work as the last five yet they maintain. The other area i am concerned about is the fundamental idea of how libertarian is a miss based upon, i think think its based on a flawed view of man. I think ultimately the libertarian view is that people are free to do whatever they want to do and government is reviewed and people have this freedom to exercise their own will that the world would be a better place. I dont buy that, i dont understand why youve seen anything in Human History that would suggest that would result in a good and decent, and virtuous society. Society. They believe, i think the fundamental understanding is that humans are essentially good and if left to their own desire things would be fine. I believe my man has basically fallen and needs to have family and civic institutions in the government to have laws in place and conventions in place to shape and mold that individual. Host interesting. Everyone agrees their have been problems with the application of iraq in the last decade. But the last decision to invade iraq, do you think that was a good decision . Guest i can answer this to ace, at the time i made the decision i thought it was the right decision, and i look back and the only 1i know i knew at the time i wouldve made the same decision. Knowing now what happened and how the occupation and having involvement in that area of the world and the complexities of dealing with the radical islamists and frankly just the muslim culture, i certainly Going Forward would be a lot more cautious about him being engaged in those type of activities in the future. We need to learn a lesson that once the longterm prospects of doing what we had attempted to do when going into iraq is not im not optimistic about positive results about going and taking that type of approach again. Host do you think others have learned that lesson . No one has been ostracized. Guest i think its different to suggest that what we attempted this is not been done weve never done this before. So the idea that says well these people were wrong and they should be ostracized, i think a a lot of them and ive talked to many of them, are little chastened in venturing again into Something Like that. I dont think its the people in the initial invasion and managing that war are necessarily the people who are going to finish it out. When you look at the fact that maybe theres other administration that have less of a stomach stomach for finishing the job and doing it right, you have to take that into consideration when you engage in the first place. Host you free seven children, seems like youve done a good job at it. Do you think of attrition and apology play a role, if you make a mistake even if you do with the best of intention if you really screw something up, should you apologize . Shouldnt there be a role be a role for public humiliation and sanction, isnt that all part of, you know she apologize. Guest i dont think they should apologize i think they should be candid at about the failures that took place. I dont you look look at iraq today and say thats a success. But that doesnt mean you have to take out the whips and start flogging your back to the public square. The decisions that were made at the time were under a very different set of circumstances and limited understanding of how that interaction with woodwork. I dont think attrition is necessary, i think honesty and analysis of what happened and what we should do Going Forward would be much better more appropriate fact. Host one of the assumption at that time was democracy is the best system for everyone and democratic countries tend to be more peaceful. They dont attack one another, do you still believe that question work. Guest i still believe that, the question is how applicable is it in various cultures. I i think we have to recognize that there are certain cultures where this type of idea is more difficult to plant and sustained than others of the world. World. I think we have to be realistic and where we apply that. The idea is still the right idea and i think its true the question is is it possible, and to what extent are we willing to sacrifice to sustain a presence in an area to finish the job. I believe we have found that that is not going to be possible in that area of the world. Spee1 if that id is true then shouldnt we be pushing, advocating and should we have some authority in this area for example saudi arabia could be a Democratic Society or jordan, would would that be better for us . Guest i think the question is not thats better for us or not, i think the idea and the goal is a good one the question is how do you get there and how to long do you take, and what measures you take. I think you mentioned egypt. I dont egypt was ready for elections, you look at a lot of these countries and you make the assumption, look at the United States were we ready for an election when the United States was formed to have everyone in the United States well . Will our founders and think so, they limited the people who could vote in an election. It was a decision that was made to make sure there is some continuity and stability within the government that was consistent with the values of the government was founded upon. We cant go out and say well the objective and was a free election, that shouldve never been the objective. Democracy is something is appropriate to come when its appropriate to come. We have have to work with individual situations to ultimately and it could take 100 years to get there but the idea of rushing into these types of freedoms and elections, i think was that the road right approach. Host what do you think we should do in afghanistan now question work. Guest i think maintaining some type of presence there, weve certainly learned our lessons from iraq that leaving is the worst of all possible situations. Now we have chaos again in a Dangerous Alliance between iran and iraq. Civil unrest, terrorism, terrorist groups, is not a positive situation so to the extent to which we can continue to support the afghan military. Again, its the stomach for the long haul and having the involvement that it provide some sort of possibility for stability in the future. But when we say its hopeless and we leave, then you go back to the situation that caused you to get there in the first place. Host this book makes me assume that youre running again because it lays out a pretty call current worldview, do you agree or disagree, that suggests to me that you are entering the likely for your run again . Guest will entering public like doesnt nastily mean youre running, but im out there in the publics. Host i mean running for office. Guest ive been very clear that it something that im actively considering, trying to gauge both the level of support thats out there but also trying to figure out, being being the father of seven kids four of whom are at home, having just finished up two years ago it takes a toll. You have to measure all of those things that both politically and personally. I have a concerned about the future of this country, i think i bring Something Different to the table and so we are going to actively consider whether this is something we should do and well make a decision sometime next year. Host you have little kids at home. Guest yes our children, we have a little little girl was going to be six in may, thats our youngest. We have a 23yearold is our oldest. So still relatively young and they still need their dad around and thats my challenge and something that we think about and pray about trying to discern whether to know whats the right thing to do for our family and our country. Host how far hard is it on your family to run for president . Guest well youre absent, youre just not there for long. Of time. You can bring you can bring kids on the campaign trail, and we did, our two oldest kids were traveling with us a bit and now some of our other children would be in position to be more of that. We saw of younger kids and as you know, our youngest are sixyearold, has a disability and requires constant care. Those are the things, i know people look at politicians and say well its all political and you talk about the family is just an excuse, maybe thats the case and somebody said case of mine. exposing yourself to the american public, that now because of social media, has the ability to speak much more loudly than what they should. Host hmm. I know that candidates or potential candidates are always hesitant to critique other candidates. But who are you impressed by of the people would might run for president . Anyone . Sunny thought in 2012 we had a bunch of really good people, and host you did . Guest i thought we do. They were good folks. Running for president is hard, tucker. You look at folks and say, this person didnt do very well, that person didnt do well. Its hard. I would say dont try this at home. You look at candidates who have dropped in, someone like a rick perry last time, dropped in and found out, wow, this is were not in texas anymore. Were in this is a very tough environment, and its day in and day out. You have to be mentally and physically and emotionally prepared for it. And so i guarantee you that two years from now, when youlooking at the republican field, youll see, gee, that wasnt quite as good a field as we thought it would be. Because its a hard thing to do, and everybody has faults, everybody has weaknesses and they get shown very clearly in a president ial race. Host im sure youll say this isnt true, but my perception after reading this book you had some measure of contempt for mitt romney. Dont seem impressed by him. Theres talk his a couple of his aides were talking up the possibility of another run by him for president. That do you think of that . Sunny i dont think i was unkind to mitt romney in the book. I think he was miscast, the wrong counties. I supported him in 2008. I wait as different election. But in the 2012 election he was just not the right candidate. He was at the time of the 99 1 we did not need to nominate a wall street multimillionaire, one percenter, who unfortunately never was able to even throughout the primary never able to deal with and get comfortable with his wealth and how to explain that and his success. And on top of that the whole issue of obamacare and the fact we had a candidate who took the most important issue that helped is win the 2010 election, probably well help us win the 2014 election, but when the leaks was up for the important who instituted obamacare, we never talked about it. We just had in my opinion, the reason i was so passionate about running and got engaged in the campaign we needed someone who was better on those two fronts and, i thought a guy who group up in a steel town, on of an immigrant. Wasnt for the wall street bailouts, who actually had put forth a lot of good free Market Private sector ideas on health care would be a better choice. Host what do you think of jeb . Guest i dont know jeb that well. I look at his record as governor of florida. Seems like a solid record. I think he is a good and decent man i dont really know that much more. Host now, as you know, romney won of the seven biggest states he won only one, texas, and if republicans dont win texas, i dont think theres a way they can get to the required number of electoral votes. Guest very hard. Host so a lot of people who are watching this carefully believe texas could easily go blue, become a Democratic State over the next ten years. At that point, would the Republican Party cease to be National Party in practical terms . Guest thats why its important that we expand the base of the Republican Party. If you look at what Ronald Reagan did, in 1980 and 1984, winning all these states, you say thats not possible again. Its not possible given where the Republican Party has positioned itself, but its very possible if we position ourselves and identify with the great middle of america, who is looking for someone who has a plan to make life better for them. Its really the reason i wrote the book to speak from the people across america, those of us who have these sets of values, but also speak to the republican establishment that we have to stop focused on, i think, extraneous issues. The idea that we have to abandon the family and i ban don life. Well, the people im talking about happen to share our values on those, and theyre willing to vote for us if we can show we care about them. I cite in the book, in the exit polls, there was 23 of the population on the exit polls said the number one issue for them was does he care about people like me . And barack obama got 81 of