[ bells tolling ] ♪ ♪ "america's most wanted" edward moore kennedy. >> ted kennedy became the greatest legislator of our time. >> i plan that i shall dedicate all of my strength and will to serving you in the united states senate. >> the hope rises again, and the dream lives on. >> i love sweet rosie o'grady and rosie o'grady loves me. >> two of kennedy's closest friends in the senate. democrat john kerry and republican orrin hatch. then -- >> senator kennedy's spirit will infuse the congress. >> hopefully at every step along the way they'll ask themselves what would teddy do? >> without kennedy what's next for health care? that and all the week's politics on an expanded roundtable with george will, sam donaldson, gwen ifill, e.j. dionne and lynne cheney. all this on a special edition of cheney. all this on a special edition of "this week." captions paid for by abc, inc. good morning. he wr he was tp he wabr. t tthe onlr the op for his death. by the time teddy kennedy was buried next to bobby and john late yesterday, you just knew it was the farewell he wanted. from a senate he served. the sons he loved. >> i said, i can't do this. he said "i know you can do it. there is nothing that you can't do. we're going to climb that hill together even if it takes us all day." >> when he first got elected and my cousin joe was a member of congress and i came to congress, dad finally celebrated saying, finally after all these years when someone says, who does that damn kennedy think he is, there's only a one in three chance they're talking about me. [ laughter ] >> and the president. >> the greatest expectations were placed upon ted kennedy's shoulders because of who he was. but he surpassed them all because of who he became. >> and with that let me bring in senators john kerry and orrin hatch. welcome to you both. you both spoke movingly friday night at the celebration for senator kennedy and i want to begin with you, senator kerry because you called this last year of senator kennedy's life the sweetest of seasons and i wonder if you could share a little bit of what you learned and saw of your friend in this last year. >> well, he -- he was so graceful, george, and courageous and i think the most important thing is that he was able to see and feel the love and affection and the accomplishment of his li lifetime. so that in the end when he -- when he went, he was truly ready and at peace and i think there's a beauty in that. >> that was one of the themes related to the whole week. senator hatch, you cracked everybody up friday night when you talked about your friend, senator kennedy, and especially when you talked about those old days sometimes when he was feeling no pain in your words on the senate floor, but you spun it out into a story of redemption. >> yeah, i -- actually teddy was a very religious person, and, you know, when vicki came into his life, it changed a lot of things. of course, we had had some experiences before that, as well, that were very redemptive and helpful and all i can say is that the latter part of teddy's life was really tremendous. and i enjoyed being with him. you know, we were like fighting brothers. i mean we'd go at each other and he'd walk up to me and say, how did i do? and i used to just laugh. i used to really rib him and give him a rough time too. >> you said fighting brothers. i couldn't help but notice you two talking about health care right before we went on. >> orrin is going to be our man. he's going to be the go-to republican and do what ted kennedy would have done, right? >> all we have to do is start thinking straight and i'll be right there with him. >> that's the big question. you say do what ted kennedy would have done. you know, this ha has been a big part of the debate. secretary sebelius engaged it just a couple of days ago. >> the best possible legacy is to pass health reform this year and have a bill that president obama could sign and hopefully at every step along the way they'll ask themselves what would teddy do and move it forward. >> senator kerry, there already is a big debate over what he would do. a lot of liberals and progressives saying he would fight for this option and, you know, if you didn't have that, it wasn't worth doing. others look at it. i think you may be one that say, no, the lesson of senator kennedy is he got what he could get. the perfect couldn't be the enemy of the good. >> well, ted would put the facts on the table and he'd put the reality of life for a lot of mers on the table. and the reality of life is that we have over 87 million americans every year during some portion of the year who don't have insurance and almost 50 million who all the time have don't have insurance. it costs them and costs america an enormous amount of money. we are not managing an efficient health care system. and so we are delivering worse health care for more money than many other nations in the world. orrin knows that. we know we can do a better job of providing health care to americans and what teddy would do is he would fight for that public option because he beli e believes -- believed that the public option as i do is an effective, the best way possible to be able to reduce costs. le me just finish. but let me finish. he would fight for it and he'd do everything in his power to get it just like he did for the minimum wage or like he did for children's health care, et cetera, but if he didn't see the ability to be able to get it done, he would not throw the baby out with the bathwater. he would not say no to anything because we have to reduce the cost, we have to make these changes and he would find the best way forward. >> like howard dean not worth doing if you don't have the public health insurance option? >> i think there is an enormous amount, george -- here's what teddy would do. he would say i'm going to fight the fight and if and when we get to the point we can't get there we'll see whether we can do enough to make good happen out of this. you can't make that measurement today. we have to go down the road. >> you said earlier this year, senator hatch, that senator kennedy was really missed in the negotiations because of his ability to speak to progressives and reach out to republicans. what about going forward right now? who can fill that void and is there a deal to be had here? >> well, the one thing that kennedy had, he could bring together all of the -- all of the base groups of the democratic party. they wouldn't take him on once he plead up his mind and somebody who over the last 33 years passed almost every health care bill that works, many were ted kennedy, in fact most with ted kennedy from orphan drugs to the three aids bill bill to the c.h.i.p. bill and those with disabilities. we worked on all of those together. in every case he worked as hard as he could like john as haid sheer but when he recognized that, you know, he couldn't get everything that he wanted but he could get a good bill by working with the other side and making a true compromise he would always -- >> he would move in that direction. >> if he were there i don't think we'd be in the mess we were in. ted was a leading liberal in the senate -- in the whole congress as far as i'm concerned and others come very close to him like john here. i mean very good people. but, you know, let's be honest about it of the people out there are concerned. they don't want a government-run plan. that's simple and showing up everywhere throughout america. when medicare is $38 trillion in unfunded liability and then they want to take 4 billion or 5 billion out of in he had care, it doesn't make sense. teddy would have recognized that. look, we used to get in tremendous fights, he and i but we'd always come together in the end and it was always because both of us were willing to go to the center and sometimes he'd go to the center right. c.h.i.p. was a center right bill >> one of the things teddy would make clear and i want to now -- no one is talking about a government-run washington-based health care plan. that is not what people are talking about. so if we can get a reality onto the table which orrin is usually pretty good at doing, we can have a good conversation here. i'm convinced we're going to do this. i believe better judgment is going to prevail. i think we're going to come back, begin this discussion anew in the way we ought to. >> let me throw out something. democrats and republican, if you look across the broad senate have agreed on a couple of components of the bill. these insurance reforms, you can't be denied health care if you're sick. you can't get thrown out if you're sick. a lot of democrats, republicans say that maybe we should have this individual mandate that required people to buy insurance to couple that with the reforms. bill bradley points out today, i think 50s in "the new york times" that maybe this should include malpractice reform as we. are those three things the building blocks of a deal. >> yeah, they really are. you know, democrats have been n unwilling to take on the personal injury lawyers. and, look, there are cases that really deserve huge reward, huge judgments. we've got to find some way of getting rid of the frivolous cases and most of them are. most of them -- >> it's doable. >> that's doable. most of them are brought to, you know, to get the defense cost. they know that once they bring them, the insurance company is going to have to pay the defense cost rather than take a chance of a runaway jury. other elms they're talking about too. those are three important -- >> if you add subsidies to move towards covering more people -- >> yes, which i think we have -- actually we have some flexibility on as to sort of the rate and manner in which you do that so i think there are ways to do this, george. as a member of the finance committee, i've been part of this discussion, though many of us would like to see it broadened in some ways. my question to orrin and others is who is the republican? who are the republicans plural who are prepared to step up and do as ted kennedy would have done here. >> you were part of the negotiations earlier but then step add way. are you ready to come back? >> sure, i've always been ready to do that. you talk about an individual mandate. the problem with that is that the people who really hurt the most are those on the lower end of the wage spectrum, lose their jobs or the company goes overseas. once you start doing that -- the theory behind it you penalize the company if they don't provide insurance for their people by having them have a surc look, let's just be honest bit. it's a very difficult thing to do. there are some ways we could do this. >> actually -- >> both sides are arguing for insurance reform. that's not the issue. the issue is how do we put these together. >> let's switch the subject. >> doing it effectively in massachusetts. ted kennedy was part of making that happen. key part of making that happen. we went from 10% of our folks who had no insurance down to 2.6%. the lowest percentage of uninsured in the nation and it has worked and companies have not left. companies, in fact, are delighted with the better distribution of costs in the state, so what we need to do is have people who want to sit down and not be bound by ideology, not be the prisoners of a political strategy, but who want to get health care done based on the best way to get it done. >> can i make i point on that. >> very quickly. >> that's one of my points i've been making. utah, massachusetts, massachusetts is having a very, very difficult time because of the costs involved in their program. but it is their right to do that. utah has one of the guess health care systems in the country. motion people agree with that as does minnesota. because -- and i think the demographics in each state are different. i think if we give some flexibility we might -- >> let's move on to another issue. >> that's what worked on c.h.i.p. >> another issue that came up. the attorney general decided to investigate possible cia abuses in the prisoner interrogation cases and vice president cheney this morning has blasted that decision by the attorney general. >> the approach of the obama administration should be to come to those people who were involved in that policy and say, how did you do it? what were the keys to keeping the country safe over that period of time. instead, they're out there now threatening to disbar the lawyers who gave us the legal opinion, threatening contrary to what the president originally said they're going to go out and investigate the cia personnel who carried out those investigations. >> he called it an outrageous and possibly dangerous act. >> well, dick cheney has shown through the years a frankly a disrespect for the constitution, for sharing of information with congress, a respect for the law and i'm not surprised that he's upset about this. the obama administration has no intention -- i think the president himself has been unbelievably bending in the direction of trying to be careful about what happens to national security, protecting our national security interests, being very sensitive about the cia's prerogatives and needs and so forth and, in fact, i think there is a little bit of attention between the white house itself and the lawyers and the justice department as they see the awe and what their obligation is. and in a sense that's good. that's appropriate. because it shows that we have an attorney general who is not pursuing a political agenda, but who is doing what he believes the law requires him to do and we have an administration on the other hand that is balancing some of those other interests. >> the vice president also said that he believes the cia officials who went outside the bounds of the guidelines they were given were justified. do you agree with that. >> there is a real question whether they went outside the bounds they were given at the time. look, i -- as the longest serving person on the senate intelligence committee i've got to tell you, we don't want to cripple our ability to be able in very crucial times to get the information we've got to have to save our country and to protect our people. i think what dick cheney is arguing for -- how can anybody argue cheney has been a great asset in so many ways. he is a tough guy. no question. he differs from the so-called progressives in the congress. and i really question after all of the investigations were done, some prosecutions that were waged and most of this material was decided not to go forward to now go forward with this. i really question whether the attorney general is doing what's right. and, look, the attorneys, maybe you can question the opinions, but they were sincere opinions. i know the attorneys involved. wonderful lawyers. >> they are not going to be investigating that part. >> they shouldn't investigate that part. and nor should they be prosecuting people who acted under good faith following the advice of the lawyers in the department. so, you know, and what they're doing is crippling the cia where they're going to be unwilling to really take the risk that have to be taken during crucial type notice i'm afraid that's all we have time for you. gentlemen, thank you both tore coming in. straight to the round table. as our panelists take their seats turn back the clock. the first debate of ted kennedy's first campaign. >> if his name was edward moore with his qualifications, with your qualifications, ted, given edward moore, your candidacy would be a joke. >> great problems of this election are the questions of peace and whether massachusetts will move forward or not. we should not have any talk about personalities or families. i feel that we should be talking about the people's destiny in massachusetts. >> 47 years ago let me bring in the roundtable to talk about ted kennedy joined by george will, e.j. dionne of "the washington post" and brookings institution, liz cheney, former state department official, of course, the daughter of the former vice president as well. sam donaldson, welcome back and gwen ifill of pbs and, george, it is remarkable. you look at that debate, the first debate, 47 years later he wrote 2,500 bills. 300 written into law. he most be the consequential kennedy brother. >> yes, in the sense that politics requires patience and rewards cumulative effort and the other two lives were cut short. history dealt ted kennedy a bad hand. that is he became mr. democrat and mr. liberal at a time when liberalism just began to recede. his career is a little bit like that of robert taft who was for a generation mr. republican. and republicans loved him, applauded him and never nominated him for president. in 1980 they refused to nominate ted kennedy. in 1984 they nominated the last new deal democrat to be nominated, that was walter mondale and he lost 49 states. in '88 they began moving away with dukakis. in '92 they finally elected a different democrat. >> you know, ed mccormick was right in 1962. his candidacy was a joke except for the fact ahis brother was president of the united states and it was very important and for the first 15, maybe 20 years, i think what he did in the senate was not something that will be his legacy. it is the things he did outside of the senate that people remember. but it was liberating to lose that nomination fight to jimmy carter, get that monkey off his back and the next few years particularly when he married vicki, i think the whole body of ted kennedy's work has to be judged and in judging the whole body i think i agree. >> e.j., ted kennedy put it in context, i don't know how many saw it at arlington national cemetery, cardinal mccarrick read the letter, parts of the letter that ted kennedy wrote to the pope earlier this summer and he talked about how he wasn't a perfect person. but he also seemed to use his catholic faith and say that his public career had -- was rooted in his faith an expression. >> we believe pro-foundly in the power of confession of part of that was ted kennedy's last confession, an acknowledgement of sin. he got the last word of ace own funeral and extraordinary m manifest to in part and i think he -- his catholicism was important to him. he was a serious churchgoer and it was not only a way to make a public case for his kind of liberal catholicism, it was also a way of lobbying pope benedict and it's fascinating that pope -- and that it's interesting pope benedict's latest encyclical was a powerful call for social justice ted kennedy would have endorsed almost to the last -- >> he did mention abortion. >> he did slightly. he said we want a -- protection for catholic doctors within the health care plan. >> the catholic church, instruct me. why couldn't the pope have replied in his own maim. >> i'm glad you asked that question. >> i was curious about that, as well. i think that it's possible that there's a head of state, head of state thing going on. possible that the pope didn't want to send a signal of endorsement because they did disagree on abortion. but that's -- i'm not sure why the pope didn't write personally. >> i was disappointed although it's not my place. >> done in the third person. >> liz, another contradiction of ted kennedy which we saw played out this week. he was the democrat who in the country republicans love to hate but you saw so much here inside the capital so many republicans loved him. >> well, i think that goes to sort of what he was like as a man off the floor of the senate. i think obviously there were some very bitter partisan debates that people had with him but i too was struck by the eulogies you heard by people like senator hatch and other, senator mccain, as well and i think also what he showed was sort of the example of a man who dedicated his professional life to service to the nation. and you know i think at a time we're in now for the country, it is an example and i think it's an example for young people, i hope it serves as an example for young people. served the nobility of public office and i think you have to admire his passion and his perseverance even though many of us, myself included, you know, disagree strongly with him on his politics. >> you were at the funeral yesterday. you also covered senator kennedy in the senate and it was another striking moment, not only the sons but the niece, nephew, grandchildren using the litany to talk about ted kennedy's public works. >> you know, i served on the board -- i serve on the board of the institute of politics at kennedy school and senator kennedy was on that board obviously as is his niece and he not only reached out to the children of his family, he also spent a lot of time every time he visited harvard with the students who wanted to be future public servant, not just people who wanted to be politicians, people who volunteered in local schools and cambridge and people who do amazing things and would come to washington and intern in various offices, republican, democrat, you name it. he was very invested in that in the name of his brother and in the name of his family. but it was also an example of how ted kennedy and i noticed this yesterday in all of the eulogies and all weekend long, he was known as the great lion of the senate, the great liberal lion. he was that but he was liberal in a way that jack kemp used to say he was a democrat with a little "l." jack kemp was a little "d" if that he believed in expansiveness. when he defined civil rights he thought it applied to people disabled and to people would wanted to be married who are same sex and he thought that liberalism applied to people who needed to vote at the age of 18 and young girls who wanted to compete in athletics. he had a hand in all of these things. >> expansive, george, but you point out that era may be over and i want to pick up on the conversations that senators kerry an hatch had. any way any senator can fill that void? >> i don't think so. partly because it is a product of longevity and the enormous niceness in the man. people just liked ted kennedy. the funny thing that's happened in this august it seems to me is the country is indicated a bifurcated mine, great affection for ted kennedy. but at the same time, they are having second thoughts about this president and this president is the first ted kennedy democrat elected -- >> segue i want to take a break and come back and talk about the whole health care debate and how did ted kennedy's death affects in it and the investigation into the cia. my favorite interview with ted kennedy before the democratic convention in 2004 and the senator was walking me around the grounds at hyannis port pointing out the house where his brother jack first learned he would be president and i asked kennedy how much he regretted not winning the white house himself. >> my pursuit is public service, not the constant pursuit of the presidency. i said that almost 25 years ago so i have been honored to serve in the united states senate. i love the united states senate and we've been able to get a number of things done in the united states senate. welcome to the now network. right now five coworkers are working from the road using a mifi-- a mobile hotspot that provides up to five shared wi-fi connections. two are downloading the final final revised final presentation. - one just got an email. - woman: what?! hmph. it's being revised again. the copilot is on mapquest. and tom is streaming meeting psych-up music - from meltedmetal.com. - ( heavy metal music playing ) that's happening now with the new mifi from sprint-- the mobile hotspot that fits in your pocket. sprint. the now network. deaf, hard-of-hearing, and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com. the mobile hotspot that fits in your pocket. sprint. the now network. if you're still one of the guys who's going over and over... going urgently... waking up to go... it's time to do what lots of guys everywhere have already done-- go see your doctor, because those could be urinary symptoms due to bph, an enlarged prostate. and for many men, prescription flomax reduces their urinary symptoms due to bph in one week. one week. only your doctor can tell if you have bph, not a more serious condition like prostate cancer. avoid driving or hazardous tasks for 12 hours after your first dose or increase in dose, as a sudden drop in blood pressure may occur, rarely resulting in fainting. if considering cataract surgery, tell your eye surgeon you've taken flomax. common side effects are runny nose, dizziness and decrease in semen. millions of men have been prescribed flomax. maybe it's time to see your doctor and ask if flomax is right for you. and call 877-4-flomax to see if you qualify for up to $40 off new or refill prescriptions. for many men, flomax can make a difference in one week. to do business on a smarter planet... ...you need to open your business to the world. invite customers into the design process. work with people far outside the firewall. collaborate with business partners... get insights from suppliers anywhere... unlock knowledge from our supply chain. smarter technology means the choice... ...between being open... ...and being secure isn't a choice anymore. i can have both. helping to secure an open world. that's what i'm working on. i'm an ibmer. let's build a smarter planet. we will be right back with the roundtable and "the sunday funnies." if we're to accept the recommendations of the administration, what we're in effect going to be doing is still having two sets of medical standards, one for the poor of this country and one for the rich. and i think if we've learned one significant factor over the period of the last 20 years when the congress and the country is focused on this issue, is that what we need is one kind of a program for all americans, rich and poor and that ought to be quality health for all americans. >> ted kennedy saying he's not going to accept nixon's health plan in 1972. years later he called it one of his biggest mistakes. i'm joined by george will, e.j. dionne, liz cheney, sam donaldson and gwen ifill and i think, george, that gets at the gift of this whole what would kennedy do? what would teddy do debate? he was both a fierce partisan and ideological partisan an very pragmatic legislator at the time. >> conservatives spend our lives saying there is a reason things are as they are. there are vast forces out there and there's a reason why health care is very difficult to do. newt gingrich has a piece in "the washington post" saying since the second world war only ford and clinton had lower poll ratings than barack obama has after seven months. if that is true, it is because the independents are leaving him and more important, the elderly are. in 2008 and everyone in congress knows this number in 2008, 40% of the votes were cast by voters 50 or older. by 2030 when the baby boomers have all retired more americans 65 years old or older than there are 18 and under. had is the politics of gerontocracy. they're most weary of this program. >> gwen, senator kennedy is one of those democrats who would have had the most credibility with senior citizens could sell the deal if that's indeed -- if one indeed did come together. >> there is a big debate going on about whether senator kennedy had the magic wand and could have influenced the debate. i don't think that's resolved at all but also clear that people are reaching for something. there was a great deep breath taken this august. no shark attacks and, you know, no hurricanes that -- >> unless you were at a town hall meeting. >> and maybe they wouldn't -- they wouldn't have gotten attention. they would have been unhappy but wouldn't have been so vitriolic. ted kennedy's death made people stop. we'll see what happens when people come back to town, back to school after labor day and see if they start from a different spot or everything keeps going downhill. >> sam, watching the two senators there, it seems like there's this sense that because in the wake of the death you want to be a little more civil. you want to try to find this common ground but the closer you listen there's still huge differences. >> absolutely. two months ago i was talking to tom daschle who might have been but isn't hhs secretary but still influence on the obama side about health care who said then, we may just have to push it through with reconcile yaths in the senate. >> meaning democrats only. >> yeah, the democrats only because if they don't get something that is meaningful, ted kennedy is right, ronald reagan the same way, you take what you can get from half a loaf rather than nothing whatsoever but half a loaf in this case if it doesn't produce the goals particularly of reducing the increase in health care expenses isn't good enough. >> e. jshj.'s a problem with it. a couple of problems. number one, one fewer democrat in the senate, unclear whether massachusetts will be able to fill -- will change the law to be able to fill the seat but also and i guess this is the deeper problem, the democrats that you need to get to a majority want a bipartisan bill. they want the cover of republicans on the bill. >> first of all, i'm so glad george mentioned medicare. extraordinary conservative hypocrisy that republicans are emerging as the great defenders of a medicare program they once tried to cut and hate socialized medicine so it's a remarkable point. we've gotten to here. the fact is that the democrats i think know what a huge price they paid as a party when bill clinton's health care bill went down in 1994 and i think from left to right in that party or left to center they know what a catastrophe it will be if they can't pass a health care bill. yes, there are some technical problems in getting it through with less than 60 votes, but, you know, as donald rumsfeld might say you have to live with the republican party you have not the one you wish existed and republicans don't want to support this. >> i think that may be true but do -- i'm wondering if you're right about your analysis. are the democrats -- i want to bring you in, as well. >> are the democrats who are for the public option now, do you think they've ab skoshed the lesson? you say you've absorbed, which is the consequence of failure is just too deep. >> see, i think the mistake president obama made is sending mixed signals on the public options so early. i think he is for it. he should have defended it and described it. right now it's only ideological. not talking about the actual benefits it could produce in terms of cost saving money. in the end if he fights for it and it's clear that you can't get a bill without it then i think liberals would go along if you're going to massively increase coverage. has to push it. >> i think there is a much bigger problem here. you have a situation where president obama who is supposed to be sort of the great communicator, the white house rolls him out for three town hall meetings and on issue after issue where he's attempting to provide some comfort to the american people, they're looking at focus groups and seeing that the american people want costs down. so the president asserts that this -- these plans which everyone has adopted will in fact result in a cost cut and cbo and now the o & b also and peter or sag's letter says that's not the case, we will increase the deficit. on an issue will you be able to keep your own health insurance, the president is asserting yes, you can keep your own health insurance but then in a conference call with liberal bloggers talked about a particular provision in the legislation that sounds like it wouldn't allow to you keep your own insurance he has to admit he hasn't read the bill so there's a deeper problem here. the american people -- this was hr-3200 they were talking about but there's a deeper problem here which is that the american people fundamentally are scared about, you know, whatever bill is being proposed and sort of look to their president particularly one who has been such an effective communicator in the past to be able to give them some comfort and when they see such a difference between the president's rhetoric and blanket assertions and the specifics in any of the pieces of legislation. >> you're right. we tao talked about it before. this president by july should have said this is what we should do. you cats have been hurting yourselves. now it's time someone has got to herd you. this is what we should do, move on that. be franklin roosevelt. be a tough guy. no more mr. nice guy. ink stead he still wanted them to figure it out. >> i didn't know he was going to win no matter what he was going to do. >> he has to win. >> well, that's your opinion. my point is he's making everybody unhappy. the homeland in "the washington post" op-ed which said we bought into the whole where is the audacity? liberals are not happy, conservatives are not happy. what will be interesting to watch after the holiday is what is the line that he can force? >> it's more than a technical problem, though. if the white house is now facing a really tough choice which is are you going to not get anything on what the president said is his central domestic policy issue or -- >> a tactical problem. >> i was going to say, people are torn because they're always afraid if government does the wrong thing they'll lose something but the conservatives who have won the debate in august because they focused on that, everybody has forgotten what they don't like about the current health care system. they don't like that people go bankrupt. they don't like that you can be denied coverage because you have a pre-existing condition and obama's task is to move the conversation back to, wait a minute, there's stuff in here you don't like and we'll fix it >> that's right but what happened is -- sorry. what happened is people are realizing that is being proposed no matter what the bill is actually worse or will make things worse. >> those who have insurance are worried. >> first on the border -- brother e.j. says the republicans are guilty of hypocrisy for now defending medicare against cuts. the president is guilty of cognitive dissidence on medicare. >> which is worse. >> he says to the elderly, fear not, medicare say government health program that works well. next breath he says it's going broke and in deep trouble. now, which is it? >> it's both, in fact, you cannot sustain medicare over the long haul and he's trying to fix it. >> i tried to figure out why all of the elderly people of which i am one are against the government programs. my a orric valve replaced, thanks, taxpayers, i did pay some, over $100,000 i managed to come up with 1,800 out of my own pocket. they will cut some the benefits to make up that, we're worried about so i would have to come up with $2,100. >> the way the white house tried to solve this problem was by reaching the deal with the pharmaceutical manufacturers where they would -- >> billy tauzin, the lobbyist -- >> that's the problem. they got the agreement to fill this doughnut hole which would affect a lot of seniors but leaders are backing away it that deal. >> that's my point. how do you win a fight where everybody hates your ideas? where everybody hates your approach? and now he's the president. that's his job. it's a hard job. >> you should know what you are ideas are to begin with. >> yes. >> know what he wants to do. i think that, you know, between what hillary clinton approach which was unbelievable detail, a 500-pirng group and 0, there's a lot of room and he's got to more -- >> he's got to deal with tort reform. the american people fundamentally know that the cost of malpractice is -- >> bill bradley but also senator kerry interestingly seemed to make -- seemed to accept that could be part of a final deal. lease change subjects now and get to the other big news of the week. the attorney general's decision to investigate possible cia abuses. the president first spike about this back in february. >> if there are clear instances of wrongdoing that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen. but that generally speaking i'm more interested in looking forward than i am in looking backwards. >> now, the attorney general made this decision this week and it wasn't necessarily the decision i think the white house was all that happy with, george will. but it does appear to meet those broad parameters the president laid out. according to the -- the attorney general is not going to investigate those who wrote the law. not going to investigate the policymakers, only those who went outside the guidelines given to the cia. >> the president speaks as though he's a disinterested bystander and the obama administration's position sees to be the president cannot control the attorney general, which is false. and even more dangerously false that the attorney general can control this prosecutor. if we've learned anything at all and we maybe haven't from all the prosecutors we have had in recent years they get their own momentum, their own agenda and follow the logic of the law. >> what's the danger. >> the danger is you not only start to prosecute in a way that looks like double jeopardy but begin to go up the food chain toward the seen your levels of the administration. >> george, as i understand it, a person has been called a prosecutor has been appointed to determine whether in his opinion there is grounds to proceed with prosecutions. he will make a recommendation. there are no prosecutions. he is not prosecuting at the moment? if he recommends yes who is to say no? >> you say testimony be the president ultimately. >> the investigation has has already been done. >> one thing administration officials say -- excuse me, sam. that's where the discussions could come in. i bring you in in a second. the argument he's making does the initial investigation and that further on in the process either the attorney general or the white house could then make the decision you know you're right. these were investigated before. it's not worth prosecuting again even though there is some evidence. >> i'm not sure that there is some evidence. this was looked at for five years by career prosecutors. they decided not to prosecute except in one case where a contractor has been convicted as and jail. leon panetta himself laid out to his employees that they took action where they thought it was necessary at the cia. the other big danger here is we've investigated all of this before. we are now opening what is clearly a political investigation at a moment when we need the cia focused on keeping the nation safe. and there's no question but that when you start talking about investigating and prosecuting, people having to hire lawyers to defend against this, it is simply the case that their attention is not entirely focused where we need it to be. >> e.j., there does seem to be a dilemma. ott the one hand if there is evidence of wrongdoing other's bound by statutes they say to investigate. on the other, you do have this double jeopardy problem where people were investigated under previous administration, even if you find some evidence there might be reason not to go forward because it does appear to be politicizing this. >> what's astonishing is that eric holder is being accused of politicizing this when he has made a decision that is clearly made the white house unhappy. the white house would prefer this to go away and i think what it does show is finally we do have an independent justice department that's making decisions on the basis of law. i don't think he had a choice. new information emerged publicly that had been there before but there was new information. >> no new information. it's not true? people looked at it -- it was public for the first time. >> but that doesn't mean it's new. it's five years old. >> this raises serious questions. the justice department can also have serious questions about what we now know is a very politicized bush justice department and how it dealt with these cases. and so i think -- there is this issue of the food chain and i think that's why ultimately you can't just prosecute a couple of people and end it there. and so that's why you i think you'll end up with a truth commission, a study of the whole thing. >> yeah, i'm not convinced they'll open up the whole can of worms. fur he a democratic president and democrat lick appointed attorney general and holding your hand as cia inspector general's report which says, i wrote this down "the enhanced intear gaegs techniques under the ctc program are inconsistent with the public policy positions that the u.s. has taken regarding human rights." even if this has been investigated before how do you as a democratically appointed attorney general and democratic president not say let's take a look at this even if it's a slippery slope as george says. >> what you do is you say it has already been looked at. i mine that's the piece of this -- >> by whom. >> by career prosecutors. >> in the bush administration justice department. >> sam, they were less political than eric holder who a political appointment. but the other point that -- >> had that 2004 report been made public and then they look at it, the public looks at it and they say all right, drilling by the guy's ear perhaps r raping -- >> that is inexcusable. nobody raped anybody. >> no, but they threatened. >> a big difference. >> if i threaten you but don't actually hit you, there's a big difference but you can call me to court. >> the law said that the threats were illegal. no, it's against the law >> that's not clear. we don't want to spend a whole panel on the investigation. >> why not? >> you guys have misstated the standard for the legal investigation here and i would point you to andy mccarthy's excellent piece on what the standard is the justice department should have applied which is the notion you need evidence you can move beyond the presumption of innocence in the court of law that torture occurred. that is not here and that was as i said looked at before. the other point that is critical to me. >> everyone except one person says waterboarding is wrong. >> waterboarding isn't torture. we can go down that path. >> the lack of seriousnesses is important. goes to the point about moving the interrogations out of the cia into the white house and i think that the fact that the white house can't even tell us who is in charge of these interrogations now combined ---ors. >> has to be broader sharing. but i do want to get to the other question of the information we gleaned from all this and whether it was -- it was worth the interrogations that were conducted. >> this is why my liberal friend here, the law of averages having caught up with him has got something right. we ought to have a commission, fred hyatt in "the washington post" suggests this morning, senator dan connor and david souter, bring them down, set it up and answer some factual questions. for example, khalid shaikh mohammed was rhett sent. he was waterboarded 183 times and became loquacious. did it have something to do with that and was he useful because whether or not these techniques are immoral or how immoral they are surely depends on whether or not they work. >> and how useful the information was, whether it could have been gotten in other ways. >> right, because the cia's own office of legal counsel raised questions about how effective they are and the worst thing is do something wrong and have it been ineffective. >> and it saves lives and that may be. >> if it saved lives. >> hold on. >> if you read the documents that were released. >> -- let me just answer -- >> let you answer, sam, liz. go. >> i'm with admiral blair our top intelligence guy supposedly everybody cops under him. he said he thought we did receive some useful information from these techniques. he then said, part that's left out by people who take the first part but in our relationship with the rest of the world and the way the united states is viewed by the rest of the world it was not worth it. we have lost more by those techniques than we gained. i am with edward blair. >> i suggest you read the documents in their entirety. the documents that were released because in those documents it makes absolutely clear not only in the inspector general's report imagine 91 that khalid shaikh mohammed provided information inaccurate and incomplete prior to being waterboarded but if you read the addendum done makes clear that that information could not have been gain the through other way. says that the tech nothings were invaluable and worked. the documents -- let me finish. >> it does not prove that -- >> guys, guys, the documents demonstrate conclusively that the enhanced interrogation program provided information that saved lives. four former cia directors including -- >> waterboarding in the last two years -- >> you know what, you guys -- we're going to have to continue this -- >> dennis blair said it worked. >> hello. george is talking. >> we are out of time. i just say -- the inspector general said -- the inspector general in the report, the inspector general said that finally it is a subjective interpetation which is probably why the commission is needed. you guys continue this in the green room. we're going to be back with "in memoriam" and "the sunday funnies" but we leave with one last memory of senator kennedy. >> the image of a man on a boat, wide mane tussle, smiley broadly as he sails into the wind, ready for whatever storms may come. carrying on toward some new and wondrous place just beyond the horizon. may god bless ted kennedy and may he rest in eternal peace. crime in new york city has dropped 27% since 2001. response times in madrid... ...have been cut by 25%. cities all over the world are getting smarter... ...and safer. every time an emergency happens... ...data is generated. smarter cities fight crime... fires... flu outbreaks... ...by capturing the data. detecting the patterns. sharing it across departments. ...responding to emergencies... ...even preventing them. making cities safer. that's what i'm working on. i'm an ibmer. let's build a smarter planet. it doesn't cover everything. and what it doesn't cover r can cost you some money. that's why you should consider... an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. it can help cover some of what medicare doesn't... in out-of-pocket expenses. call now for this free information kit... and edicare guide., if you're turning 65 or you're already on medicare, you should know about this card; it's the only one of its kind... that carries the aarp name -- see if it's right for you. you hoose your doctor. you choose your hospital. there are o networks and no.referrals needed. save up to thousands of dollars... on potential out-of-pocket expenses... with an aarp medicare .supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. call now for your free information kit... how ou ould start saving. now, "in memoriam". ♪ going to the chapel and we're going to get married ♪ ♪ going to the chapel of love >> this is not really an o.j. book. this is a book about me at the o.j. trial. this week the pentagon released the names of 15 soldiers and marines killed in iraq and afghanistan. >> we'll be right back. t mileag well, do they know this malibu offers an epa estimated 33 mpg highway? they never heard that. which is better than a comparable toyota camry or honda accord? they're stunned. they can't believe it. they need a minute. i had a feeling they would. there's never been more reasons to look at chevy. it's time now for "the sunday funnies." >> senator john mccain, did you hear about this. had an out-of-control woman thrown out of a town hall meeting because she wouldn't stop yelling at him so i'm guessing he still hasn't patched things up with sarah palin. obama is spending the week at a $30,000-a-week beach house. $30,000-a-week beach house and they call this man a socialist. come on. the state of california by the way is $30 billion in debt and there's no way to pay it back. what we decided to do is set it on fire and collect the insurance money. latest rumor is that president obama is going to have dinner on martha's vineyard with oprah winfrey. that's what they're saying. the most powerful person in the free world is going to have dinner with president obama. >> we'll be right back. rything. and what it doesn't cover r can cost you some money. that's why you should consider... an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. it can help cover some of what medicare doesn't... in out-of-pocket expenses. call now for this free information kit... and edicare guide., if you're turning 65 or you're already on medicare, you should know about this card; it's the only one of its kind... that carries the aarp name -- see if it's right for you. you hoose your doctor. you choose your hospital. there are o networks and no.referrals needed. save up to thousands of dollars... on potential out-of-pocket expenses... with an aarp medicare .supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. call now for your free information kit... how ou ould start saving. we are going to leave you today with a look at arlington national cemetery, tourists paying their respects to senator ted kennedy. thanks for sharing part of your sunday with us. thanks for sharing part of your sunday with us. we'll see you next week. captions by vitac oh yea, well for 6 months, customers get all three: fios tv, internet and phone for just $79.99 a month. oh, all right, see... you're just moving your fingers aren't you? i've gotta cut my nails. (announcer) now get three amazing fios services for the price of two. tv, internet, and phone for only... plus a free multi-room dvr for three months. record shows in one room- watch in another. call the verizon center for customers with disabilities at 800.974.6006 tty/v before september 19th. and get fios tv - ranked highest in overall customer satisfaction