tv CPAC 2016 CSPAN March 4, 2016 10:30am-1:16pm EST
to the fbi. host: why? caller: because it is a terror attack that happened and they should have access. host: barbara, what if this was a murder case? what if this were a drug deal? should apple release that information to those types of issues as well? caller: absolutely because we are in so much trouble here in the united states that i believe they should have access at all times to anything -- murder cases, anything. i don't think apple should be doing what they are doing right now. they should release all the information regarding that phone. host: think you, ma'am. eli dourado, if this were e-mail they were trying to get or phone old wirelineom an phone, are those different issues? guest: i think it is different.
maybe the color does not understand that apple has turned over everything on the phone. but the court is asking apple to produce something that it doesn't have. asking apple to take its engineers, put them in a room for four to six weeks, creating a new operating system that it does not have that apple believes is too dangerous to create, and then after having that team of 10 engineers working for six weeks, they would have this tool the fbi can then use. , justple has turned over as other companies turnover .-mails when it is a warrant other companies turnover records that they are ready have when there is a proper subpoena. this is not a subpoena, this is an order to create a neutral. host: robert tweet sent, not
collocated at all. fbi can go to court, get a search warrant to search a home or confiscate your computer, same thing. the opposite of what i was just saying. it is not the same thing. again, this order is a fairly unique court order. it is not a subpoena at all. it is not technically a subpoena. a subpoena is when you go to court ended on the court says, the order you to testify, or we order you to produce evidence you already have. this is a court ordering apple to do work that it does not want to do. jeff, maryland, give us your views, jeff. caller: good morning, thank you for having me on. the first thing i want to say is that it is very disappointing for the guest speaker will be
talk about terrorist attacks in our country that we downplay them because one, it is too many. failure ofws us the our government. its greatest responsibility to americans as deemed by our founding documents, which is to protect us. the second point i want to make is the most important aspect of all of this is the fourth commitment. americans -- fourth amendment. americans forget that the fourth amendment protects us. ist we do and what you see the control through fear. as the one caller said, let's wait and see when it is your family member that is murdered. calls, the calls is liberty. if my child was murdered, i
would not expect americans to give up liberty to solve that case. at thisee with apple moment in time. host: thank you, sir. eli dourado. this isn't a fourth amendment issue. the shooter is that in this case. the shooter does not have any fourth amendment rights to privacy. virtue of being a dead person. so, in this case, just the legal issues center around other 1789 is thet justification that the fbi is using for this. apple is opposing the order on lawground of a clinton era on obligations of communication providers to law enforcement.
and on first and fifth amendment grounds. i would caution the caller that is -- that this isn't a fourth commitment issue. privacy is that's not even the issue. this is often being framed as privacy versus public safety. securityhat it is data that is drawn the objections and most -- from apple other people who support apple. host: would we have this conversation with an android or phone?ft guest: it is very possible. android phones have a form of encryption as well. in the android case, the operating system is written by google and the phone is made by different manufacturers. it is not clear exactly how it would apply, but a similar case could be brought in the future. host: the government has said this is a so-called marketing
ploy by apple. is that fair? guest: i don't think that is there at all. when the judge issued a preliminary order, apple asked the judge to do it under seal. apple asked for it to be in secret. they do not want to have this fight in public. they would much prefer to do it in private. that is not consistent with it being a marketing ploy at all. and again, it is the fbi really want to have this battle in public because of the facts of this case are so favorable to them in the court of public opinion. supports terrorism -- nobody supports terrorism or has any , orathy for these shooters their privacy. it is astounding that anyone would care about the privacy of someone who has obviously committed a terrorist act.
ploy by is a marketing the fbi more than a marketing ploy by apple. journal" "wall street -- apple is right on encryption. they write, we found no one on program that waxes and wings on political surveillance. this case is not about privacy. it is about engineering security and its implications of security on all americans. anthony in maryland. when you come down on this issue? caller: thank you very much to speak to you on this channel for the first time in many decades i have been listening to you guys. i support apple. grounduation on the and anreate momentum
interesting situation across the globe. it will not be limited to the united states, it is everywhere. what they are asking is a upnket injunction to open the floodgates. throughybody can go anybody's phone, no privacy, no nothing. i am surprised. it is creating a political divide to address this issue. this is about everybody. the situation that they are -- it will be a situation where nobody has privacy. i do not support the government's position. host: thank you, sir. mr. dourado. guest: i think anthony is
absolutely correct. this is serving going to be a global issue. we should be clear about the that the u.s. is asking something that no other government has asked for. if the u.s. government succeeds in asking for this from apple, it is going to be -- every other government will find cases where reasons, there are either good reasons or bad perspective, our to ask apple to do the same thing. of course, apple, is a multinational company. it operates in china, russia, drop the world. and if illegitimate court in the , or order apple to produce this backdoor operating system, then a court
in any of those countries will be able to order apple to do the same thing. apple will face a choice potentially between having to produce it there, or leaving that country. terrible precedent to set. anshould be supporting oppressive regimes who don't want to have the government have access to all of their information. host: mr. dourado, have any cases, to other countries like this? guest: this is the only time in history where the government has asked apple, or another computer programmer -- another for computer -- another computer company to produce something like this, a backdoor to their
system that does not exist. are -- ourtweet 10, devices spy on us, track of, collect info on less, or they are on crackle fortresses. devices toan use our track ourselves and upload data to the cloud. if that data has been uploaded to the cloud, those companies do need to produce it. my --duce it when asked when asked by a lawful court. we also have the option to use these devices in a very private manner. we don't have to upload everything to the cloud. we don't have to allow the tracking to occur on our devices. and as far as that is the case,
i think we are better and of course there are always going to be some ways that we can be tracked. right now, cell phone towers are still being used, are still collecting data about where we are. law enforcement has access to that data about which cell phone tower you are connecting to, even if you lock down your phone otherwise. it is a bit of both and it depends on how you use the phone. host: daniel, columbia maryland. caller: i just want to speak about the technological aspect of this debate. it seems as though apple has come out with a proof of concept where we can no longer break the encryption and know what people are saying to each other, what data we have.
whether or not we legislate and make a legal solution or a law enforcement, government, solution, thisty technology is out there whether it is apple or another american company, or in the case of a foreign company who is not subject to american laws, they can create communication standards that are not subject to this fbi federal judge ruling saying, you have to unlock this. it is here. we are dealing with encryption standards that cannot be broken means, so how do we as a society deal with that? we move forward understanding that communications are going to be encrypted, we are not going to be able to see them, people are going to use this. daniel, he seemed to have
more than a second level of understanding of this issue. do you work in this area? caller: i do. i went to school for computer science and i have since moved on to government thinks. host: thank you, sir. guest: to some extent, the toothpaste is out of the tube. encryption, even if big companies are subject to court orders, there are open force projects. anybody now has access to these sorts of encryption tools and indeed apple, i would not be surprised if the next generation of iphones is something that even apple cannot break into even if they want to. this is really the future of how we engineer devices, devices that you own, that nobody else can access without your permission. using encryption to enforce that
restriction. i think it is really spitting into the wind to try to undo that legally in the short term. host: this tweet, this is a government phone, we are talking about. it is not his private phone, for heaven sakes. does that make a difference? guest: if it were not encrypted, it could. government would not need an access therder to contents of the phone. but of course, this is encrypted so in practice it does not make a difference. or not the government in san bernardino county want apple to open it, they still need a court order. host: one more call, adrienne in suffolk, virginia.
i come down on the side of the government. i think apple should open the phone. host: why is that? caller: because 14 people were the shootersthink were connected to a terrorist group, and i think the fbi needs all the help they can get to solve that crime. herenk this case right will be the future of crime solving as phones gets more -- phones get more danced. -- more advanced. adrienne, what about in other cases? what if this were not a terrorist case? murder,it were a
robbery, drug dealing case, do the same standards apply? caller: i think so, yeah. i think they should open the phone for those cases, i do. i do not think we really have any privacy anyway. google and apple, i that they collect our information, our activity on our phones. nobody really has any privacy anymore and everybody's social security number is out there. host: thank you, sir. view, this ise's a very dangerous tool and they think it is too dangerous to create. you can imagine that even if they created this, and even if the fbi only used it appropriately, you could still see hackers from foreign countries, from foreign
governments hacking apple's system, stealing the operating system, being able to load it onto the phones of people they want to spy on. this is not just about lawful requests to access data. this is about, should we have a presumption of security on our phones? as other national security officials have said, we have other interests besides making law enforcement's job easier. i fully recognize that what apple is doing makes law enforcement's job more difficult, but we do have other interests that need to be considered. host: the final comment comes from jody on twitter, if you want your correspondent secure,
write it down, put a stamp on it, and mail it u.s. postal. >> i'm back to our live coverage of the conservative political action conference, day number two at the gaylord national harbor resort and hotel just outside the nation's capital. the event has gotten underway this morning. we expect to hear from republican national committee chair reince priebus. he will be followed by jenny beth martin and then later on, republican candidates john kasich and ted cruz. you will also hear from ben carson this afternoon. he's expected to talk about his political future. this is all fresh off of the detroit republican debate last night. donald trump will be speaking early tomorrow morning. we will have that at 10:00 saturday followed by "washington journal." you will also hear from marco
rubio do it all gets underway this morning on this friday morning. we did cover the event yesterday. you can find all of that coverage online anytime at www.c-span.org. gentlemen, the nra um.ies leadership for >> good morning, conservatives. without further ado, i would like to welcome reince priebus, the chairman of the national republican party, and his special guest star, sean hannity.
>> how right you all doing? i gave out 1000 football last night. welcome to you, reince priebus. so good to see you all. there is the liberal media. where are you from? times." york you have to leave. what did you think of the debate last night? this. say at the end of this process -- if you are hearing my speech yesterday, i was asking people to stand, and at the end of the process, if your guy does not win, are you going to support the nominee? is important, if we want to save the country from another obama term, which would be hillary, that we have to unite.
youchairman, let me turn to to ask you -- talk about the process and the role the rnc plays. i don't think i would want your job right now. reince: let me just clear something up for everyone very clearly. ourver the nominee is our party, they will get the full backing and 100% support of the republican party. process and it is really simple. our voters -- our republicans are voting in a lot of states. bind to delegates to the convention. then at the convention, obviously, it takes a majority of delegates to become the nominee. that person joins the republican party. i know i have tried to make the case, and it takes longer than you have got on a 30-second
response on television, but i want to remind everyone of what's going on. we have candidates that are competing to be the nominee of the republican party, who want to join the republican party at our convention in cleveland. and when they joined the republican party, obviously, they take in what we have been able to build at the rnc. we do not take sides, regardless of what you think or read. there are no signs we take a republican party. es we take at the republican party. a lot of the things that you think are boring like turnout, or identification programs, howntee programs, so i know much money you make, what kind of car you drive, what kind of beer you drink -- sean: what do i drink? host: if i had to guess, sam adams. sean: coors light. reince: i am trying to get into
the spirit tonight. by the way, if you have a headache this morning from drinking too much last night, it is not your fault, it is not jagged daniel's fault, it is bush's fault. reince: last point, there is nothing controversial about a national party that has its act together when it comes to ground game and data. we were embarrassed in 2012. we were reading everyone bragging about what barack obama did on the ground. we have to do the same thing. so the candidates are not worried about buying data licenses and building user interfaces. so my question is who is doing it? the republican party. they have to get what we mailed in order to win. whether you are for ted cruz, --io, k-6, trunk -- k-6
kasich, trump, we need a national leader. sean: one of the things that i would think you are happy about, when you look at the turnout this year, it is almost identical in terms of the enthusiasm barack obama had in 2008 and the democrats are down 33% in their primary. that would tell me that enthusiasm is on our side, right track, wrong track. a vast majority of people that we are on the wrong track. that is certainly a good indicator that this could be a great your for republicans. are seeing historical turnout across the country which we have never seen before. 17 million people watching the foxnews debate. sean: you have the ratings already? how did i do at 1:00? reince: the point is, there is some drama. we know that. there is some intrigue. with that comes an incredible amount of enthusiasm. we called a program called republican leadership
initiative. we have some people out there that are a part of it. we have over 10,000 people that have signed up for six weeks of training to be ready to go in all of the targeted turks that we have identified. sean: this is going to be new this presidential election. that is you have basically adopted what the democrats very wisely had adopted for barack obama, and that is targeting every voter in every county in every state, that when it comes election day, they will be getting calls and reminded to go out and vote, how important this election is. exactly right, but we have to admit something. midterm party that doesn't lose but we have a hard time a lifting presidents. winave to figure out how to , but we had to win a cultural vote in this country. that is a different process. it requires total immersion, complete saturation in
communities, in many cases that we do not represent in congress or state legislature. if we do not put 10 people every 10 blocks and target the states -- we are not just talking about fracking and clean coal. you have to talk about the issues that matter in communities. also have to do things like have pizza parties, get to know people, and cash in -- sean: maybe they would be happier with coors light. i have a serious question here you heard mitt romney's speech yesterday. you all heard it? i voting for mitt romney, i thought he would have been a great president, and i was not happy with the speech yesterday. when he is suggesting is more important, and what the audience want to hear from you -- what he is suggesting is that people in ohio vote for john on the people
in florida vote for rubio. in other words, there seems to be a strategy to target one candidate and force a brokered convention, which i would argue probably is not good for you or the republican party. i think the people ought to decide. reince: the people are going to decide, that is the point. there is no way that the delegates are not going to decide. a second. if you were at the convention, you would be bound on the first vote, and the majority of you would choose the nominee. whoever the majority chooses will be the nominee of our party. so that is our pledge to you. the other thing i would say is this. a lot of this is early talk. , there you understand are 1237 delegates needed to be the nominee of our party.
1744 delegates left to be distributed. we are a long way to go. in fact, everyone is talking about ohio and florida, but between now and that day, there are 14.5% of delegates yet to be distributed. states going this saturday, another four on sunday, puerto rico. the odds of a contested convention are very small. i have been saying that for a long time. sean: could i give you a hypothetical? i'm not putting you on the spot. say we go to the convention and rather than getting people worked up, let's say candidate a is leading by a significant amount does not -- but does not get to 1237. we go the first round of voting he does not get the 1237.
it is now the second round and the delegates are freed up, they can go anywhere they want. let's say the don't you think the people that are with a guy they got the most votes are going to be angry at their guide is not win? reince: the last time we have been through this -- first of all, you should all become delegates to the convention. the last time we have been through this if it did happen, which i think is highly unlikely and i said -- sean: what are the odds it will not happen? reince: i don't know. 85%-90%? i think people want to know just a case. just in case, we will play that game, i think what would happen would be going back to 1976.
d, reagan challenged for the convention and ford won. in the second round you still have the same rules that apply. the majority of states to be nominated. sean: every delegate can switch. reince: in most cases. and some they are bound for two votes or three votes. some cases they are not bound at all even on the first vote. delegate allocation rules were not something we started with many years ago. it used to be our party would have a convention and at the convention the people on the floor would choose our nominee. you would all compete in the states to be the delegate. maybe you are heading up one of the republican groups and you became a delicate from wisconsin or whatever and you would show up and vote. at some point some people said i have an idea. why don't we tie a primary or a
caucus to the actions of a delicate so we can get more people involved? that is how all these rules came into play. suddenly you have delegates going to the convention that are now tied to the outcomes of caucuses and primaries. we are were to happen, sort in territory our party has not seen. again, highly, highly unlikely. explain bothied to on radio and tv and i don't know if this is confusing. it's confusing to me. we have in some states proportional distribution of delegates. we have ohio, florida, winner take all states. why would it be better, and i'm thinking out loud, to maybe have a universal system for every state where perhaps when he the congressional district will be the determining factor of
whether or not you get the delegates were not in that district? reince: there are state's writes. -- rights. sean: i am not against states rights. i am a right-winger here. everybody loves uniformity and clarity. . you admit it is confusing reince: at the same time i would bet this crowd, the last intimate one is a republican national committee dictating to all the states and territories exactly how they will operate. [applause] we have a system to take a national candidate. sean: i get that. reince: those are debates we have constantly. a lot of these folks of a delegates or at conventions in every four years we debate. should we start with iowa and new hampshire and south carolina? why not another state. all in thetake proportional calendar. people are debating that right now.
is the process too fast or too slow? those are debates we have. as of now we have proportionality through march 14. winners -- state can go winner take all if they want to. sean: why can't they prior to march? reince: we put in a rule years ago to add the entire month of march to be proportionate. remember in 2012 the entire month of proportional. the rules committee, which a lot of people here hated in champion t -- tampa, they hated best they rolled -- they cut proportionality in half. they actually added two weeks of proportionality. as a convention to removed proportionality. they took the five stapler audi and made it an eight state majority. we added in two weeks of proportionality said he would not have a national primary in the first two weeks of march.
sean: it is sort of related. in any way as the chairman of the rnc doesn't bother you that there seems to be an effort to get to the brokered convention, which you say is not going to happen, but it seems to be a locust rated, planned out campaign outline the governor romney yesterday to get her brokered convention. reince: at some point -- this is interesting. sean: you don't think it matters that they spend money? reince: they can do with they want to do but eventually the voters are going to vote and they will decide. and are getting to vote or not getting to vote. ton: they are trying influence the process and await it would be disruptive, right? reince: it is a strategy that people can use. look, i would suggest it's better to win races and acutely delegates. sean: i want to get a feeling from the crowd.
the fact that there are people we don't even really know who they are have designed a plan to create chaos to me. reince: i would prefer reagan's 11th commandment. sean: did you watch the debate last night? reince: fox news, right. fair and balanced. sean: i think what the most important thing and you have been very -- you have told every campaign you are in control. you have told every campaign at the end of this process only have a candidate you will support. what does that mean for the candidate? you talked about targeting voters. what does this mean with the rnc gets behind -- reince: when i walked in the door at the rnc we were $26 million in debt. credit cards suspended for nonpayment. sean: he sounded a democrat. reince: we had about 80 employees.
we have moved on to thousands of employees. we are covering district across this country. in ways we never have before we invested over $100 million in data. we are twice as big as the dnc. sean: how is your money going into -- reince: a goes directly into funding the mechanics, the ground game, the data operation. we have far more. if anybody wants to look this up and check the rnc versus dnc fundraising, it is not even close. unfortunately the dnc is not our competition. our competition is hillary clinton, that machine, and they built their program differently. they built it around a candidate. barack obama built as data operation in chicago around barack obama. we built hours around republican national committee that one of the candidates plugged into it. there is no option. there is no entity going to find a ground operation.
that someone is going to plug into the candidates are not funding a national ground operation right now. they are worried about what is going to happen. who was doing the work? the republican national committee. .we need to be successful [applause] sean: i can predict with certainty everything, and you know what the game plan of the democrats -- you know what hillary is going to do. whoever the nominee is is a racist and there is a warm on women. i see more women in here than men. [applause] war on women. republicans are homophobes. they want dirty air and water. that came out of obama's mouth. they what the young people in the old people to fend for themselves. ryanfriends like paul will be pushing every grandmother in the country out of her wheelchair. are you prepared on that front to deal with that, whoever the candidate is? and i would ask how ready are
you? i have are the democrats are ready for whoever the nominee is. how much research have you guys done? reince: we have a full-time department at the republican national committee. we've been preparing a book on hillary clinton for years. obviously there is more to do. sean: how many millions of pages? reince: you i would also talk to the fbi and the doj. for what they have in store for hillary clinton. i assure you with a handout immunity agreements around your employees, is not for something that is not real. sean: the you think hillary looks good in orange? reince: we might have to find out. hillary clinton might not even be eligible to run by the time we get to november. [cheers] sean: are you prepared for that? evene: on the other front,
in the house and the things paul ryan is talking about having an agenda, we did not have an agenda for years ago. he harped on that in a river being on the show continuously, but having the five things you believe in. what you going to do next quarter and go through those five things. let's talk about the next five things you did. having a legislative agenda. we also have to have a person on the ballot that people believe in that has a vision and people want to have a beer with. we also have to have an operation that can identify voters that are unique to presidential years and we can turn that into a better job in 2012 so we can win once and for all, say the supreme court for the next generation, and make undere get our debt bomb control and get our country back. sean: let me ask you the last question. i know it is on the minds of many of the people here. if you look in the state polls, the exit polls of every state,
55%e is anywhere between and 65% of republicans that feel betrayed. i think the republican governors have done a great job. they really have. reince: you have two different situations. sean: we have 900 plus or legislative seats, more senate seat, morehouse seats. the rnc has gotten elected but on the issue of repealing or replacing obamacare and the issue and promise of 2014 to stop executive amnesty, there is a feeling that republicans did not fight. they were too timid, afraid of the get blamed for a government shutdown. reince: if i could single-handedly repeal obamacare and if i could care of executive amnesty i would do it right here. sean: but they have the power of the purse. reince: they do, but they have a constitution that provides for veto authority that the president has. that is constitutional as well. i am for you. i don't think you can promise things he cannot deliver. that is clearly something you
can't do. chairman --give the no. are you saying you don't believe they could abuse the power of the purse on obamacare? reince: they can. and i was the legislature would. as the chairman of the rnc i don't have the authority to walk across the street and pass the bill single-handedly. we get people elected. that is what primaries are for. that is what the choice is on the ballot. sean: you are not in congress but i think with this crowd wants to see you talk about his paul ryan laying out a positive agenda. i think they want to make sure if they get the house, the senate, the presidency that these things are done. [applause] reince: you need to have a person in the white house to consign those bills. sean: did you guys have a good time? reince: thank you everybody. sean: chairman of the rnc. reince: if you look down here,
we are one of your main sponsors because we want you to know we care about you and we want you to be proud of our party. thank you. sean: give it up for the chairman. reince: thank you. [applause] ♪ >> is when my world literally turned upside down. we finally had a diagnosis after going to different doctors, trying to look for an answer why
she was acting the way she was. why all of this had happened. he finally said she is on the spectrum. she has autism. you need told me apply for medicaid. the lawyers said what you need to do is move out of your house, take your three children, living to your parents home and then you will get medicaid. i said i am sorry, i am not going to do that. that is not something i believe in. that is not something i'm going to do. i was so frustrated with the system. i felt like i had to do something. i felt there must be other people out there going through the same situation. i needed to be a voice for them. rli program but the rnc, it was amazing.
to be a better leader in the community. my children are my motivation each and every day that i'm involved in politics. i look at them and i know why i am out there. i know for a fact there are other mothers out there that feel the same way. they don't know what to do or how to do it. that is something the rli program teaches. it will teach you how to get involved. how to become a leader in your community. ♪ gentlemen, please cofounderesident and -- ea party patriots,
[applause] [no audio] [applause] >> good afternoon. know, the president of united states last address this gathering eight years ago. do the math. it was a different president then. as he sat in the oval office preparing for that speech he came across a phrase that confused him. he asked, what is this movement the key talking about in this speech? the speechwriter, stunned, responded "the conservative backent." the once started in the 1960's when the conservatives first took root. that apparently did not sit well with the president.
let me tell you something. i will with gary bauer's ass. there is no movement. i wish i had known that story eight years before this presidency, rather than eight .ears after is a lot -- is it any doubt we started to doubt the republican party. a man claiming to be conservative. he did not govern as a conservative. he oversaw the largest spending increase since lyndon johnson's great society. and win big banks got in trouble his solution was to force congress to hand over $700 billion we do not have. an worse, he laid the groundwork for barack obama who in one month of taking office called president bush's $700 billion
bailout and raise it by $87 billion again with borrowed money. weeks seven years ago last in response to that $787 billion so-called stimulus package that had worked its way through congress that the modern tea party movement was born. we are just regular people, nothing special. we do share something in common. we love our country. what we love what makes our country special. the constitution and the rights it protects. [applause] the rights that come from our creator and not from government. our freedom. we are fighting to defend it against a liberal -- liberals who want to fundamentally transform it. many of us are angry and upset at our government because we see
washington insiders making deals that throw the government and increase the national debt with no regard to how their deals impact our lives. we want to make a difference. i bet that motivates a lot of you. when rick ran against the stimulus bill on the floor of the chicago mercantile exchange, we were ready. two dozenter that, strangers got an a conference call that talk about will be could do to take of action based call devoteelli's party like our founding fathers. we held protests in cities all across this country and by april 15 we had organized more than 850 of them. engaging americans who are fed up with our government. we have not looked back since. let me ask you a question. how many of you here today are angry and upset with the federal government? [applause] jenny: i am upset.
those in washington never seem to hear us. i helped organize the march in 09.hington dc in 20 i kept saying washington, can you hear us now? business as usual continued. it's like they are tone deaf to us, who they are supposed to be representing. i'm upset that will be organized ourselves into a tea party movement and we work in 2010 to remove from office all those liberals who voted for obama care we gave republicans control of the house. the republicans may corrupt deals in the increased the debt. i am upset because when we began working with others who are just as angry as we were, the protests in the bailouts, and to express ourselves about our government, the government turned into targeted us with the
most feared agency at its disposable, the irs. they tried to take our free speech from us and silenced much of our effort. frankly we still feel the effects of that today. theyupset that even after reveal the irs had to liberally targeted american citizens just for using our first amendment rights, freedom of speech, freedom of association, she has not been held accountable. no one has held her accountable. it was him was three years ago. i am upset and angry. i know i am not the only one who feels that way. do you feel this way? [applause] news. give you some good to paraphrase mark twain, the rumors of the tea party's death are greatly exaggerated. [applause]
stop and think about the top three contenders for the republican nomination for president. all of them to varying degrees are running as tea party candidates. you have marco rubio the rent for the senate in 2010. explicitly on tea party values. once he got the washington he allowed himself to be used by the other side on an issue of great importance to us. he has been try to make up for that ever sense. ted cruz ran for the senate in 2012. [cheers] explicitly as a tea party candidate. our people helped elect him. once he was in office ted cruz champion the tea party values. he saw the establishment and he stayed true to his principles and true to our principles and his promises. decided totrump, he run for president and he said
himself, self, this tea party movement is good for me. so he took on one of the biggest issues that drives the tea party today and he did his best to make it his own. and sense that i have heard him say over and over again, "i love the tea party." he doesn't traded cloak himself. think about that for just a moment. seven years ago the tea party movement did not exist. today republican candidates running for president know if they want to win the nomination, they have to appear at the very least to the tea party. in seven years time that is not bad. not bad at all. not dead yet. [applause] we need to speak some hard truths this morning. one of these candidates i just talked about is not tea party at all.
i know donald trump says he loves the tea party but that is not what it takes to be tea party. party, you to be tea have to love our country and love our constitution. he have to be willing to fight for them above your own interests. aboveve to put freedom your own interests. let me ask you a question. have you ever heard donald trump talk about the tea party? i have not. i have got serious questions about his fidelity to the document tea partiers review. -- revear. theaid he would "open up libel laws" subcommittee easier for him to sue unkind newspapers.
the right to speak freely is enshrined in our constitution. [applause] what makes is america different from every other country on the face of the earth. here we can speak our minds, even criticize our government, and even criticize our political leaders without fear of reprisal. we are protected by our cost to do so -- constitution to do so. when i hear a candidate say he was to mess with our rights to free speech, i fear for our constitution and our country. that is not tea party. in fact, the tea party fought tooth and nail to keep our free speech. that is not the only reason i know donald trump is not what he says he is. look at his history and his background raises very serious questions. donald trump stole a line from ronald reagan. he says he wants to make america
great again. i will borrow a line from ronald reagan. "trust but verify." [cheers] jenny: here is what i verified. many of donald trump's critics say he is inconsistent. he was for universal health care before he was against it. he once supported the biggest tax increase in history and now he says he wants to cut taxes. he was pro-choice before he became pro-life. he donated to democrats 40 donated to republicans. he donated to republicans. yes, he he is inconsistent. but if you look at his motivation for taking those positions, you will see in fact there is a remarkable consistency. is the consistency of serving his own interests.
[applause] you can always count on this, on any given issue at any given time. donald trump will take the position that serves his interest as he perceives it at that time. [applause] are you still not sure? listen up. when a little old lady, a widow, refused to sell her property said he could not done her house for a parking garage next to his casinos, donald trump try to use the government to take her property away from her. the property rights, the right to use a known your property as you see fit is one of the essential elements of limited government. who does not understand and defend the property rights has no business serving in elected office, let alone the presidency. [cheers] government to force a
property owner to give up her property that she does not want to sell, that is not tea party. in 2013 when so many of us were fighting to stop the gang of eight, trump issued statements saying he was for amnesty. for the last eight months he has been saying he's against industry and he was the building wall. in the last few days he said he may have told the new york times some thing entirely different. we don't know because it is off the record and he will not release the tape. last night he said he is softening his position on immigration. we don't even know where he stands on this issue today. that is not tea party. [applause] a few years back donald trump decided to trade his reader -- reputation as a real estate tycoon and markets and seminars. he opened up what he called the
university bearing his name. it apparently took a lot of people for a lot of money. so much so he is now defending by threenot two, separate lawsuits on the matter. 5000 plaintiffs. scamming people out of their hard earned money is definitely not tea party. [applause] in each of those cases he was serving his own interests as he perceived them as the time. he is about love of himself. the tea party is about love of country and the love of our constitution. [applause] angry and i know you're upset. i know that donald trump is tapping into that anger. it's a smart campaign strategy
because he makes it seems like he shares our frustrations. it is like he is fighting on our behalf. when he says he wants to make america great again, we cheer because we all believe america is great. we appreciate what sound like love of country on his part. it's a seductive hitch. i have several friends and colleagues who support him even as i speak. here is what i think. donald trump loves himself first, last, and everywhere in between. [cheers] he loves himself more than our country. he loves himself within the constitution. he does not love you or me. he does not love the tea party. donald trump has no business thinking he is key party. -- tea party. and every tea party person that loves the constitution should take that into account when casting their vote.
and why should you vote for donald trump anyway? if you are tea party, you have a much better candidate to support. ted cruz. [cheers] ever since he came to the senate and i know him as the, man of his word a man of honor, a man of integrity, a man who keeps his promises. and let me tell you, in washington that makes him a rare man. a very, very rare man. fight thes time to implementation of obamacare or the increase in the debt ceiling or work to block amnesty for illegal immigrants, ted cruz led the charge on issue after issue. ted cruz stood strong for our constitution. he has kept his promises and he will not back down. proud tea party patriots
citizens fund endorses ted cruz for president. [cheers] [applause] about a man, it is about our principles. are candidate really is the constitution. we support ted cruz because he reveres and defend the constitution. [applause] timeproud to know that any we are in a battle against washington insiders i can always count on ted cruz to be on the right side. to the right by our side. we have a historic opportunity this year. we have the most conservative candidate since ronald reagan running for president. i have never been able to vote for a candidate who is conservative. he has demonstrated in his campaign that he can be donald trump. donald trump and when
the general election against hillary clinton. but he needs our help. that means i need your help. tease go to our website at party patriots citizens fund, or go to our booth and help us make calls to get targeted voters out. we are about to move into the winner take all stage. that is where the nomination will be decided. if you're looking to make a difference, volunteer to help and nominate a true conservative and someone that loves the constitution. join us to do this. our country is great because of her people and because of our constitution. in ted cruz we have a menu understand that, you respect that, who will lead us into the future guided by the time-tested principles established in our founding. most importantly he understands our rights flow from our
creator, not our government. -- that means the government is meant to be a servant of the people, not the other way around. ted cruz is not going to back down or standing for our freedom. neither will i. and i hope neither will you. thank you very much. [cheers] thank you. [applause] ♪ ♪ d i won't back down [crowd noise] in the morning my room filled
with light and it spoke to me. i was just 14 when you were born. why did god choose me? what if i am not strong enough. >> you must trust him. what will we tell our little boy? >> i do you explain god to his own son? hekeep your power inside until your father shows you the time to use it. avoid.e are rumors of you have your assignment. the messiah is born.
>> [indiscernible] -- the 2016 election. please welcome chairman of the american conservative union, the honorable -- [applause] >> ♪ free bird ♪ ♪ [laughter] >> it does not matter the order, just grab a seat. all right and thank you everyone. surprised at what the topic of this panel is. there is something going on call the presidential election.
we will have a general election here sooner than we know. we are in the middle of one of the most interesting primary campaigns we have ever seen. i will start by introducing somebody he was a hero of mine. that is not you, charlie. fred barnes. it is great to have you. fred: thank you for having me. >> the executive editor of the weekly standard which he cofounded in 1995. next to fred we have britney kaiser. is this your first cpac? great to have you here. she is the director of program, development at cambridge analytic. it is wonderful to have your today. -- aext person at cpac cpac board member, kelly and conway. i think you call yourself a pollster? is that right.
founder and president of the polling company. women-ownedheld, corporation founded in 1995. and finally someone you see on tv all the time, charlie, a political columnist for the washington times. he was the new york post's d.c. bureau chief and news columnist covering the white house for five years. just to be clear -- you are my hero. let's jump right into this. let's not hold anything back. i will start with fred. have you ever seen an election like this? fred: i have only cover the back in 1976. i have not seen anything like this in my lifetime, at least in journalism. it is remarkable. the debate last night, some people described it as raucous.
he called it "insanely raucous." i thought captured it. is a brutal election. there is one poll number i always pay attention to for the states on super tuesday. the question is do you feel betrayed by republican politicians? about all those states half of the voters say yes. either a little book -- below 40% or above. that is a divide in the republican party right there. those that feel betrayed are more likely to vote for donald trump. for ted cruz. those that do not feel betrayed or more likely to vote for marco rubio and john kasich and more for jeb bush and a few others.
a does show you there is really hard divide in the republican party that is not exist in the democratic party. they are united. >> what fred just said reminds me to say make sure you vote in the straw poll. i don't know what is going to happen this year. kelly anne might have opinions herself. the question is about where conservatives are going to be in a think it's an important question. should they feel the republican party has betrayed them? is that fair or not fair? i think if you look back over the past two or three elections with the advent of the tea party, whatever that is, it's obvious that not a single movement the wikimedia -- the way the media often tries to portray it.
people have elected every conservative people. -- we havel have obamacare. delegate promises we will abolish or defund obamacare and we still have obamacare. i think it is a legitimate thing. the party has to figure out a servicing to those people and how to start speaking their language. obviously donald trump has come in and sort of intuitively figured out how to speak to them, how to reach them on issues he has picked up on that are crucial to them, starting with illegal immigration. i was at the debate last night. tonuck out into the audience drink in the field of all of it. el of all of it. donald trump not to see waterboarding, but waterboarding plus.
literally you had a row of people in the magnificent fox theater going -- and then two rose over you have people going yeah! i was like, wow. that of the republican party in 2016. until those -- until somebody figures out how to find common ground between those two groups of people, the republican party will be screwed. matt: nobody knows more about the numbers and you. what is going on. kelly anne: thank you for being at cpac ever being conservatives all year long. this is the presidential race you have dreamed of for years. speaking of drinking it in, you ought to. this section of electability and who can win who cannot win that is kill conservative president -- candidates for years of the presidential level is gone.
it is gone this cycle. people that were electable and had it running away are off the stage. they are not even running anymore. 2014, look at 2010 and where conservatives want everything not nailed to the ground by running as free market, individual liberty, limited government, fiscally conservative, socially conservative conservatives and winning statewide and in the legislatures, 2016 could be the year for that manifests itself on the national platform. nominating people that are just a little bit different than democrats basically asks would you like to drink 1% milk or 2% milk? [laughter] we want choices. i think electricity that has replaced electability as the court governing value in this process is a huge boon to
conservatives and has been created out of conservatism. euros with the numbers say. who is voting and he was not voting in 2015 -- 2016? a lot of people are voting. the turnout in these republican primary caucuses is historic. people are lining up across the river in virginia just this week. double the number of people turning out. double the number of wednesday when mick -- mitt romney was on the ballot. matt: we heard from mitt romney. llyanne: we have people to stand in line and cast about. with the enthusiasm level as high as it is, people are paying attention. the date news is starting at was 17 candidates and now we have about four or five. people are saying you are not
going to tell me how to think, what to do, whom to vote for, who to win and you cannot. i have plenty of time and choices. i will make my decision after have seen and heard from the candidates time again. demographically in the democratic primary it is very skewed the highly female. 58% female, 42% male. the republican side is more male than female. fall,ting forward to the one of the many reasons i'm not afraid of hillary clinton -- she wakes up every morning the second most popular person in a two-person household. [laughter] i'm definitely not afraid of that. i am not afraid of hillary clinton in a two-person race. a three-person race, we will talk. hillary clinton he's having trouble within her own party or % of the electorate being female.
they are standing in her way. that is great for the fall because men do not like hillary or trust her. they do not want her to be president of the united states or commander-in-chief. that is not apt to change between now and november which means a year from now we will have the new gender gap. the democratic party's problem attracting men. [laughter] matt: it does work the other way. kellyanne: you never hear about it. matt: britney, you spend your days pouring to the numbers and the trends. we have what charlie and others are saying, all whole new group of voters getting involved in this. other people say it is the same old voters just separated into two different camps. what is going on? istney: what is interesting that traditional wisdom is being completed shattered. where most candidates would be able to rely on specific demographics and say they're going to turn out those voters, this time we have a large
percentage of normal tea party voters actually evangelicals --ng for new candidates ever they have never voted for before. -- they have never voted for before. normally they would be rallying behind some of the marco rubio, another interested in someone that's never been in politics before. that is important in the way that candidates are going to connect with people. we cannot really be targeting people on their traditional demographics we need to be understanding how regard to message voters so that they can understand what these candidates are scanning for, how to we persuade them on certain issues and really connect with people in ways that some candidates have failed to do this time around? matt: take social conservative issues. it seems like what would've motivated those issues and what candidate they would end up with
we are not following the same model this time. how do you explain the dynamic? fred: i think of most social issues that's one of the things the republican party is pretty much in agreement on. a post to abortion, same-sex marriage. that is not something that really divisive candidates. there are other things that do divide the candidates, particularly donald trump. something.inted at if trump is the nominee, and i think he is the most likely one. be -- among a huge part of the republican party there is opposition to him. everybodypractically i talked to say they will not vote for trump. they will either not vote, vote for hillary, or they want a third-party or an independent
conservative candidate. i think there will be one. matt: nobody here is going to vote for hillary. we have to get that straight. charlie: but if you want to third-party candidate were voting for hillary. matt: i agree. fred: it will make it easier for hillary clinton to win. inlyanne: bill clinton won 1992 with far less than 50% of the vote. he had third-party candidacy and ross perot. . he received 19% of the vote nationwide he did not carry any state. is best state was main or he got 30%. of worse was mississippi where he got 9%. even his best state did not win in any state. you become a spoiler. if mr. trump is the nominee, i support ted cruz. i've run one of his biggest super pac's, but i know mr.
trump well. he has done a remarkable thing in terms of getting more people to listen and vote and be part of direct democracy. he is theid, if nominee and hillary is the democratic nominee and to get a third-party challenge from within the republican orbit, you are handing the election to hillary clinton. i like big government in this conversation. you are chomping at the bit here. charlie: i will not go after kellyanne. i would lose. we have seen this in the last two debates. at one point it was just donald trump being donald trump. in the last two debates we have had two more people try and be --kellyanne: marco rubio consulting donald trump's
manhood. it is really a presidential. --un-presidential. just because he attempted don rickles routine that doesn't work well. kellyanne: it worked in minnesota. charlie: people get so upset about the tone of donald trump and i understand that. i have parents. they really don't like this. -- tok it is wrong to say throw the tone out with the bathwater. the reason he is doing so well is because of his tone. and it is certifiably to behold at times. -- sort of ugly to behold at times. in a general election if donald trump, and i think he will moderate some of the harshness of his tone, when you listen to hillary clinton, seriously, sit
down sometime. if you're going to have a root canal surgery and want something to get your mind off of it that even worse than that, listen to hillary clinton for literally five minutes. try to find a single complete sentence in which she does not lie. she lies about everything. [applause] that and you compare it to donald trump. i get it. he can be maddening and course. andyou take the bombast what certainly sounds like harsh honesty out of him and compare it to her, i don't know. i don't think it will do so badly in the general election. perhaps i am wrong. i think another thing we need to recognize is it is candidacy ended before november, the polarizing statements you're making will
not hamper him going back to the business world. he will not see a huge backlash. where the rest of the candidates looking towards their future in politics for the rest of their lives cannot come out with these very polarizing statements which sometimes could affect their future. attitudenot just the and the harshness of some the things trump says. it is that he does not know much . he cannot explain how he will replace obamacare. on foreign policy he is completely at sea. he was to be vladimir putin's pal. he wants to be neutral between israel and the palestinians and on and on. there's so many issues on which trump finds a ton of injections by people in the conservative orbit and the republican party. these of the people i spend my life with. they are just not going to
support trump. people whof them are are very active in the republican party and very active in the campaign. i think it will not let themselves sit on the sidelines. that's one of the reasons why a think there will be an independent candidate. they will find somebody that everybody in this room knows. i don't know who it would be but i agree with kellyanne. it will elect hillary. friends see the downside of the chum candidacy. -- trump candidacy. we like to get the benefit out of everything, right? for those folks that don't think trump is the right candidate they cannot deny the fact he is connecting to people. -- let's say the nominee is not donald trump. it's ted cruz or marco rubio. can they get the benefit of those new voices as they move
forward or is this a dealbreaker, or are they fired if donald trump is not the nominee? brittany: i think by analyzing what is candidacy is turning out voters, which issues and personality types are coming out of the woodwork, how he is motivating apathetic voters to come out, than other candidates can understand what they need to talk more about. which policies they need to stress in order to make sure those people can rally behind them. kellyanne: in looking at the general election i think many trump voters would support the republican nominee depending on who it is. certainly on senator cruz. ast: is that what you see the second choice for trump voters? kellyanne: absolutely, especially when you get down to four or five candidates. and about two thirds more of the delegates need to be awarded. is very ironic.
even through mr. trump's bombast or his rhetoric are what people are down on him for, my friends in the republican movement, his message is actually optimistic. make america great again. we are winners. we need to be winners. hilary's message is fighting for us. then she gets up there. i'm fighting for women, breakdown varies -- break down barriers. friday -- fighting the fbi. bernie sanders has fighting for us in his signs also a "a future we can believe in." that is very much more obama. voters like optimism. with the exception of 1972, this country has always elected for president the candidate they thought was more optimistic.
almost more positive, more projecting joy and hope and all of that. had972 president nixon institutional advantages and was reelected. that person is never going to be hillary clinton. i agree with charlie. i find listening to hillary clinton with all the 'uh', you know, like, -- it's like testing with a teenager/ -- teenager. , they wouldot trump go because he has made the clintons an issue. one of the things that has helped donald trump stay where he is is he was the one willing to go first and furthest and putting bill and hillary clinton on the defense a few months ago. when he pivoted to the general election a lot of rank-and-file voters appreciated that.
why should we be afraid of hillary clinton? he would make history, but not as the first woman. this country has never elected a president of the united states for whom over 50% of us think is not honest for trustworthy. charlie: in addition to the tone thing, going back to the very beginning. it has been six months and he is still with us. everyone was amazed at how politically incorrect he was and how he would say things you cannot believe he would say them. -- they keptept helping him. i think that helped as much as the tone. it explains the support for him. a lot of people think politicians are just all lying, including republicans. and they think republicans are full of bs. you have this guy they went
after them and decided to say i will fill the rulebook away and i will go after hillary clinton on women and attack her husband for being an accused rapist. no republican with touch that. he grabs it and runs with he is successful with putting her on defense. this is the biggest frustration that a lot of of people have with the republican party right now, is that they might come up with a third person now that we all know, and i do not know who it would the who would unify everybody. the question i have is, where were they six months ago? why weren't they running back then? because they could not imagine where they would be where we are today. mr. hurt: and that is the problem. people should have realized when you listen to his speech, people
should have realized that republicans should have realized that he hit on all the topics, and it may not have been the way we are used to hearing politicians talk, but that was a good thing. mr. schlapp: the moderator will now say something. isn't it fair to say that it is a unique thing that we have two senators -- how many here from florida? texas? think about it. think about it. we have two senators running for president who have been in the senate less than a term, so it is not just a trump phenomenon. a freshant necessarily point voice, but in outside voice. mr. barnes: the fact that trump is an outsider, that helps him. the fact that ted cruz has fought with the leadership of
the republican party in the senate, i think that helps him as well. [applause] mr. barnes: i do not agree with him, but it helps them. mr. schlapp: we are cheering for you on that. mr. barnes: cheering for ted cruz. it is highly unusual. the conventional wisdom was that governors have an advantage, they have done things, not just talked about things. that helps not at all, but it is not helping john kasich at all. i think he helped himself the last couple debates as he is the nice guy and not friday, and that helps, and that gets him 15% of the vote. it is not going to get him to win. night, a lotlast of you were here in the room at the town hall media party which was a wild success. happened that i thought was one of the highlights was at the end, all
the candidates said they would support the eventual nominee. mr. barnes: but it is not credible. they will nominally, but after trashing trump for two hours, but i am supporting him. they are not going to do anything to help him. mr. schlapp: that was a pretty big headline -- [indiscernible] mr. schlapp: all right, that is good. let's go to this question of electability. is that even a fair term to use from this point forward? if people say this person is more electable or not, do you think all of the candidates in the race now are electable in a general election, most likely against hillary clinton?
she will have all the money, all the men who are propping up her career forever. she is stuck between wanting to run for the third term of bill clinton, but is forced to run for the third term of barack obama. her weakness is a gift to so we have toty, look at it that way. it is difficult to get that third term for an incumbent party. it has been difficult traditionally. i think anything could be hillary clinton, but according to most of the pulling out have arubio and cruz better shot at beating hillary in the fall right now. that is something, but i think what we have learned about the word electability is it is a function best fiction.
youngats elect generational people who say you cannot win, do not bother, and go on to win. obama, bill clinton, even jimmy carter. these are young people. andre told you cannot win, this time nobody is waiting their turn. there is no forcing us to nominate the person who lost to the person who won. it is not a consolation prize to the next time. that is not free market competitive principles at work. i think hillary clinton is beatable, but we have to unify, be smart, and have to call out who is really extreme in this country. the party that believes, the movement that believes that life is precious from birth to whoral death, that a woman
faces an unplanned pregnancy deserves our compassionate, not our judgment and condemnation, or does the platform allow for abortion, anytime, anywhere, no rejections, partial-birth abortions, heartbeat of horses she is running in a very extreme leftist democratic party now that her husband could not have survived it. the party has gone so far to the left, we can beat that party in race.person we need to keep the clintons out of the white house. [applause] mr. schlapp: i think people should have stood for that. rittany, we talk about the question of electability. one of the things that commentators say, republicans, tone it down, be a little calm
her, dl little more appealing, move a little bit to the center. it seems like the model now for both parties is hillary is going fast. she is grabbing that socialism banner without using the term, so why isn't it fair for their publican party to get right back acquainted with the conservative values that make it great? ms. kaiser: this cycle has told us that no matter how strong the opinions are coming out of the candidates, it resonates with the people. keeping those aligned with strong messages are what is going to be turning people out and making sure that any of our candidates now are electable in the member. mr. schlapp: fred, it is a new forl, because four years -- years, get the nomination and move left to win the general
election. obama never got close to that. he stayed away in left field. what do you think about the new model? mr. barnes: that is the way obama has governed. what did he promise more than anything else? he did not say he was more liberal than other candidates, even say he had more experience. he said he could solve the washington problem, and the polarization, he would be bipartisan, and hope and change. he did not run in the left as we knew in 2012, and he was running as an incumbent, and incumbents are very powerful. i think there's something to be said in distinguishing among the four republican candidates on electability. i personally do not think donald trump is electable. he has alienated too many people. and he has alienated such a variety of people. he has alienated hispanic, many
conservatives. i do not know how you do that, but he has managed to alienate a lot of people. think, it will be difficult for him, but achievable to move to the center. you have to have the center-right if you are going to be elected president. that includes the center, right? you have to appeal there. at the moment, i do not think ted cruz does much of that, but potentially he can. rubio, who i could not agree e that he haslyann looked unpresidential in attacking trump, i think is probably more electable if he wins the nomination. which is unlikely. kasich, canw, john hardly even judge him because he is so far from winning the nomination. some candidates are more
electable, and i think he can tell that now, than others. you're right that some of trust ruffled a lot of feathers, that you cannot take away from the fact that he has brought out a level of enthusiasm on the republican side that we have not seen in a long time. this is a good thing no matter who winds up being the next nominee. withof them i see problems going ahead to head with anybody , but the one thing we have learned from all of this entire cannot --aries is you nothing is expected. i ted cruz is the nominee, could totally see him beating hillary. if rubio is the nominee, i can see it, and even if trump is the nominee, i can see him beating hillary.
the conversation about electability, it tries to rob the voters of their rightful say as to whom their nominee told from theng beginning who can win, who cannot, it is just unfair, and this is the election where the people spoke and they have spoken in big numbers. you havepp: kellyanne, been candid about where you are in the battlefield. they are lucky to have you. i will not put you on the spot on who is going to get the nomination, that the timing is interesting. cleveland will be a pretty big important city. it should be an important city, where i was born. a great city. an interesting time for us politically. fred, do we have a republican nominee so it up before cleveland or at cleveland? mr. barnes: probably at cleveland, but the candidate going into it with close to a
majority of delegates will easily get enough to be the nominee. mr. schlapp: ok, so before or --er cleveland question mark before or after cleveland? ms. kaiser: there are going to contenders, and there will be if writing races much of anot make o difference. when people stand for and decide that people rally around will be more important than the candidate. we will havehink one by cleveland. ms. conway: yes, we will, and it will not be somebody totally from the outside who could not win fair and square and was inserted into the blank at the last minute. it will be somebody who amassed enough delegates. if rubio drops out, it could be
uz.is mr. hurt: i think we will have a nominee by cleveland. you are a dope. enjoyed thisve panel. andppreciate you at cpac, thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
>> live coverage continuing from cpac throughout the day. just seeing a tweet saying, very disappointed, real donald trump has decided at the last minute to drop out of cpac. his choice sends a clear that it conservatives. tomorrow.o will speak also this afternoon we will hear from john kasich and from ted cruz. then carson as well. -- ben carson as well.
former white house secretary. i was going to bring my doll with me, but i had him staring off into the middle distance for a while, but i thought that would be awkward. so i did not. a lot of you think i am married to my dog, but i am not. the dog has a father, my husband, so i want to recognize him. i also want to say cpac schlapp and his wife are friends of mine. we go way back. when we were back in the white house there were days when we were shaking our heads before that was an acronym on twitter. they are the kind of people who will call you when you need it most, and remind you that prayer
restores the soul and can keep your good humor. they met during them bush administration, have five daughters, and i would call the bush marriage children the bush babies, and they have done such a great job with cpac. myant to thank desmond, excellent book editor. there is fox news, where i found a home after i left the white house. spokesperson pour the leader of the free world, i became a spokesperson for myself. it is as unpredictable and fun as we can imagine. we pride ourselves on being an interactive show. we like to talk with you all day long, but especially during those crazy martial breaks that we wish we could show you, but if we did, they would not be as crazy as they are.
it is an unscripted show, and i was likely to speak out because we are in the middle of a primary season that is keeping us very busy. because they could not be here with me, we have a message for you, and we got some video. perino. dana it is 5:00 in new york city, and this is the five. socialism is a doctor who knows the cure is freedom, but the patient with a pillow anyway. >> presidential politics at this stage of the game are about two things -- momentum and time. >> we got somebody like clinton putting her convenience ahead of national security. i would call hillary clinton to find out how do you get out of it. >> they have got to understand social media is a front in this war. >> i am a feminist.
>> you are feminine. >> the young democrats are going to get mad when they realize how the game is fixed for hillary clinton on the delicate portion. >> when you say women can elect a woman to go to hell, that is strong on my part. on your mark, get set, go. >> [indiscernible] >> ring the bell. hi, it is from the set of "the five." our antics are fun. appreciate that, open up a can of worms on the liberals, and crush it. i am going to tell you, my
son is often in your company of republicans, but anyway, -- no [beep] please, not on air. >> your fearlessness to help make this country the best in the world, we love what you do, keep up the great work. pac, i love you. you cleared up three days of an embarrassing rash. [applause] ms. perino: thanks to everyone who gave me a chance to be there. it is a great way to spend an afternoon every day. one of the reasons that i wrote was to talk to conservative kids across the country. wyoming, on a ranch in and in denver, colorado, and then i ended up being the person
of public and woman to serve as the white house press secretary. i could not be more grateful for those opportunities. i want young people to know that your horizons are much broader than you might consider. i never realized it, i never thought i would be sitting on marine 1 with the president of the united states. today we will talk about millennials and how conservative ideals and values can meet goals.ials' i remember what it is like, for those of you here. it is like that first week on the job and you are excited about it and how humbling that can be. when i was the acting press secretary, had a chance to fill in for tony snow. unfortunately, tony snow is no longer with us. he died in 2008. he was the press secretary, and i was the pretty. i had to step up to the podium, and i got a humbling experience.
i do not cause any problems. the president cannot get mad at me. i did not start an international interest. tony snow was 6'5". i am not. the podium had been built for him. the night before i got a note, a knock on my door, who said, they need to have them build you a new podium. i said, that is such a waste of taxpayer dollars. let me stand on an apple box. the next week, ma'am, i think we need to make you a new podium. travelingazy, we are next week, and then tony will be back. ws said, actually, nbc ne showed me the camera shot from the back of the room. and when you are at tony podium, on the apple box, it does not say the white house.
week. i had an incredible bosque right julie believed it and could learn from every day and made my time in the administration greatest experience. i got to know president bush has well when i was a pretty press secretary. works holidays, weekends, late nights, early mornings, and i always admired millennials, -- advised millennials, take the job. mentioned curing up in rural america, one of the things my dad did me as a kid and maybe you could do with your children or future children, every day before he got home from work when i was in the third grade, i had to read the newspaper before he got home from work, and i had to pick out two articles to
discuss with him. that was a great learning experience because later on i am sitting on marine 1 and i remember being on the chopper and the president asked my opinion about something. knew ity opinion, and i was unpopular with the rest of the senior staff. he was quiet about it for a minute, and he looked out the window, it was not something he wanted to hear, and after about five minutes, he turned around to the rest of the guys and he said, she is exactly right. and i love to hear that. i offer that as a way to get people engaged early on, and there are so many different ways to do that. i do not know if anybody reads the old-fashioned newspaper, but it was a great experience to get that confidence. -- livinge was served life with a sense of humor was a plus for me. if i can connect with somebody's
humor, it helps. in 2000, george w. bush was being interviewed by arbor walters, and she says, governor bush, if you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be? he said, barbara, i am not a tree, i am a bush. [laughter] ms. perino: humility, gratitude, and character, those are the themes of my book, the themes of my life, and the themes that sm.servatives of i have a chapter called unafraid to be right. it answers the question, why am i a conservative? i do not know if liberals have to internet, but it is asked like this -- how can you possibly be a republican or a conservative? it comes quite easy to me.
conservatism is by its very nature compassionate. thatis one of the things truly did george bush. ok, we can clap for that, compassion. [applause] ms. perino: i respect tradition. i learn from history, and i hear to a code of ethics. i have standards and i stick to that. conservatism is where i can fully express my support in the individual rather than the state or the government. where might believe in self-government's responsibility is not in conflict with the policies that i support. conservative characters are everywhere in the media. being a conservative has given me clarity and freedom. my mind is free. my heart is lighter. that is a gift from god that i believe we have an obligation to share with others around the country and the world. i love to be right. i think we are going to
bring out our panel, because millennials, what are we going to do with you? i actually love you. the selection is interesting to me. there are five distinct generations headed to the polls -- i am sorry, four. all of these groups see the world differently. they understand the role differently, and the way they communicate is different. of theials are now 1/4 population, overtaking baby boomers. this is critical, and how we shape their lives, how conservative values meet their goals is important. let me introduce my panel. they will come out here as sit and i will grill them. y is from the heritage foundation.
is obsessed with the intersection of politics and the social web. he is the creative director ij review. ich, atie pavl foxnews get your murder, and she of ano the author article. this is not chris christie. this is the best that we could do. we have limited time and a lot to cover, but we have 22 minutes. rob, let me start with you. what statistic that bothers me most is many millennials, a
majority, no longer believe in the american dream. i want to start there. mr. bluey: the challenge with millennials is they do not have faith in institutions, so churches, organized religion, families, they are delaying the process of getting married, having children. they do not trust the news media. who does? ms. perino: worse than congress. mr. bluey: you have the government as this is a generation that has grown up during that they are going to be the first time that they are not better off than their parents. when you grow up hearing that, you are probably not going to have the faith and the positive spirit by the american dream the other generations have had, especially when you are paying into social security and you know it will not be there for you. ms. perino: benny, let me ask
you, given that, then how can the republican party or conservatives reached millennials and try to change that thinking or tell there is a different way and a brighter future for them? mr. johnson: thank you so much for having us. i'm a huge fan the of the movie oolander." that is the first runway i ever walked. ms. perino: do it. mr. johnson: that was my answer. ms. perino: storytelling, tell me about storytelling. reach ason: how do you fickle group of people? , most at the biggest wonderful conference, and the first of the things that
happens, we took our phones onstage and checked them. people born from 1980 all caps up to the year 2000, a 20-year block that you call millennial. how do you reach that person? it is hard for anyone, conservative, democrats, really hard to be millennials, because our tastes are unpredictable. the internet has helped out a lot with this. let's say that you were a madison avenue executive. cat, and iin with a said, this cat has an underbite, that you are i are going to take turn it into a hundred million dollars business entity, and that is it. what would you do? ms. perino: am i my age?
i would say you are crazy and get out of my office and you would go and make $100 million and i would lose out on -- mr. johnson: can we get a round of applause that is crazy, right. who ever thought of rebecca black. what song did she say? singer? beautiful does she have a lot more money? wet is because decided to make rebecca black famous. these are fascinating perspectives about how the world is upside down. millennials are not predictable. sometimes the most unrelated things play with millennials. ms. perino: at the same time, makingmillennials are
$100 million, but they are living in a dangerous world. announcedng it was that officials in madrid down 20,000 police uniforms that were ready to be sent over to be utilized by isis. there are national concerning -- erns, and ms. pavlich: i would call them grumpy millennials. 00will try to make $100 t million. we are so individual and the things that they are doing are so amazing successes. the flipside it sounds like we are not focusing on serious issues. foreign policy and terrorism
being one of them. millennial generation is interesting in terms of foreign ,olicy because they feel like they are frustrated because other generations are living in the past. a say we are not in the cold war, we want to embrace other nations, we are not afraid of china, russia, cuba, they want to be more interactive with those countries rather than separate enemies. they are not afraid of state governments, for example. they are concerned about terrorism, and i think that 9/11 has a lot to do with that. the cato institute did a white paper on millennials and foreign policy, and it shows that while millennials still see 9/11 as a historic event, interaction is an interesting one, because they see terrorism is a problem and something we need to handle, something that they have overseas now, not something that is here anymore necessarily. it is something that is dealt with in another place.
at the same time as they are concerned about it, they want to defeat terrorism, and they're concerned about the way we do it. they do not want intervention, a necessary a la terry intervention. the iraqi and afghanistan wars have had a good impact. the nsa has a big influence. edward snowden is a big controversial topic. the final thing is millennials seem to be less patriotic. millennials see the united states has been the best country in the world, whereas thatation x, there are 48% feel that, and you can keep going up from there. the greatest generation, 64% think america is the greatest country in a row. there is this globalization going on in terms of how
millennials feel about working with other countries. they are concerned about terrorism, but also concerned about the solution and how it impacts their own personal -- civil rights and privacy. ms. perino: since we have enough time, i want to do something in the lightning round, but it is worth talking about. i was going to ask, what do you think is the most defining moment in a millennial's life so far that has helped define their political views? i would like to any to give the answer, and i will to follow up with a question to rob about student loan debt. mr. johnson: did everybody see chris christie standing behind donald trump screaming? think the sentiment that chris christie was trying to tell us with his eyes is what every
millennial think about when they see their first paycheck. it is probably a job you worked really hard on, right, had a cutting grass, you work your fingers to the bone, a waiter or some type of manual labor job, and you look at how much of your probably minimal wage salary is taken away. and i think that is a tremendous staring into the abyss, screaming internal moment for millennials. you see a lot of move toward economic freedom in millennials. i am encouraged by it. if you're talking about something that we all have in common is something very theytant to millennials, feel like they have something in common with those around them, i think that giant chunk taken out, taken from you, and goes to a secret -- to social security?
anyone under 30, raise your hand if you think you are going to get social security? ms. perino: there is one over here. mr. johnson: it is bernie sanders. i am sorry about this rambling response. that is really important to millennials, and that is why we have a lot of,, something that that is you come from, something you look at and you go, that is kind of unfair. if you couldob, broaden that little bit, there are reports that millennials are attracted to this idea of socialism. if you could talk about the socialism piece and the student loan debt problem. mr. bluey: obviously, there is the old saying that when you are
young you are going to be attracted to the more liberal point of view, when you get older, you will get more wise and moved to the right. based on the sentiment we just heard, we have conservative s with us today, fortunately. [applause] when ity: and i think comes to the attraction to a candidate who is espousing socialistic views, a lot of them have gone through four years or more of a college education where they are not even hearing a conservative perspective on college campuses. ms. perino: they are not allowed to. mr. bluey: if you look at the debate that is played out on college campuses over the last year, you see what happens to conservatives in situations where they try to speak out or point a conservative point of view out on campus in. i experienced that at my own communistere you have
professors who are proud to wear the badge of honor. on the bigger issue of the student loan debt, you are correct. that is driving some of this anxiety, frustration, sentiment for the american dream, because if you're coming out of four year of college, you are carrying this that, you are looking at the paycheck and seeing how much the government is taking, why wouldn't you have a pessimistic view of the world? that is why you have sanders espousing free education who wants to forgive student loan debt. those things are appealing to some the millennials. ms. perino: private conservative alternatives and policies that actually are better solutions on student loans? mr. bluey: it starts with .ersonal responsibility o i think the baby boomer
generation should instill a view in their children that they have to work hard, they have to save maybe not everybody needs to go to a four-year that is costing a ridiculous amount of money. ms. pavlich: while we have had frustration in washington, andblican governors legislators have done a life, and it is time for legislators at the state level to hold state universities accountable for the products they produce. the are giving kids they are nots, and saying what they are buying, so they are buying these worthless degrees that they have no chance of ever paying back anyway, and that is if they got a job coming out of college. i love the reason we are seeing millennials as embracing
socialism, and they do not know what that means when you pull into their understanding, it is opposite of what they believe in. socialism limits choice, does not expand it, but they do not understand it. to the point of college, they $100,000f college with in debt, and under the past eight years, he unemployment rate for millennials and the labor participation rate is lower than it has ever been since world war ii. you go to the first 10 years of your life after college, a time to find your way and decide in your 30's. your first 10 years in your life as a young person determines your wage earnings for the rest of your life. there's plenty of data to support that. of thee an entire block millennial generation for eight years under obama coming out of college into an economy where be in this cycle of
dependency because they cannot find a job in the first place to pay off the loans they took out they wille which pay for anyway. ms. perino: whoever wants this first, can go first. according to the ap, there has been a 12% nationwide decline in abortions administered since 2010. sithis includes states.ce you who want to take that on, how important is that, and you see that growing, and is it because of technology and science? mr. bluey: i think it absolutely is. it are the technology did not
exist, that changes a lot of views there. you now have pregnancy centers that are set up across from that areclinics there to give women another option so they can discuss what is confronting them. technology plays a huge role. ms. pavlich: i would say science that the left accuses the right of not embracing. on the pro-life issue they certainly do. mr. johnson: i will take it. , benny, youg to say look great today. how did you get in those skinny jeans? i am not going to comment on this. i would say that a fascinating
foil, and you should try it sometime, i have not yet, but i think an interesting foil would be, why do you believe in global warming? democrats say because science backs it up. the follow-up question, when does life begin? and you should leave it open ended. and there is ae lot of different perspectives child'sprobably saw his fingers and beating heart. donald trump would make fun of me for drinking water. , thehe part of it pro-choice jumps the shark.
believe in humanities. stare at ar bowl, to baby inside the womb, shows how extreme they are when it comes to human life. [applause] that story was something that went viral because it was a ridiculous that they would be upset about the tos showing the reality of a child and they are upset about it. i am excited that the millennial generation is pro life. you are a manause does not mean that you are not allowed to have an opinion on the issue either. ms. perino: in the minutes we have left, i will do a lightning round. you know what that means. earlier i said my dad had me read the newspapers. we got the hardcopy magazines.
we wear a big news consumer type of family. the three of you have multiple ways to communicate, and with mediums that do not exist, some of them not even two years ago. and ij great outlet, review, all kinds of different ways in social media to comment. if you could take over the rnc social media for a week, what would you do? mr. johnson: uh -- well, -- ms. perino: it is a lightning round, benny. mr. johnson: i would follow all the kardashians. ms. perino: that is a great answer. katie, did you want to mention something ms. pavlich: yesterday -- they hadied to
the big yellow fbi letters. they had a picture of that and said, hey. ms. perino: do you have an answer on that? mr. bluey: i would put benny in charge. video -- they had a ms. perino: we have the video. mr. bluey: i don't know if we can set it up, but donald graham -- donald trump gave out lindsey graham's phone number. ♪
>> if you want my response, it is following the principles of morality that people want something. donald trump gave out lindsey graham's cell phone number to the world. this is the way he chose to respond. he was able to relate his feelings at that moment, and that ended up getting 3.5 million viewers.
ms. perino: on our show we talked about it. it was on multiple times on traditional media. mr. johnson: you will see that 60 million people saw that video, and that was his response to donald trump. ms. perino: i think that is a good place to wrap it up. i want to appeal to you for a moment. i want to remind you that the people you are here with today, you are of like mind. there is a big tent, and for the young people, you are making friends here. contacts, notjust just networking to see if you can get some place else in your life. i still communicate with the people i worked with on capitol hill. i talked to them every day. they had been my friends. he helped me in my work, and i would encourage you to stay in touch, worked together. you have all the tools at your fingertips to be him to do that, and you can make lifelong friends here today. i have been friends with rob and
we followed the jobs report and the stock market, and how accurate and complete are these as measures of prosperity? at the same time, he notes american families are not nursing like they once -- not flourishing. the connection between the state of our coming and the state of our families. research on that leading cultural indicators in the 1990's, we now have a way to use government data to score the well-being of families from year to year and from state to state. the family prosperity index. measures thenes start market, the family prosperity index measures the prosperity of families and the nation like combining the most important data into a single number. we can now measure real progress
statesear and weigh against each other. president ronald reagan once , work,or us, faith family, neighborhood, and peace are not just words. they are expressions of what family means. power.tion is. the family prosperity index is us all a more powerful voice for positive change and a roadmap for finding real solutions that -- for families and our nation. find out how your state ranks at familyprosperity.org.
>> from the moment of her birth, she would suffer incredible pain , and quite possibly a lifetime of pain for little gain. we thought about her suffering, suffering made all the difference in the world. that was how a woman, a mother describes her decision to abort her child seven months into her pregnancy. and i know everyone in this room comfortablegets hearing those words.
you can only begin to visualize the first time that i read that blog and realize that the diagnosis that drove baby rachel's mother determinate that child's life, the diagnosis that laid inside her mother's womb, is the very same diagnosis that i sit here today with. gentlemen, we all know that baby rachel's story is not unique in america. it is commonplace. baby rachel joins nearly one million children in the united states who are aborted each year. of death does not end with that specific.
stake in our union currently have lost that protect dr.-assisted suicide, so-called death with dignity laws. an additional 18 states are considering such legislation this year alone, and half of the state in our you have considered such legislation at least once. this culture of death is a crisis for our nation. and on the matter of life and human dignity, on the matter of life, we cannot be wrong. we cannot get this wrong. this is about -- [applause] ms. hocker: this is about the fiber of our making, and is about the character of our great
nation. laws of ourt the land, it is about the justices in the decision of our courts, and it is about opportunity that we as conservative activists hope in thew dignity of life in america. tos is about our opportunity renew and appreciation for life stage,y form, at every and for every single human being. [applause] today wer: so today are going to talk not just about the facts, about what is going on in our nation around death
but we are going to talk about what we as conservatives can do about i wasn't to start by introducing the three great americans who joined me on this date today. thise going to talk about and what we can do. to my right, i have lenny mcallister. lenny is a radio and tv host, also a candidate for the house of representatives in his hometown of pittsburgh, pennsylvania. [applause] lenny i realized that his greatest accomplishment, goes along with the number four. he has four great kids. welcome. i also have gianna jessin. she lives a life that was not exactly always meant to be. a's birth certificate,
it does not just say she was born in the abortion clinic in california, it reads that she was born surviving an abortion. [applause] her prognosis was that she would never walk or lift her head. i'm pretty sure she lifts her head quite high when she goes before organizations like the united states congress and talks about the pro-life movement in america. [applause] finally, we are joined by father ben johnson. he is the u.s. bureau chief of live site news, a guest post of nothing but the truth quitclaimed around -- with crane
durham and he is the relentless advocate for human dignity across the entire five span. thank you panelists. i want to jump right in and get to the heart of the matter. most of us in this room have probably been pro-life feminist of our lives. most of our lives. we may have come to that realization at different points, but even if we have been pro-life our whole life, there are moments where the truth reveals itself, where it crystallizes in a way that does not just change our hearts and our minds, but it changes the way that we also talk and we speak on behalf of the voiceless. for each of you to tell us one of those moments. i suspect there has been many in your lives. one of those moments that the truth revealed itself and then how has it changed your methods
and how can it change the methods of all of these great conservatives who are going to head back to their hometown at the end of cpac? i will start with the. mr. mcallister: first, i am very very to be with -- i am grateful to be here. i started thinking about what moments those work for me. a lot of times of people "choose" abortion cash and that is what choose is, it is choosing abortion, let's be honest. when i was at that moment, at two different points of time in my life, to moments where people choose not to have kids when they find out they are pregnant with life -- when i was 21 years old and when i was 41 years old. when i felt i was too young to have a child and some would say i was too old to have a child, so when you hold that sonogram -- and when i was 21, my daughter and grad school right now, i slept every single night
with that picture underneath my pillow. i don't even have it because it is so ripped up and shredded, but i fell in love with that person. at four months, gestation. [applause] just the same when we had our last child. 40 years old. my wife and i find out that we are pregnant again. you fall in love immediately. what does that do with you when you fall in love that 21 and 41? you understand that pro-life principles are a lifestyle and not a choice. i know i resemble president obama -- [laughter] obama, i dident not feel like i was being punished with the pregnancy like you said with his daughters. that wea gift from god have the obligation to embrace and elevate with every policy
institute of our lives. [applause] ms. jessen: i would say the moment for me that changed my life and it has changed every moment ever since is the moment i gave my life to christ. [applause] christian.medly i do not believe that you can survive being burned alive in your mother's will for 18 hours and have the gift of cipro policy without jesus -- of cerebral palsy, without jesus, and i don't mean cocktail party jesus, the one that keeps the neighbors happy and never offends anyone, that jesus is not exist, but i mean the jesus that raises the dead. [applause] i am his girl.
you do not mess with me because my father runs the world. that is the deal. [laughter] it is not every day i get out preached. [laughter] auspicious i am speaking about cpac. i became pro-life because of politics. i was always politically active as a child and ronald reagan was my hero. i agreed with him on every issue , national defense, foreign policy, politics, but i disagreed on abortion. i was a pro-choice atheist. as time went on and when george bush was running, he was pro-life and several of the people within talked to me and said, you need to think about what is being done to the child and you need to think when life begins, so as an atheist and someone interested in science, i began to study when science says life against. there is a scientific consensus
that life begins the moment what they called fertilization or would be called consumption, went the unique human being comes into the world. when there is a new human being in the world, under our constitutional form of government, that child is endowed with all the rights of our constitutional system. we do not kill without due process of the law and because of that, i changed my view. after a while, they changed my mind about the existence of another form of life i did not believe in. [applause] ms. hocker: wow. withr ben, i want to stay the firm and when we think about being pro-life, we gravitate toward the beginning of life, at conception, like you were talking about, but i want to go to the end of life for a moment. i want to go to when the person has run the race and she has perhaps,reat life, and
her suffering -- as many use to think about abortions -- but newfound suffering at the end of life, you know, advocates for doctors who commit suicide argued that death with dignity while protecting individuals from going and getting a prescription and choosing for themselves to quietly and their own lives on their own terms because of their own perceptions .f suffering i want to talk for a minute about that and went to hear from you. why is it dangerous to society that 18 states in our union are currently in 2016 considering doctor assisted
suicide. buys that dangerous? -- why is it dangerous? fr. johnson: the definition of medicine is a safe people and do not kill people. every oath the doctor has to take is that they preserve life and not take it. it is a violation of medicine in itself. thatd of all, this is same -- is saying that every choice is subject to government coalition. had a year 2008, a woman recurrence of lung cancer and she petitioned she was on the state health care program, oregon health plan, and she asked for the right to have the medication she needed to survive, which cost $4000 a month, and they said they would not pay for the medicine but they would gladly pay for her assisted-suicide. ms. hocker: this is the reality of these laws. fr. johnson: imagine if we get a
single health care pay system? i could be reality from coast to coast. is an issueoercion and the fact that many people notesting this are terminally ill. the people who are doing so are doing so because they are depressed. there is a study by harvard university that found that only 10% of the people requested this -- and only 10% of the terminally go cancer patients ask for assisted suicide and in the netherlands, they are doing so because of pain and the rest because they are depressed. the author of that study was the brother of the architect of obamacare, so they know they are lying through their teeth if they say it is because of pain. it is immoral in terms of what they are pushing. when we stick at the end of life, we get a picture of when that would be, usually, write
both age and someone suffering. reality is something different. if you want to see where america will be in 20 years, look at legalizedere they assisted suicide. in netherlands, the age for consent of assisted suicide is 12 years old, not to be outdone. in 2014, the king of belgian eliminated all age restrictions for assisted suicide, so children as young as nine years old have been approved for assisted suicide around the world. that is not the picture we usually have in our minds. people are dying because they are depressed, not at the ripe old age and it violates the hippocratic oath. the most dangerous thing is it forecloses cope and inspires the worst in us. it forces cold water on what is best in us and violates the very fiber of what we are as a nation. ms. hocker: i want to stay on that because i think you are getting at the slippery slope
backwards. it is not just about someone who was truly in their final days as those on the less supporting would make us bank carried this is about people in their lives who also feel pressured to say, i am too much of a burden on people. gianna, i want to talk about that because there is a statistic that both of us know out there that 90% of children who are diagnosed with down syndrome are aborted before they are born, and that is just down syndrome. 90% of adults with down syndrome report being happy and fulfilled in their lives. it is kind of amazing to think that somehow there are people who are going to feel that they are too much of a burden. aboutu talk a little bit what you think we need to do as a society to strengthen our culture around seeing people for their potential, seeing people
for the value that they bring in a matter what form of life they have taken on? ms. jessen: you know, i think palsy- i mean, cerebral is such a gift. was horrible. no one ever expected me to their to try to complete two marathons by running on my toes for seven or 8.5 hours. [applause] my balance gets better, i have every intention of figuring out how to climb a mountain of some kind. [applause] the think it is such arrogance for the healthy person to look at the person they perceive as disabled or unworthy of life and say, i am going to say what your quality of life is, i am going
to sort of put my own perception -- i think we have forgotten as learnety that we often wisdom from the weakest among gust, and you can imagine how horrified i am when i hear the argument that someone who .urvived a failing abortion if the baby is disabled, we need to terminate the pregnancy -- who does that sound like, adolf hitler? and who are you? you have no idea, people, the amount of beauty and joy in having -- and happiness that i lean on the i must strong arm of jesus, limping all the way to heaven. i have more happiness than most people i meet who are whining about nothing. [applause] sorry.
and cultivating a nation of victims, and i am telling you i am no victim. i am of victor because of christ and what he has done for me. [applause] i do not know if i answered your question, but i think -- ms. hocker: i think you gave a great answer. ms. jessen: that means i did. ms. hocker: yes. [laughter] ms. hocker: i want to stay on the topic of pain and the topic of preventing people from suffering. lenny, let's start with you. i think all of our panelists have a perspective on this. capable of the unborn child protection act, it passed the house but did not get to the senate rate -- get through the senate.