Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX  May 16, 2010 9:00am-10:00am EDT

9:00 am
and sun today but i'm sure they won't notice it. a lot of rain into the week. that d >> chris: i'm chris wallace, and this is "fox news sunday." laura bush speaks out on her husband after 9/11. >> how was your comfort at home? >> chris: on the news media. >> do you think michelle obama has been typecast the same way you were? >> chris: and her new life in texas. >> you say i could at the last -- >> chris: plus a first look inside her home in dallas. former first lady laura bush in a sunday exclusive. also newt gingrich accuses president obama of building a corrupt political machine that threatens the country. former house speaker newt gingrich only on "fox news sunday." and with all the finger pointing over the gulf oil spill, we'll ask our panel who is really to blame. all right now.
9:01 am
on "fox news sunday." hello again from fox news in washington. we'll take you to dallas for our interview with laura bush in a few minutes. but first, newt gingrich and his explosive new book called "to save america." we want to get right to it. speaker gingrich, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> good to be here. >> chris: you say president obama and the democrats are trying to impose a se secular socialist machine on the country. what is that? >> it's clearly a machine. if you can get $787 billion out of the congress and no elected official has even read the bill, that's the behavior of a chicago-style machine. if you have the entire country rejecting healthcare, you lose teddy kennedy's seat over healthcare and your attitude is who cares, we're going to run over it and pass it. today for the first time in my lifetime, a bill you passed 58% of the country wants to repeal. that is the behavior of the
9:02 am
machine. >> chris: now the secular socialist side. >> working backwards, you have a pay czar in washington who thinks they have enough knowledge and power to set salary for people -- if that's not socialist? they're the largest funder of aig. they just nationalized student loans so they're not all 100% government program. they're trying to find a backdoor way to get to a government-run healthcare system. if you look at the recent reports that in 2014, many major corporations are going to dump their health insurance. >> chris: the secular part? >> if you look at his appointments, if you look at equal employment opportunity commission employee that says the religious has to be subordinate to politics, the gay agenda or if you're practice catholic you
9:03 am
shouldn't work in emergency rooms, or the two democrats that introduced a bill to abolish the catholic church in connecticut, there is a continuous anti-religious bias. the recent judge's decision a day of prayer is unconstitutional. if it weren't so serious would be laughable. >> chris: you also write this, and let's put it up on the screen -- mr. speaker, respectfully, isn't that wildly over the top? >> not if you mean the historic contract we have had that says the rights come from the creator, they're unalienable, you're allowed to pursue happiness. listen to president obama's language. he gets to decide who earns how much. >> chris: we're talking not just about any company, talking about the companies that the government has spent billions of dollars in, the pay czar. >> he said publicly,
9:04 am
generically, some americans earn too much, so he is now going to decide that? >> chris: he has said that. i agree he said americans make too much. >> you want politician to be arbiter of your dreams where he can say we'll have a tax -- they proposed this. a punitive tax on those we don't like. we'll decide that you have too much money and we'll take it for you. >> chris: compare it to the nazis? >> i compare it to a threat. not in terms of moral -- there is no comparison to nazi communism, or mao, all of which were evil. but the secular socialist left represents fundamental replacement of america. a very different world view. a different outcome. i think there is a very serious threat to the way of life. >> chris: your proposals are as dramatic as your analysis of the situation. you say, "don't reform,
9:05 am
replace. replace the environmental protection agency. replace the department of education." replace with what? >> in the case of the environmental protection agency, off bureaucracy that is self-selected of people who believe they have the right to make the most amazing micro management judgments around the country. if you look at the degree to which they now issue rules, believe they can regulate the entire carbon economy, again you talk about socialism, how about having a government agency of unelected people who decide they can literally rewrite the entire economy based on carbon? i think it's very hard to reform an agency which has spread two generations recruiting people more and more anti-business, more and more anti-commercial activity, and who represent a value system that is very hard to deal with. >> chris: you also talk about replacing entitlements like social security? >> i think you have to migrate to a system that is social security based on
9:06 am
personal contributions. if you are a young person today and you do the math, you are much better off to have a special security system where you control your money, you put it in. it builds up for your entire working life. when you retire, you get the money. >> chris: really have wanted that with the stock market dropping by 50% in the course of the last couple of months? >> if you put it over a lifetime and over the last 30 years you'd still be way ahead compared to transfer system. when social security paid the first check, there were 42 taxpayers for every recipient. when my grandchildren who are eight and ten get to be social security recipients, they may well be two taxpayers for every recipient. you can't sustain that. the whole lesson of greece, spain, the crisis in europe, the lesson of sacramento or albany, we can't sustain having government of the fourth bubble where we are spending more than we can maintain. >> chris: not surprisingly,
9:07 am
your book has drawn strong criticism. you praise the tea party and when they ousted utah senator robert bennett last week you said this -- but speaker, just three months ago, you endorsed bennett for re-election. >> i did. i think bennett is a very nice man. but my comment wa wasn't anti-bennett. he'd agree. he went back home and found his vote on tarp signaled people, gave them an explanation of their anger. second, bennett is a very reasonable person. they wanted someone to come and fight, and they were saying we're unhappy with washington. we want people to want to fight to change washington. that will be a characteristic across the country. >> chris: your critics point out as you have seen here you attack president obama for a socialist intrusion in the private sector. but the fact is in 2008, you
9:08 am
supported the $700 billion wall street bail-out. >> right. what i said at the time -- actually, it was 400. >> chris: no, 700. >> what i said at the time, i would repeat. if the chairman of the federal reserve, and the secretary of treasury both look you in the eye and say in the absence of doing this, we're going to collapse in a great depression, i don't have the confidence as historian to say i think my judgment is so much superior, i'm going to walk, let's take a gamble and see if we have a great depression. but i said the same week i thought it was wrong for paulson to be secretary of the treasury. i don't think you ought to have chairman of goldman sachs in the process of transferring wealth to wall street. >> chris: talk some of the big issues now. what do you think of the nomination of elena kagan to the supreme court? >> i think the president should withdraw it. you don't need a lot of hearings. the fact that she led the effort which was repudiated unanimously by the supreme court to block the american military from harvard law
9:09 am
school -- we're in two laws and i see no reason to appoint an anti-military supreme court justice or why the senate would confirm an anti-military supreme court justice. >> chris: in fairness, she says and a lot of her supporters say she is not anti-military, she was opposed to military having don't ask, don't tell. forgive me, sir. the fact is she supports a lot of policies i suspect you do. spoken supportively as solicitor general as the bush detainee policies. she has spoken about an expansive view of executive power. do you think you will get a better nominee out of barack obama? >> i think the president has every right to nominate a liberal. he is the president and that is his value system. the fact is if you look at the brief you filed, if you look at what she wrote at the time, it's very myopic view. harvard accepts money from saudis. saudi arabia, by the way, excutess homosexuals and recesses women and doesn't allow christian or jews to
9:10 am
practice religion, but to be saudisi saudi fine. the policy of the united states and clinton administration she served in had a policy. for her to single out the military was extraordinary myopic position. if you read what she read it was focused on the military and at a time we have two wars it's inappropriate for somebody to end up as justice of the supreme court. >> chris: we have about a minute left. there are big primary elections tuesday. arlen specter running now as a democrat in pennsylvania, is in trouble in the democratic primary. in kentucky, the establishment candidate, secretary of state trey grayson running behind tea party candidate rand paul. what is going on with voters? >> voters are very upset and should be, 10% unemployment, massive debt and government that doesn't phoen function wel. people have right to be upset. they are looking for ways to
9:11 am
signal that. arlen specter, i did one of his last republican fundraisers for him and i wished he would have returned the money. i think he has a likelihood of losing. i think tim burns will probably win in the special election. we have a friend of ours running in a primary in arkansas and we hope she wins. i think what the voters are looking for is somebody who communicates a determination to fight for very dramatic change. i think that internal thing is very, very important. i think that's why john casey will become governor in ohio and why meg whitman will probably be governor in california. >> chris: mr. gingrich, thank you for coming in and discussing the book. i have to say, it's always interesting. >> thank you. >> chris: up next, former first lady laura bush on supreme court nominee, elena kagan, the battle over immigration and much more. we'll be right back.
9:12 am
but we're also in the showing-kids- new-worlds business. and the startup-capital- for-barbers business. and the this-won't- hurt-a-bit business. because we don't just work here. we live here. these are our families. and our neighbors. and by changing lives we're in more than the energy business we're in the human energy business. chevron.
9:13 am
[ male announcer ] we call it the american renewal. because we believe in the strength of american businesses. ♪ ge capital understands what small businesses need to grow and create jobs. today, over 300,000 businesses rely on ge capital for the critical financing they need to help get our economy back on track. the american renewal is happening right now. ♪
9:14 am
>> chris: we went to dallas friday to interview former first lady laura bush about her new book called "spoken from the heart." it takes you inside the white house, as mrs. bush describes the most dramatic moments of the bush presidency. and it's begun to top best seller lists. we talked with mrs. bush in the first interview she's done in her new home with the president. so what is the difference between living in this house and living in the white
9:15 am
house? >> well, many, many differences, of course. a big yard that is private. george can play soccer with barney and beasley out here. >> chris: i see the satellite on the roof. is the president watching a lot of sports? >> we have the huge screen tv. that was one of the first things we bought and put upstairs in george's man cave, the one big room upstairs where his desk is and his computer. that's where he likes to watch the texas rangers every night. >> chris: mrs. bush, welcome back to "fox news sunday." thank you for inviting us to your home. >> thanks. glad you're here in my library. >> chris: i want to begin with your account of 9/11 and the days after, which i think is one of the most powerful part of your book. you say of that day, "the world as i knew it irrirr irrevocably changed." how was it living in the white house? >> there was long days of ange xy
9:16 am
anxiety and the grief. the idea of america attacked like it was. all of that really, every part of that including the threat assessments that george read every morning after september 11 gave us feeling of vulnerability and a fear really. and for us at the white house, high anxiety. >> chris: talk about the high anxiety. face it, you had a bullseye in the house in which you were living. you say you questioned every noise, every plane that flew over. >> and we had that military cap that started flyin flying t jets that started to fly cover around washington. those really, i would hear those at night and get a certain sense of security about those. and think about the pilots that were in the military that were flying those planes. but we did get the very first night of september 11, they wanted us to sleep down in
9:17 am
the bunker and george said no, i have to sleep in my own bed, we have to get some rest. he said come get us if you think you need to. in the middle of the night we heard the footsteps in the hall outside and then secret service agent rushing in the bedroom saying you have to go downstairs, another plane was on its way. we rushed down the marble staircase to the bunker and just as we got there, they knew that the plane they had started was one of our oown, one of our own military flying. >> chris: you also talk and very much evoke the fact of your husband becoming a war-time president. and you write this -- "i could see the lines cut deeper in his face, and could hear him next to me lying awake at night, his mind still working." on a human level, how tough was it? how much of a burden was it for him and directly for you
9:18 am
to bear that responsibility? >> well, it was very stressful. no doubt about it. we were worried about our troops and worried about the decisions he was making. was it the right decision to go into afghanistan, for instance? or to pressure saddam hussein and finally then to go into iraq. >> chris: when you say you could hear him lying awake? >> i knew he was there and i knew he was worried. of course there were times when the worry was more. when the chatter was more. he didn't always tell me when there was, when there was specific threats that they were particularly worried about. he didn't try to add to my worry telling me that. this was obviously nothing i could do about it. i did know and i could tell. >> chris: at night, he's lying awake, stewing, worrying. how would you comfort him? what would you say? >> we really had mainly this theory to comfort in each other's presence, just the
9:19 am
comfort of being with each other was what propped us both up emotionally. we knew already and always had each other. the emotional support of each other. >> you talk at length in the book about the run-up to the war in iraq and the fact that intelligence services around the world, believed saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. how did you feel when you learned despite our government's best efforts that he didn't? >> well, of course, we were shocked, really. then also disappointed that that was, you know, that that was wrong, that the intelligence services were wrong. >> chris: you know to this day there are some people who believe that the president lied us into war. >> i mean, that's just so false. and everyone knows that. i think the, you know, there is a certain group of people that say that. but if they look at the statements of everyone,
9:20 am
former presidents, the people on capitol hill, both sides of the aisle, that was what everyone believed. >> chris: does it bother you that some people will think the worst, the unthinkabunthink the idea a president would take us into war under false pretenses? >> sure, of course that bothers me. on the other hand it's just a fact of life. it's what happens in american politics. there is always for whoever is president the opponents, the people on the other side who cast apers aspersions that y may not believe himself. or the conspiracy theorists and something we just know about for some people in the united states and something we know about in the white house. >> chris: you said when you became first lady you were typecast. katie couric said you appear to be a traditional woman. this is my favorite. british tabloid wrote, "laura bush is a cookie-baker home-maker, dull, clumsy and
9:21 am
old-fashioned." why do you think that happened? >> a lot of reasons. because i had traditional jobs, women traditional jobs. a teacher and librarian and also i was married to a conservative president. because of that, you know, that was just the view that people had of me. and it's sad really and sort of frustrating that the press in general typecast every woman who is in the white house, the other first lalady, because always the first ladies have been more interested and a lot more complicated than their box they're sort of put in. >> chris: do you think michelle obama has been typecast the same way you were? >> i don't think so really. maybe this is just her age, that she is younger. but i think she's been given the benefit of doubt more by the press than former first ladies. certainly look at the way barbara bush, mother,
9:22 am
grandmother, was typed as motherly type woman. when, in fact, barbara bush is as strong as horseradish and people rarely know that. >> chris: you became deeply involved in advocating for afghan women for their rights the role in the life of their country. you write, "it was not that i found my voice. instead, it was as if my voice found me." explain. >> well, what happened was i made the president's radio address after september 11 and talked about the treatment of women and children by the taliban. right after that i went to the department store with jenna. and the women who sold cosmetics came up to me and said, "thank you so much for speak for the women of afghanistan." that's when it occurred to me in an emotional way that people listen to me, that i did have a podium and that women all over the united
9:23 am
states felt the sense of sisterhood with the women of afghanistan. and wanted to be able to do something. >> chris: i want to go back to this question that you touched on earlier about media bias. in the book, it almost seems as if you wanted to get something off your chest. you write some of the media came with preconceived notions and adversarial point of view. some was biased where journalists rather than being objective could not put their own emotion and objectives aside. question: was it liberal bias against a conservative republican president? >> yes, that's what i think it was. absolutely. i think that's what it was. it was not always. it was just, it was the same thing that we were just talking about. about this sort of flat view of who the first lady is, that wasn't just about me, but about other women. maybe part of that i was a bias against women or a way to put women in a special category or to be seen as the
9:24 am
little women who are home baking the cookies, like the british tabloid said. >> chris: yes, mumsy. there is a column in "newsweek" today, and not always necessarily the pro-bush magazine, where he lays out the fact of the current gulf oil spill. administration approves oil well, oil company, big donors the president campaign, initial reaction to downplay the accident. it takes president 11 days to get to the scene. he says if that had been george w. bush instead of barack obama, it would have been national scandal. >> well, i think that's right. probably. but that's just how it is. we knew that. my real reluctance when george decided to run for president, when he was thinking about running for president was that we knew from having watched the way mr. bush was characterized in 1992 that -- >> chris: yohis father. >> -- that is the risk you run.
9:25 am
it's not all that, though. that's also what i want people to see. there is a lot of criticism but there is also a lot of support from the american people. people said to us on every single road line, everywhere we went they were praying for us. >> chris: does it bother you 16 months in the presidency that the obama administration still talks about the bad economy they inherited from your husband? >> well, sure. you know, that bothers me. but on the other hand, the economy was bad that september. i think one of the things that happened when george was president was that everything, including the weather, became his fault. it's unrealistic expectation of our president. but i also know that that's what people expect and that the president better be really tough. thank heaven george was under the circumstances with having the september 11 attack. >> it'd like to do a
9:26 am
lightning round, quick questions and answers on the variety of suspects. how do you feel about president obama naming elena kagan to be, if she is confirmed, the third woman justice serving on the supreme court at the same time? >> i think it's great. i'm really glad that there will be three if she is confirmed. i like to have women on the supreme court. >> chris: think it makes a difference? >> i think it does make a difference. i just like women to be represented in all parts of american political and civic life. >> chris: in his memoir, karl rove writes -- i don't know if you know this. he writes he never knew where he stood with you. >> i kept him that way. >> chris: i was going to say, he says that you believe you kept him offbalance as a way to keep him in check and balance him. >> i didn't -- that part is not true. i didn't purposefully keep him this way. >> chris: why would he say he never knew where he stood with you? >> i think it was because
9:27 am
he -- i don't know why he would say that, really. i think there was a certain tension he felt when i was around because i think he thought i'd say what i thought to george. >> chris: in 2004, and you talk in the book, you talk to your husband about not making gay marriage a big issue in the re-election campaign. why not? >> i think what happens on big social issues on that, the debate ends up denigra denigrating a certain group of people. that's also happening on the immigration debate, another hot-button issue. instead of having it be a debate of what the laws are, it ends up making a group of people feel like they're the target of the debate. >> chris: i have to ask you since you brought it up, are you unhappy with the arizona law? >> not necessarily. i think we have to have the immigration laws, you know, that is a really important part of it.
9:28 am
it's just the debate about the immigration law, about arizona's law target i targetin someone a group of people. this is not new in american history. many groups are targeted all over the history. irish, for instance, irish immigrants including my family came to the united states. it's just that they set a trade of nativism that shows up in american history in a lot of different ways. >> chris: should gays be allowed to marry? >> i think what i really believe is that it's something that is so difficult, it's a very, very difficult issue for very many people. the marriage between a man and a woman is so fundamental to our civic life, for all of our history, for the history of humans. and it's a debate that i think people want to have.
9:29 am
i hope they have in a way that protects people. in many ways it's generational and that gay marriage will come. >> chris: gay marriage will come? >> yeah. >> chris: are you okay with that? >> i'm okay with that. >> chris: do you think gays should be able to serve openly in the military without don't ask, don't tell? >> that's something the legislators has to talk about and figure out what is best for the united states military. >> chris: do you have an opinion on that? >> not really. >> chris: finally, i want to talk briefly about life after the white house. how difficult was it for your husband to have all the world's problems on his desk one day and then the next day -- >> hahave nothing? i'm sure it was difficult. he didn't act like it. we stopped in midland on our way home on january 20 and we were met by 30,000 of our closest friends. which was really fun. when it's over, it's over. george -- when we drove up to
9:30 am
the ranch, he was the one out unloading the bags and putting the bicycles in their garage and doing everything that someone else would have done for us before. and then getting the coffee for me the next morning. and kidding that he didn't remember how to run the coffee machine after eight years of not making coffee. >> chris: no feeling of -- >> i'm sure there was a big transition. there is no doubt about it. but we were there and he could ride his mountain bike every single day and i think that exercise has always helped him, you know, get it together. we both had book contracts and we both started working on our books and there was something great about that as well. it gave us a chance to reflect on the eight years before. and to sort of sit back and look at the eight years. all of those were helpful in the transition. >> chris: finally, at the end
9:31 am
of your book you say, "i could at least exhale." really, after eight years? >> i didn't realize that. i didn't know that when i was there. it was only when i was home. and, you know, even at night going to bed and thinking what do i have to do tomorrow and try to go over my schedule and prepare for it and then realize i didn't have any obligations the next day. that's when i could exhale and see it. there was really a buoyancy of freedom that i felt, hyp hypervigilance, this worry about the troops all the time, who we still worry about. i mean that didn't stop. >> chris: right. >> but the worry about them, the worry about another tragedy, the worry about a hurricane, i mean the worry about all the millions of worries that the president of the united states worries about. >> chris: mrs. bush, we want to thank you for talking to us and thank you for your service. >> thank you very much, chris. appreciate it a lot. >> chris: mrs. bush also talks about how she conquered
9:32 am
her fear of public speaking. you can find out at the website later in this show, mrs. bush shows us more of her new house including her hallway of private family photos. up next, the blame game over the gulf oil spill. our sunday panel looks at who will take the fall. stay tuned. ♪ ♪ do u gonna be there? ♪ are u sure u gonna call back? ♪ ♪ when am calling up and all that? ♪ ♪ ♪ can't u hear i'm sick? ♪ i'm lovesick ♪ can't u hear it explode? ♪ all down, all down i can download files up to 10x faster than 3g... outside. i can stream the movie "airplane" to my cell phone...
9:33 am
at the airport. i can have a crystal-clear videoconference with my clients... ...muffin basket or something... ...while working offsite, or share five high-speed connections for online gaming... while enjoying the great outdoors. [ video game sound effects ] eat it, yoshi! what can you do with 4g? [ male announcer ] experience 4g from sprint. it's more than a wireless network. deaf, hard-of-hearing and people with speech disabilities, it's a wireless revolution. access
9:34 am
9:35 am
president obama says he
9:36 am
is angry and frustrated with the oil spill in the gulf and the oil companies behind it. he says he is tired of all the finger-pointing and then he blamed the bush administration for the whole thing. it's all over. [ laughter ] >> chris: jay leno this week making fun of the blame game in washington over the gulf oil spill. it's time now for our sunday group. brit hume, fox news, senior political analyst. contributors nina easton of "fortune" magazine, stephen hayes of "the weekly standard" and juan williams from national public radio. president obama made a show of anger in the rose garden at the white house on friday about all the finger pointing of the companies involved in the oil spill and also saying that the government, and he pointed out going back at least ten years, shared some of the responsibility. brit, how much of this do you think is calculated damage control by the white house to make sure they don't get swept up to what could become a growing political problem? >> a lot is about that. in fact, i think it's almost
9:37 am
exclusively about that. the administration has a policy in place that would call for more offshore drilling and it will be difficult in the atmosphere. not because the country at large does not recognize the need for this, but because the president's base includes environmentalist environmentalists, they're passionate about this and they see this as an opportunity to stop this kind of offshore oil exploration and drilling. and the president has to contend with that. and what you saw there was a show of anger that intended to put him at least verbally in sync with a big piece of his base. >> i think there is blame to obviously go toward the company. fine, you can blame them. when you start looking at the timeline of what happened, he is on the hot seat, the president. if you go back 18 days before the oil spill and he is
9:38 am
telling a town hall in south carolina saying the oil rigs don't cause oil spills they're technologically safe now. then you look at the timeline of their response as you indicated earlier in the show if george bush had done this, he would be on the cover of magazines as somebody who is a wreck. three days in, they're not, they're downplaying it. nine days, it takes the president nine days to even talk about it publicly. and janet napolitano of homeland security doesn't say it's a national, doesn't have a national impact until nine days later. it takes them almost two weeks to get there. there is a double standard going on there. i think there is going to be more focus on that. >> chris: steve, i also wonder about the president's timing about the display of anger because of the fact there are going to be a series of congressional hearings starting this week. last week we saw the b.p. and the oil executives on the hot seat. this week it's administration officials, including interior
9:39 am
secretary salazar. i want to point out a couple of things. first, we are seeing growing reports about how a department inside interior, the minerals management service had given a lot of -- this is in the obama administration, had given a number of oil companies permission to drill without getting environmental permits. then let's put up the video that we saw this week of plume of oil coming out on the ocean floor, a mile down which according to some scientists may be ten times the estimate of the leak, ten times greater than what we had been told. and we're approaching one month since this spill began. i guess two questions. one, how does the obama administration handle it? how much trouble are they in to get the congressional hearings? >> i don't think there was much they could have done in the earlier stages that would have prevented anything we've seen. i don't think it's a washington problem. that's why i think it was so incredibly foolish for him to say what he said on friday when he went after the oil
9:40 am
companies which is understandable and from, you know, a messaging perspective was probably a wise thing to do. but then to throw in the bush administration, or to hint that this was a washington problem, the problem we have is the issue to be able to say, you know, what happened here is irresponsibly on part of the country and not a washington issue. by doing this, he invites exactly the scrutiny that you suggest that he is going to get and he validates some of the scrutiny. >> chris: juan, do you think there is a washington component to this problem? >> clearly, if you have in terms of the minerals people, minerals management service say we saying we're not going to apply the regulation act and necessary to clear, if we're not applying that why was favorable treatment given to the oil companies to go ahead with the drilling without looking at the environmental impact on the gulf? it will have a terrible impact. people are wondering was there a thorough vetting of the oil companies? did the government perform the necessary protective
9:41 am
function they should have? it's not just the big oil companies under the obama administration. this has been going on for some time that the leases are just given without proper scrutiny. people have questions about it. secondly, with regard to policy of having oil exploration, the president said friday yes, it is part of our future in terms of energy that we are going to have drilling. people are wondering should the incident, the terrible calamity had prompted president obama to go back and readdress whether deep sea oil drilling is appropriate in the united states and apparently he hasn't done that. >> it's probably too much to expect we have an adult conversation about this, but that is what is needed. the first thank that n thing tho be said is offshore drilling on the shelf is more hazardous than drilling closer in but the environmentalists won't hear of it and we don't do it. secondly it needs to be said that the most fragile form of
9:42 am
oil acquisition is in tankers. when you look at record, the spills have come from tankers account for more of the spilled oil, i mean way more of spilled oil than do leaks from offshore or other oil rigs. so, to whatever degree we end up closing down offshore drilling off of our own shores it will be made up for in tankers coming from the countries, in some cases, not aligned with us who are bringing it to us. that's why it makes sense for us to try to explore on and off the coast of the united states. >> first of all, you say the analysis is going to be in excess of what happened with exxon valdez? >> see if that happens. that is a good question today if you are standing on the gulf, and that is, where is the oil? >> where is the oil? >> it's not on -- except for chunks of it, you're not seeing it on the shore yet. >> chris: there are new
9:43 am
reports of greater amounts on the ocean. >> that's true, but you know where the greatest source of oil that seeps into the ocean is? it's from natural seepage from subterranean deposits. that's where most of it comes from. not from drilling accidents. so what is badly needed here is the perspective on the energy policy and also on the hard realities of what goes on when it comes to oil spilling. >> i think it will damage the environment in the gulf and damage tourism and damage fish. this is in excess of anything we've previously asked the ocean to absurd. >> we'll see if it is. there is an awful lot, the ocean absorbs a lot. >> i think rush limbaugh went down this road. the ocean can handle it. i think we have to take some responsibility for the environment and be responsal for the people that live in the area, vacation area, fishing area. it's just wrong to think you know what? dump it on the ocean and let the ocean handle it. >> who said that? who is saying that? >> as a policy matter, the president would be foolish to
9:44 am
say okay, we're going to have a broad moratorium on offshore drilling. it simply wouldn't work. when you think of the potential economic impact that that would have by cutting this out, i think you are talking about something dramatic. >> chris: we have to take a break here, but when we come back, elena kagan is nominated for supreme court. do conservatives or liberals have the biggest gripe? what about the white house effort to manage its media message? that's a low price!
9:45 am
wow! that's a low price! wow! that's a low price! i'm sorry. did you say something about a low price? wow! that's a low price! i know! [ male announcer ] see for yourself. staples has low prices on everything you need for your office. staples. that was easy. host: could switching to geico 15% or more on car insurance? host: does elmer fudd have trouble with the letter r? elmer: shhhh, be very quiet; i'm hunting wabbits. director (o/c): ok cut!!!!'s i'm hunting "rabbits," elmer. let's try that again. elmer: shhhh, i'm hunting wabbits. director (o/c): cuuuuut! rabbits. elmer: wabbits director (o/c): rabbits. elmer: wabbits. director (o/c): rabbits with an "r." elmer: aw...this diwector's starting to wub me the wong way. vo: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. here's to the believers.
9:46 am
the risk-takers. the visionaries. the entrepreneurs... who put it all on the line to build and run their own businesses. at at&t, we know something about that. our company started out in a small lab, with not much more than a dream. and today, we know it's small businesses that can create the jobs america needs. that's why at&t is investing billions to upgrade and build out our wired and wireless networks.
9:47 am
making them faster, smarter, and more secure. connecting small businesses to markets across the country, and around the world. we invest now, because we know it will pay off... with new jobs, new growth, from a new generation, putting their belief in the future on the line. now is the time for investment and innovation. the future is waiting. and the future has always the future is waiting. and the future has always been our business. at&t. >> chris: we're back now with our sunday group. so president obama did what almost everyone expected, naming solicitor general and former dean of harvard law school elena kagan to be his next nominee to the supreme court. brit, has anything come out so far that you think threatens her nomination? >> no. nothing.
9:48 am
the complaint you hear is she doesn't have experience and has never been a judge. you don't have to be a lawyer to qualify for the supreme court to be nominated. there is no requirement that be the case. obviously, everyone who has ever been named has been a prominent lawyer or former judge. but i don't think anything has come out that anywhere near threatens her nomination, not with a majority this big in the congress and not with her interpersonal skills which appear to be pretty good. no one in their right mind expected obama to name a judicial conservative and nobody expects her to be anything but a liberliberal, whh she will probably be. but no evidence she is on the fringes thought of that. >> chris: i want to pick up on that, juan. maybe the left has more heartburn with kagan, particularly than the news that has come out this week than the right was. put up her record. as solicitor general, she supported much of bush administration policy about detainees and she endorsed
9:49 am
broad power and then in the clinton administration she backed restrictions on the abortion. how worried are lab liberal li about her? >> they are worried and she doesn't have a record and there is no position and they think she will be a stalworlwsn stalwort. they want someone to make the cases and if you look at death penalty from the citizens united case on campaign finance, are we sure where elena kagan stands? i don't think there is a substancetive argument against -- substantive argument about elena kagan but it has led to talk on the internet whether the woman is gay. it's craziest thing i heard.
9:50 am
people want to out her and -- the substance of this, even people on the right is attacking her to suggest she has a gay liberal agenda. coming not only from the left but comes from the right. i'm shocked it comes also from the left. it's an indication that we have reduced the quality of supreme court nominee hearings and the vetting process to get in the gutter like this. that's where we are. >> chris: i have to say the absurd moment was the "wall street journal" put picture of her playing softball and that was supposed to be indication of her sexual orientation. >> i didn't take that away from it. >> chris: that's what some people -- >> no. >> chris: i'm not saying that the "wall street journal" did it and i should point out i'm not sure we needed to bring it up, juan, but in any case she has supposedly told the white house she's not gay. jerry seinfeld would say not that there is anything wrong with that in any case. let me ask about another
9:51 am
subject quickly, nina. one thing that kagan will have to deal with in the confirmation process is an article that she wrote in 1995 where she complained about the process and platitudes that the senators and the nominee end up mouthing at the hearings and she wrote this -- so, do you expect kagan to let it rip at the judiciary hearing? >> we'll see another vapid and hollow sher r charade. that's what we'll see. they'll ask about abortion and same-sex marriage and she will do what justice roberts said. she will repeat precedent, recite what the supreme court precedent has been on the issues and then she will say i can't really give you an opinion on something that might be coming before me. she'll be questioned about her stealth views and she
9:52 am
will say look, i was representi ining solicitor general and i was representing the government and in clinton administration i was representing the president. i wasn't allowed to put my own views out. sotomayor got 68 votes. i think she will probably not get as many, because i think there is more pressures on the right. but she is -- and liberals, every democrat is going to vote for her. it will be a -- it will happen. >> chris: i can't let this past. the white house posted an interview with kagan on its website, not done by an independent reporter but done by its own staff. let's watch. >> i was so overjoyed and overwhelmed mostly. i'm not sure actually that the joy has set in quite yet. it's an extraordinary honor. >> chris: do you see a touch of state-run media there? >> i kept waiting for the white house to ask her position on roe v. wade and whether she considered it set
9:53 am
as law. >> chris: a griller. >> it's silly. it's something that the white house put out, as president obama set a new empathy standard. the initial role out of elena kagan was to make her look like a real person, that was the catch phrase. and they want her to appear as if she empathizes with everyday americans. she's from a hard scrabble family, a hard worker. i think it has given her background, a bit of a stretch. gone from academia to the government and back to academia. a harder case for them to make. that's how they want to sell her. this is why they did this. >> you know what cancers me is theped pee media management. obviously, spin control coming out of the white house, it grows with every administration. the idea you put out your own interview and control the images, that's part of the problem. >> let them try it. it's the white house website.
9:54 am
people who go there recognize this is coming from the white house. they know it's not an independent view. people aren't idiots. i don't think that many people saw it and if people ran it, you say as we did just now, this is white house video. >> i'm not saying -- >> they have the right to do it. no harm. >> we're paying for it. americans are paying for that. >> oh, big deal. >> chris: stop the attacks on the obama white house and you stop your defense of it. thank you, panel. see you next week. don't forget to check out panel plus where the group here continues the discussion on the website we promise we will post the video before noon eastern time. up next, we take anoth another never-before-seen look at the photo gallery inside the bush's new home in dallas. ♪
9:55 am
[ male announcer ] we call it the american renewal. because we believe in the strength of american businesses. ♪ ge capital understands what small businesses need to grow and create jobs. today, over 300,000 businesses rely on ge capital for the critical financing they need to help get our economy back on track. the american renewal is happening right now. ♪ ♪ go ahead, get started ♪ this'll never last ♪ not with the wind in your hair like that ♪
9:56 am
♪ no, no, 'cause i could never see how someone ♪ ♪ as soft and sweet as you could ever be with me ♪ [ male announcer ] low-mileage lease for qualified lessees... the cadillac cts sports sedan. visit your cadillac dealer for this attractive offer. ♪ >> chris: one thing that surprised us when we got the first look at the new bush home in dallas how few signs
9:57 am
there were that a former president lives there. after we finished the interview, mrs. bush showed us one of her favorite places, what amounts to a family photo gallery. >> i have to look at this one. >> at george's inauguration, when he is hugs his mother and dad. >> there is a sense, my son the president. >> exactly. it's so sweet. >> chris: i love this one, because this is your new family. >> this is the new family. that is henry. henry, that was at christmas in 2008, the last year, last christmas we were at the white house. this is when george and i hosted my graduating class of 1964 from robert e. lee, from midland high school and from george washington carver, because the schools were segregated in 1964. we like to tell the story about his friend would come visit him in the oval office and say gosh, i can't believe i'm here. and then they'd look at him. [ laughter ] couldn't believe he was
9:58 am
either. >> chris: exactly. >> really fun. >> chris: this one of you, because it's such an interesting picture. >> that was a photo early on, shortly after september 11 and it was for the cover of "psychology today." it was an interview about what we could do to reassure our children and families and what we could do to reassure ourselves to live with the kind of stress that everyone in the u.s. was suffering right after that attack. >> chris: you look very reassuring. >> well, thanks. >> chris: our thanks to the first lady and her crack staff for all their help. that's it for today. have a great week. we'll see you next "fox news have a great week. we'll see you next "fox news sunday." captioned by closed captioning services, inc
9:59 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on