Watch Clip

Well, thank you very much, Jim, and thanks to the commission and the University of Mississippi, Ole Miss, for hosting us tonight. I can't think of a more important time for us to talk about the future of the country. You know, we are at a defining moment in our history. Our nation is involved in two wars, and we are going through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. And although we've heard a lot about Wall Street, those of you on Main Street, I think, have been struggling for a while, and you recognize that this could have an impact on all sectors of the economy. And you're wondering: How's it going to affect me? How's it going to affect my job? How's it going to affect my house? How's it going to affect my retirement savings or my ability to send my children to college? So we have to move swiftly and we have to move wisely. And I've put forward a series of proposals that make sure that we protect taxpayers as we engage in this important rescue effort. Number one, we've got to make sure that we've got oversight over this whole process. $700 billion potentially is a lot of money. Number two, we've got to make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains if the market and when the market returns. Number three, we've got to make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes. And number four, we've got to make sure that we're helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country. Now, we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies -- promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain -- a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down. It hasn't worked. And I think that the fundamentals of the economy have to be measured by whether or not the middle class is getting a fair shake. That's why I'm running for president. And that's what, I hope, we're going to be talking about tonight. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused, which is why I suspended any requests for my home states, whether it was for senior centers or what have you, until we cleaned it up. And he's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests, although that wasn't the case with me. But let's be clear: earmarks account for $18 billion in last year's budget. Senator McCain is proposing -- and this is a fundamental difference between us -- $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion. Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important. And in his tax plan, you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out. So my attitude is we've got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I've called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent. And that means that the ordinary American out there who's collecting a paycheck every day -- they've got a little extra money to be able to buy a computer for their kid, to fill up on this gas that is killing them. And over time that, I think, is going to be a better recipe for economic growth than the -- the policies of -- of President Bush that John McCain wants to -- wants to follow. less more

Watch Clip

-- Senator Obama suspended those requests for pork barrel projects after he was running for president of the United States. He didn't happen to see that light there in the first three years as a member of the United States Senate. Nine hundred and thirty-two million dollars in requests maybe to Senator Obama is not a lot of money. But the point is that you -- see, I hear this all the time. It's only $18 billion. Do you know that it's tripled in the last five years? Do you know that it's gone completely out of control, to the point where it corrupts people? It corrupts people. That's why we have, as I said, people under federal indictment and charges. It's a system that's got to be cleaned up. I have fought against it. My career -- I have fought against it. I was called the sheriff by the -- (chuckles) -- one of the senior members of the Appropriations Committee. I didn't win Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate. Now, Senator Obama didn't mention that along with his tax cuts he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs. Now, that's the fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama. I want to cut spending. I want to keep taxes low. The worst thing we could do in this economic climate is to raise people's taxes. less more

Watch Clip

I don't know where John's getting his figures. Let's just be clear. What I do is, I close corporate loopholes, stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas, so that we're giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage. I think those are pretty important priorities. And I'd pay for every dime of them. But let's go back to the original point. John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And absolutely we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely. But the fact is that eliminating earmarks alone is not a recipe for how we're going to get the middle class back on track. And when you look at your tax policies that are directed primarily at those who are doing well and you are neglecting people who are really struggling right now, I think, that is a continuation of the last eight years. And we can't afford another four. less more

Watch Clip

Well, well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable. the business tax. Right now the United States of America business pays the second highest business taxes in the world, 35 percent. Ireland pays 11 percent. Now, if you're a businessperson and you can locate anyplace in the world, then obviously if you go to the country where it's 11 percent tax versus 35, you're going to be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, et cetera. I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain and -- in the United States of America and create jobs. But again, I want to return, it's a lot more than $18 billion in pork-barrel spending. I can tell you it's rife. It's throughout. The United States Senate will take up a continuing resolution tomorrow or the next day -- sometime next week -- with 2,000 -- 2,000 -- look at them, my friends. Look at 'em. You'll be appalled. And Senator Obama is a recent convert, after requesting $932 million worth of pork-barrel spending projects. So the point is, I want people to have tax cuts. I want every family to have a $5,000 refundable tax credit so they can go out and purchase their own health care. I want to double the dividend, from $3,500 to $7,000, for every dependent child in America. I know that the worst thing we could possibly do is to raise taxes on anybody, and a lot of people might be interested in Senator Obama's definition of "rich." less more

Watch Clip

You know, this is -- this is -- I know we have to, but this is a classic example of walking the walk and talking the talk. We had an energy bill before the United States Senate. It was festooned with Christmas-tree ornaments. It had all kinds of breaks for the oil companies, I mean billions of dollars' worth. I voted against it; Senator Obama voted for it. less more

Watch Clip

John, you want to give oil companies another ($)4 billion.

Watch Clip

Look, it's just not true. And if we want to talk about oil company profits, under your tax plan, John -- this is undeniable -- oil companies would get an additional $4 billion in tax breaks. Now, look, we all would love -- less more

Watch Clip

All right. All right. Speaking of things that both of you want, another lead question: It has to do with the rescue, the financial rescue thing that we started, started asking about. And what, and the first answer is to you, Senator Obama. As president, as a result, whatever financial rescue plan comes about and a billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it's going to cost. less more

Watch Clip

Well, look, look, we -- no matter what, we've got to cut spending. We have -- as I said, we've let government get completely out of control. Senator Obama has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. It's hard to reach across the aisle from that far to the left. (Chuckles.) (View cut data) The point -- the point is -- the point is we need to examine every agency of government. First of all, by the way, I'd eliminate ethanol subsidies. I oppose ethanol subsidies. I think that we have to return, particularly in defense spending, which is the largest part of our appropriations -- we have to do away with cost-plus contracts. We now have defense systems that the costs are completely out of control. We tried to build a little ship called the Littoral Combat Ship that supposed to cost $140 million, ended up costing $400 million and we still haven't done it. So we need to have fixed-cost contracts. We need very badly to understand that defense spending is very important and vital, particularly in the new challenges we face in the world, but we have to get a lot of the cost overruns under control. I know how to do that. I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong. And we fixed it and we killed it and the people ended up in federal prison. So I know how to do this, because I've been involved in these issues for many, many years. But I think that we have to examine every agency of government and find out those that are doing their job and keep them and find out those that aren't and eliminate them. And we'll have to scrub every agency of government. less more

Watch Clip

But -- well, I'm not willing to give up the need to do it, but there may be individual components of it that we can't do. But -- but John's right that we've got to make some cuts. We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. It doesn't work any better through this private insurers; they just skim off $15 billion. That was a giveaway, and part of the reason is is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare works. They did it on the prescription drug bill. They've done it with respect to Medicare. And we are going to have to change the culture. One of -- you know, Tom -- or John mentioned me being wildly liberal. Mostly that's just me opposing George Bush's wrongheaded policies since -- that I -- since I've been in Congress. But I think that it is also important to recognize that I worked with Tom Coburn, the most conservative -- one of the most conservative Republicans, who John already mentioned, to set up what we call a Google for Government, which says that we are going to list every dollar of federal spending to make sure that the taxpayer can take a look and see who, in fact, is -- is promoting some of these spending projects that John's been railing about. less more

Watch Clip

Well, the problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel. There are some programs that are very important that are currently underfunded. I want to increase early childhood education. And the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy I think doesn't make sense. Let me tell you another place where I'd like to look for some savings. We're currently spending $10 billion a month in Iraq when they have a $79 billion surplus. It seems to me that if we're going to be strong at home as well as strong abroad, that we've got to look at bringing that war to a close. less more

Watch Clip

Look, we're sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don't like us very much. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. We have to have the wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex-fuel cars and all that, but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power. (View cut data) Senator Obama opposed both storing and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. You can't get there from here. And the fact is that we can create 700,000 jobs by building, constructing 45 new nuclear power plants by the year 2030. Nuclear power is not only important as far as eliminating our dependence on foreign oil but it's also important as far as climate change is concerned, an issue that I have been involved in for many, many years. And I've proud of the work that I've done there, along with Senator Clinton. less more

Watch Clip

There is no doubt that it's going to affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it. The -- not only -- even if we get all $700 billion back, let's assume the markets recover; we're holding assets long enough that eventually taxpayers get it back. And that happened during the Great Depression, when Roosevelt purchases a whole bunch of homes. Over time, home values went back up. And in fact, government made a profit. If we're lucky and we do it right, that could potentially happen. But in the short term, there's an outlay. And we may not see that money for a while. And because the economy is slowing down, I think, we can also expect less tax revenue. So there's no doubt that as president, I'm going to have to make some tough decisions. The only point I want to make is this, that in order to make those tough decisions, we've got to know what our values are and who we're fighting for and what our priorities are. (View cut data) And if we are spending $300 billion on tax cuts for people who don't need them and weren't even asking for them and we are leaving out health care, which is crushing on people all across the country, then I think we have made a bad decision, and I want to make sure we're not shortchanging our long-term priorities. less more

Watch Clip

Well, I want to make sure that we're not handing the health care system over to the federal government which is basically what would ultimately happen with Senator Obama's health care plan. I want the families to make the decisions between themselves and their -- and their doctors, not the federal government. Look, we have to obviously cut spending. I have fought to cut spending. Senator Obama has $800 billion in new spending programs. I would suggest he start by canceling some of those new spending programs that he has. We can, I think, adjust spending around to take care of the very much-needed programs including taking care of our veterans. But I also want to say again, a healthy economy with low taxes, with not raising anyone's taxes is probably the best recipe for eventually having our economy recover. And spending restraint has got to be a vital part of that. And the reason -- one of the major reasons why we're in the difficulties we're in today is because spending got out of control. We owe China $500 billion. And spending, I know, can be brought under control because I have fought against excessive spending my entire career. And I got plans to reduce and eliminate unnecessary and wasteful spending. (View cut data) And if there's anybody here who thinks there aren't agencies of government where spending can be cut and their budget slashed, they have not spent a lot of time in Washington. less more

Watch Clip

Well, this is an area where Senator McCain and I have a fundamental difference because, I think, the first question is whether we should have gone into the war in the first place. Now, six years ago, I stood up and opposed this war, at a time when it was politically risky to do so, because I said that not only did we not know how much it was going to cost, what our exit strategy might be, how it would affect our relationships around the world and whether our intelligence was sound but also because we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan. We hadn't caught bin Laden. We hadn't put al Qaeda to rest. And as a consequence, I thought that it was going to be a distraction. Now, Senator McCain and President Bush had a very different judgment. And I wish I had been wrong, for the sake of the country, and they had been right. But that's not the case. We've spent over $600 billion so far, soon to be a trillion. We have lost over 4,000 lives. We have seen 30,000 wounded. And most importantly from a strategic, national security perspective, al Qaeda is resurgent, stronger now than at any time since 2001. We took our eye off the ball and not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched, and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government. (View cut data) So I think the lesson to be drawn is that we should never hesitate to use military force, and I will not as president in order to keep the American people safe. But we have to use our military wisely, and we did not use our military wisely in Iraq. less more

Watch Clip

Yes, I think we need more troops. I've been saying that for over a year now. And I think that we have to do it as quickly as possible because it's been acknowledged by the commanders on the ground the situation is getting worse, not better. We had the highest fatalities among U.S. troops this past year than at any time since 2002. And we are seeing major offensive taking place -- al Qaeda and Taliban crossing the border and attacking our troops in a brazen fashion. (View cut data) They are feeling emboldened. And we cannot separate Afghanistan from Iraq, because what our commanders have said is we don't have the troops right now to deal with Afghanistan. So I would send two to three additional brigades to Afghanistan. Now, keep in mind that we have four times the number of troops in Iraq, where nobody had anything to do with 9/11 before we went in, where in fact there was no al Qaeda before we went in, but we have four times more troops there than we do in Afghanistan. And that is a strategic mistake, because every intelligence agency will acknowledge that al Qaeda is the greatest threat against the United States and that -- Secretary of Defense Gates acknowledged the central front, the place where we have to deal with these folks is going to be in Afghanistan and in Pakistan. So here's what we have to do comprehensively, though -- it's not just more troops. We have to press the Afghan government to make certain that they are actually working for their people. And I've said this to President Karzai. Number two, we've got to deal with a growing poppy trade that has exploded over the last several years. Number three, we've got to deal with Pakistan, because al Qaeda and the Taliban have safe havens in Pakistan across the border in the northwest regions and although, you know, under George Bush, with the support of Senator McCain, we've been giving them $10 billion over the last seven years, they have not done what needs to be done to get rid of those safe havens. And until we do, Americans here at home are not going to be safe. less more

Watch Clip

Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan. Here's what I said, and if John wants to disagree with this, he can let me know, that if the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out. Now, I think that's the right strategy. I think that's the right policy. And John, I -- you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But you know, coming from you who, you know, in the past have threatened extinction for North Korea and, you know, sung songs about bombing Iran, I don't know, you know, how credible that is. I think this is the right strategy. Now, Senator McCain is also right that it's difficult. This is not an easy situation. (View cut data) You've got cross-border attacks against U.S. troops, and we've got a choice. We could allow our troops to just be on the defensive and absorb those blows again and again and again if Pakistan is unwilling to cooperate, or we have to start making some decisions. And the problem, John, with -- with the strategy that's been pursued was that for 10 years we coddled Musharraf; we alienated the Pakistani population because we were anti-democratic; we had a 20th century mind-set that basically said, well, you know, he may be a dictator, but he's our dictator; and as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren't going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That's going to change when I'm president of the United States. less more

Watch Clip

No, actually, I think Senator McCain and I agree for the most part on these issues. Obviously, I disagree with this notion that somehow we did not forcefully object to Russians going into Georgia. I immediately said that this was illegal and objectionable. And absolutely, I wanted a cessation of the violence, because it put an enormous strain on Georgia. And that's why I was the first to say that we have to rebuild the Georgian economy and called for a billion dollars that has now gone in to help them rebuild, because part of Russia's intentions here was to weaken the economy to the point where President Saakashvili was so weakened that he might be replaced by somebody that Putin favored more. Two points I think are important to -- to think about when it comes to Russia: Number one is we have to have foresight and anticipate some of these problems. So back in April, I warned the administration that you had Russian peacekeepers in Georgian territory. That made no sense whatsoever. And what we needed to do was replace them with international peacekeepers and a special envoy to resolve the crisis before it boiled over. That wasn't done, but had it been done, it's possible we could have avoided the -- the issue. The second point I want to make is -- is the issue of energy. Russia is, in part, resurgent and Putin is feeling powerful because of petro-dollars, as Senator McCain mentioned. That means that we, as one of the biggest consumers of oil -- 25 percent of the world's oil -- have to have an energy strategy not just to deal with Russia but to deal with many of the rogue states we've talked about -- Iran, Venezuela -- and that means, yes, increasing domestic production and offshore drilling. (View cut data) But we only have 3 percent of the world's oil supplies and we use 25 percents of the world's oil, so we can't simply drill our way out of the problem. What we're going to have to do is to approach it through alternative energy like solar and wind and biodiesel and, yes, nuclear energy, clean coal technology. And you know, I've got a plan for us to make a significant investment over the next 10 years to do that. And -- and I have to say, Senator McCain and I, I -- I think, agree on the importance of energy, but Senator McCain mentioned earlier the importance of looking at a record. Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy like solar and wind and biodiesel. And so we -- we -- we -- we got to -- we got to walk the walk and not just talk the talk when it comes to energy independence because this is probably going to be just as vital for our economy and the -- the pain the people are feeling at the pump -- and you know, winter's coming and home heating oil -- as it is our national security and the issue of climate change that's so important. less more

Watch Clip

Well, first of all, I think that we are safer in some ways. Obviously we've poured billions of dollars into airport security. We have done some work in terms of securing potential targets. But we still have a long way to go. We've got to make sure that we're hardening our chemical sites. We haven't done enough in terms of transit. We haven't done enough in terms of ports. And the biggest threat that we face right now is not a nuclear missile coming over the skies; it's in a suitcase. This is why the issue of nuclear proliferation is so important. It is the -- the biggest threat to the United States is a terrorist getting a hands on nuclear weapons. And we, we are spending billions of dollars on missile defense. And I actually believe that we need missile defense because of Iran and North Korea and the potential for them to obtain or to launch nuclear weapons. But I also believe that when we are only spending a few hundred million dollars on nuclear proliferation, then we're making a mistake. The other thing that we have to focus on though is al Qaeda. They are now operating in 60 countries. (View cut data) We can't simply be focused on Iraq. We have to go to the root cause, and that is in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That's going to be critical. We are going to need more cooperation with our allies. And one last point I want to make. It is important for us to understand that the way we are perceived in the world is going to make a difference in terms of our capacity to get cooperation and root out terrorism. And one of the things that I intend to do as president is to restore America's standing in the world. We are less respected now than we were eight years ago or even four years ago. And this is the greatest country on Earth. But because of some of the mistakes that have been made -- and I give Senator McCain great credit on the torture issue, for having identified that as something that undermines our long-term security -- because of those things, we, I think, are going to have a lot of work to do in the next administration to restore that sense that America's that shining beacon on a hill. less more

Watch Clip

Oh, there's no doubt. Look, over the last eight years, this administration, along with Senator McCain, have been solely focused on Iraq. That has been their priority. That has been where all our resources have gone. In the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed. Al Qaeda is resurgent. In the meantime, we've got challenges, for example, with China, where we are borrowing billions of dollars -- they now hold a trillion dollars' worth of our debt. And they are active in countries like -- in regions like Latin America and Asia and Africa. They are -- the conspicuousness of their presence is only matched by our absence, because we've been focused on Iraq. We have weakened our capacity to project power around the world because we have viewed everything through this single lens. Not to mention -- look at our economy. We are now spending 10 or -- billion dollars or more every month. And that means we can't provide health care to people who need it. We can't invest in science and technology, which will determine whether or not we are going to be competitive in the long term. There has never been a country on earth that saw its economy decline and yet maintained its military superiority. So this is a national security issue. We haven't adequately funded veterans' care. I sit on the Veterans Affairs Committee and we've got -- I meet veterans all across the country who are trying to figure out, how can I get disability payments? (View cut data) I've got post-traumatic stress disorder and yet I can't get treatment. So we have put all chips in right there, and nobody is talking about losing this war. What we are talking about is recognizing that the next president has to have a broader strategic vision about all the challenges that we face that's been missing over the last eight years. That sense is something that I want to restore. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Gwen, where I come from, it's called fairness, just simple fairness. The middle class is struggling. The middle class, under John McCain's tax proposals, 100 million families -- middle-class families -- households, to be precise -- they got not a single change -- they got not a single break in taxes. No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised, whether it's their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax. And 95 percent of the people in the United States of America making less than $150,000 will get a tax break. Now, that seems to me to be simple fairness. The economic engine of America is the middle class. It's the people listening to this broadcast. When you do well, America does well, even the wealthy do well. This is not punitive. John wants to add 300 million dollars -- billion dollars in new tax cuts per year for corporate America and the very wealthy while giving virtually nothing to the middle class. We have a different value set. The middle class is the economic engine. It's fair. They deserve the tax breaks, not the super wealthy, who are doing pretty well. They don't need any more tax breaks. And by the way, they'll pay no more than they did under Ronald Reagan. less more

Watch Clip

Gwen, I don't know where to start. We don't call a redistribution in my neighborhood -- Scranton, Claymont, Wilmington, the places I grew up -- to give the fair -- to say that not giving ExxonMobil another $4 billion tax cut this year, as John calls for, and giving it to middle-class people to be able to pay to get their kids to college -- we don't call that redistribution; we call that fairness, number one. Number two, factually, 95 percent of small businesses in America, their owners make less than $250,000 a year. They would not get one single, solitary penny increase in taxes, those small businesses. Now with regard to the -- to the health care plan, you know, it's -- one with one hand you give it; the other, you take it. You know how Barack Obama -- excuse me. You know how John McCain pays for his $5,000 tax credit you're going to get, a family will get? He taxes as income every one of you out there, every one of you listening who has a health care plan through your employer. That's how he raises $3.6 trillion on your -- taxing your health care benefit, to give you $5,000 plan, which, his website points out, will go straight to the insurance company. And then you're going to have to replace a $12,000 -- that's the average cost of the plan you get through your employer; it costs $12,000 -- you're going to have to pay -- replace $12,000 plan, because 20 million of you are going to be dropped. Twenty million of you will be dropped. So you're going to have to place -- replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check you've just given to the insurance company. I call that the ultimate Bridge to Nowhere. less more

Watch Clip

Well, the one thing we may have to slow down is a commitment we made to double foreign assistance. We'll probably have to slow that down. We also are going to make sure that we do not go forward with the tax cut proposals of the -- of John McCain -- the existing one for people making over ($)250,000, which is $130 billion this year alone. We're not going to support the $300 billion tax cut that they have for corporate America and the very wealthy. We're not going to support another $4 billion tax cut for ExxonMobil. And what we're not going to also hold up on, Gwen, is we cannot afford to hold up on providing for incentives for new jobs by an energy policy creating new jobs. We cannot slow up on education to give -- because that's the engine that is going to give us the economic growth and competitiveness that we need. And we are not going to slow up on the whole idea of providing for affordable health care for Americans -- none of which, when we get to talk about health care, is as my -- as the governor characterized -- characterizd -- characterized. The bottom line here is that we are going to, in fact, eliminate those wasteful spending that exist in the budget right now. A number of things -- I don't have time because the light is blinking -- that I won't be able to mention, but one of which is the $100 billion tax dodge that, in fact, allows people to take their post office box offshore, avoid taxes. I call that unpatriotic. I call that unpatriotic. That's what I'm talking about. less more

Watch Clip

(Chuckles.) Again -- let me -- let me -- let's talk about the tax breaks. Barack Obama -- Obama voted for an energy bill because, for the first time, it had real support for alternative energy. When there were separate votes on eliminating the tax breaks for the oil companies, Barack Obama voted to eliminate them, John did not. Now, let me just ask a rhetorical question. If John really wanted to eliminate them, why is he adding to his budget an additional $4 billion in tax cut for ExxonMobils of the world that, in fact, have already made $600 billion since 2001? And look, I agree with the governor. She imposed a windfall profits tax up there in Alaska. That's what Barack Obama and I want to do. We want to be able to do for all of you Americans, give you back a thousand bucks like she's been able to give back money to her folks back there. But John McCain will not support a windfall profits tax. They've made $600 billion since 2001, and John McCain wants to give them -- all by itself, separate, no additional bill -- all by itself another $4 billion tax cut. If that is not proof of what I say, I'm not sure what can be. So I hope the governor is able to convince John McCain to support our windfall profits tax, which she supported in Alaska, and I give her credit for it. less more

Watch Clip

That is not so, but because that's just a quick answer, I want to talk about, again, my record on energy versus -- your ticket's energy -- ticket also. I think that this is important to come back to, with that energy policy plan, again, that was voted for in '05. When we talk about energy, we have to consider the need to do all that we can to allow this nation to become energy-independent. It's a nonsensical position that we are in when we have domestic supplies of energy all over this great land, and East Coast politicians who don't allow energy-producing states like Alaska to produce these, to tap into 'em, and instead we're relying on foreign countries to produce for us -- we're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries, some who do not like America; they certainly don't have our best interests at heart -- instead of those dollars circulating here, creating tens of thousands of jobs and allowing domestic supplies of energy to be tapped into and to start flowing into these very, very hungry markets. Energy independence is the key to this nation's future, to our economic future and to our national security. So when we talk about energy plans, it's not just about who got a tax break and who didn't -- and we're not giving oil company tax breaks -- but it's about a heck of a lot more than that. Energy independence is the key to America's future. less more

Watch Clip

Yes, Senator McCain does support this. The chant is "drill, baby drill," and that's what we hear all across this country and our rallies, because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be tapped into. They know that even in my own energy-producing state, we have billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of clean, green natural gas. And we're building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever, to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets. Barack Obama and Senator Biden, you've said no to everything in trying to find a domestic solution to the energy crisis that we're in. You even called drilling -- safe, environmentally friendly drilling offshore -- as raping the outer continental shelf. There -- with new technology, with tiny footprints even on land, it is safe to drill, and we need to do more of that. But also in that all-of-the-above approach that Senator McCain supports, the alternative fuels will be tapped into -- the nuclear, the clean coal. I was surprised to hear you mention that because you had said that there isn't anything -- such a thing as clean coal, and I think you said it in a rope line, too, at one of the rallies. less more

Watch Clip

Gwen, with all due respect, I didn't hear a plan. Barack Obama's offered a clear plan: shift responsibility to the Iraqis, over the next 16 months draw down our combat troops -- ironically, the same plan that Maliki, the -- the prime minister of Iraq, and George Bush are now negotiating. The only odd man out here, only one left out, is John McCain, number one. Number two, with regard to Barack Obama not, quote, "funding the troops," John McCain voted the exact same way. John McCain voted against funding the troops because the amendment he voted for -- voted against had a timeline in it to draw down American troops, and John said "I'm not going to fund the troops if in fact there was a timeline." Barack Obama and I agree fully and completely on one thing: you've got to have a timeline to draw down the troops and shift responsibility to the Iraqis. We're spending $10 billion a month while the Iraqis have an $80 billion surplus. Barack says it's time for them to spend their own money, have the 400,000 military we've trained for them begin to take their own responsibility, and gradually, over six months -- 16 months, withdraw. John McCain -- this is a fundamental difference between us -- we will end this war. For John McCain, there is no end in sight to end this war. Fundamental difference: we will end this war. less more

Watch Clip

Well, I think the American public has a stomach for success. And my recommendations on Bosnia -- I admit I was the first one to recommend it. They saved tens of thousands of lives. And initially John McCain opposed it, along with a lot of other people. But the end result was it worked. And look what we did in Bosnia. We took Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks, being told by everyone -- I was told by everyone that this would mean that -- they've been fighting and killing each other for a thousand years, it could never work. There's a relatively stable government there now, as there is in Kosovo. With regard to Iraq, I indicated that it would be a mistake to go into -- I gave the president the power, I voted for the power, because he said he needed it not to go to war, but to keep the United States -- the U.N. in line, to keep sanctions on Iraq and not let them be lifted. From the -- I, along with Dick Lugar, before we went to war, said if we were to go to war without our allies, without the kind of support we needed, we'd be there for a decade, it would cost us tens of billions of dollars. John McCain said no, it was going to be okay. I don't have a stomach for genocide when it comes to Darfur. We can now impose a no-fly zone. It's within our capacity. We can lead NATO, if we're willing to take a hard stand. We can. I've been in those camps in Chad. I've seen the suffering. Thousands and tens of thousands of people have died and are dying. We should rally the world to act, and we should demonstrate it by our own movement to provide the helicopters to get those 21,000 forces of the African Union in there now to stop this genocide. less more

Watch Clip

Oh, man, it's so obvious that I'm a Washington outside and someone just not used to the way you guys operate, because here you voted for the war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, you know, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it, or vice versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it. And it was a war resolution, and you had supported John McCain's military strategies pretty adamantly until -- until this race, and you had opposed very adamantly Barack Obama's military strategy, including cutting off funding for the troops, that attempt, all through the primary. And I watched those debates, and -- and so, you know, I remember what those were all about. But as for Darfur, we can agree on that also -- support of the no-fly zone, making sure that all options are on the table there also. America is in a position to help. What I've done in my position to help, as the governor of a state that's pretty rich in natural resources, we have a $40 billion investment fund, a savings fund, call the Alaska Permanent Fund. When I and others in the legislature found out that we had some millions of dollars in Sudan, we called for divestment through legislation of those dollars to make sure we weren't doing anything that would see -- be seen as condoning the activities there in Darfur. That legislation hasn't passed yet, but it needs to because all of us as individuals and as humanitarians and as elected officials should do all that we can to end those atrocities in that region of the world. less more

Watch Clip

The line that should be drawn is whether or not we, A, first of all, have the capacity to do anything about it, number one; number two, there are certain new lines that have to be drawn internationally. When a country engages in genocide, when a country engages in harboring people who are killing our people -- terrorists -- and they will do nothing about it, that in fact -- at that point, that country, in my view and in Barack's view, forfeits their right to say you have no right to intervene at all. The truth of the matter, though, is that -- let's go back to John McCain's strategy. I never supported John McCain's strategy on the war. John McCain said exactly what Dick Cheney said. Go back and look at Barack Obama's statements and mine. Go look at JoeBiden.com -- contemporaneously held hearings in the summer before we went to war, saying if we went to war we would not be greeted as liberators, we would have a fight between the Sunnis and Shi'as, we would be tied down for a decade, it would cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. John McCain was saying the exact opposite. John McCain was lockstep with Dick Cheney at that point about how this was going to be easy. So John McCain's strategy in this war -- not just whether or not to go, the actual conduct of the war -- has been absolutely wrong from the outset. John McCain was lockstep with Dick Cheney at that point about how this was going to be easy. So John McCain's strategy in this war -- not just whether or not to go, the actual conduct of the war -- has been absolutely wrong from the outset. less more

Watch Clip

Gwen, thank you for doing this and the commission. And Governor, it really was a pleasure getting to meet you. Look, folks, this is the most important election you've ever voted in your entire life. No one can deny that the last eight years we've been dug into a very deep hole, here at home with regard to our economy and abroad in terms of our credibility. And there's a need for a fundamental change on our economic philosophy, as well as our foreign policy. And Barack Obama and I don't measure progress toward that change based on whether or not we cut more regulations and how well CEOs are doing, or giving another $4 billion in tax breaks to the ExxonMobils of the world. We measure progress in America based on whether or not someone can pay their mortgage, whether or not they can send their kid to college, whether or not they're able to, when they send their child like we have abroad -- or I'm about to abroad, and John has as well I might add -- to fight, that they're the best equipped and they have everything they need, and when they come they're guaranteed that they have the best health care and the best education possible. You know, in the neighborhood I grew up in, it was all about dignity and respect, a neighborhood like most of you grew up in. And in that neighborhood, that was filled with women and men, mothers and fathers who taught their children if they believed in themselves, if they were honest, if they worked hard, if they loved their country, they could accomplish anything. We believed it, and we did. That's why Barack Obama and I are running, to reestablish that certitude in our neighborhoods. Ladies and gentlemen, my dad used to have an expression. He'd say, "Champ, when you get knocked down, get up." Well, it's time for America to get up together. America's ready, you're ready, I'm ready, and Barack Obama is ready to be the next president of the United States of America. May God bless all of you, and most of all, for both of us selfishly, may God protect our troops. less more

Watch Clip

Well, thank you, Tom. Thank you, Belmont University. And Senator Obama, it's good to be with you at a town hall meeting. And Allen, thank you for your question. You go to the heart of America's worries tonight. Americans are angry, they're upset, and they're a little fearful. And it's our job to fix the problem. Now, I have a plan to fix this problem, and it's got to do with energy independence. We've got to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't want us very -- like us very much. We have to keep Americans' taxes low, all Americans' taxes low. Let's not raise taxes on anybody today. We obviously have to stop the spending spree that's going on in Washington. Do you know that we've laid a $10 trillion debt on these young Americans who are, who are here with us tonight? Five hundred billion of it we owe to China. We've got to have a package of reforms, and it's got to lead to reform, prosperity and peace in the world. And I think that this problem has become so severe, as you know, that we're going to have to do something about home values. You know that home values of retirees continues to, to decline. And people are no longer able to afford their mortgage payments. As president of the United States, Allen, I would order the secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad home-loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes, at the diminished value of those homes, and let people make those -- be able to make those payments and stay in their homes. Is it expensive? Yes. But we all know, my friends, until we stabilize home values in America, we're never going to start turning around and creating jobs and fixing our economy. And we've got to give some trust and confidence back to America. I know how to do that, my friends. And it's my proposal. It's not Senator Obama's proposal; it's not President Bush's proposal. But I know how to get America working again, restore our economy and take care of working Americans. Thank you. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Teresa, thank you. And I can see why you feel that cynicism and mistrust, because the system in Washington is broken. And I have been a consistent reformer. I have advocated and taken on the special interests, whether they be the big-money people by reaching across the aisle and working with Senator Feingold on campaign finance reform, whether it being a variety of other issues -- working with Senator Lieberman on trying to address climate change -- I have a clear record of bipartisanship. The situation today cries out for bipartisanship. Senator Obama has never taken on his leaders of his party on a single issue. And we need to reform. And so let's look at our records as well as our rhetoric. That's really part of your -- your mistrust here. And now I suggest that maybe you go to some of these organizations that are the watchdogs of what we do, like the Citizens Against Government Waste or the National Taxpayers Union or these other organizations that watch us all the time. I don't expect you to watch every vote. And you know what you'll find? This is the most liberal, big-spending record in the United States Senate. I have fought against excessive spending and outrageous; I have fought to reduce the earmarks and eliminate them. Do you know what Senator Obama has voted for -- is proposing? $860 billion of new spending now, new spending. Do you know that he voted for every, for every increase in spending that I saw come across the floor, of the United States Senate, while we were working to eliminate these pork barrel earmarks? He voted for nearly $1 billion in pork barrel earmark projects including, by the way, $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money? I think you have to look at my record and you have to look at his. Then you have to look at our proposals for our economy -- not $860 billion in new spending but for the kinds of reforms that keep people in their jobs, get middle-income Americans working again and getting our economy moving again. You're going to be examining our proposals tonight and in the future. And energy independence is the way to do that, is one of them. And drilling offshore and nuclear power are two vital elements of that. And I've been supporting those. And I know how to fix this economy and eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and stop sending -- less more

Watch Clip

-- $700 billion a year overseas.

Watch Clip

I -- I think you can work on all three at once, Tom. I think it's very important that we reform our entitlement programs. My friends, we are not going to be able to provide the same benefit for present-day workers that we are going -- that present-day retirees have today. We're going to have to sit down across the table, Republican and Democrat, as (he ?) did in 1983 between Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill. I know how to do that. I have a clear record of reaching across the aisle, whether it be Joe Lieberman or Russ Feingold or Ted Kennedy or others. That's -- that's my clear record. We can -- we can work on nuclear power plants, build a whole bunch of them, create millions of new jobs. We -- we have to have all of the above -- alternate -- alternative fuels, wind, tide, solar, natural gas, clean coal technology. All of these things we can do as Americans, and we can take on this mission, and we can overcome it. My friends, some of this $700 billion ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. As far as health care is concerned, obviously everyone is struggling to make sure that they can afford their premiums and that they can have affordable and available health care. That's the next issue. But we can do them all at once. There's no -- and we have to do them all at once. All three you mentioned are compelling national security requirements. less more

Watch Clip

We're going to have to prioritize, just like a family has to prioritize. Now, I've listed the things that I think have to be at the top of the list. Energy we have to deal with today, because you're paying 3.80 here in Nashville for gasoline, and it could go up. And it's a strain on your family budget, but it's also bad for our national security, because countries like Russia and Venezuela and, you know, in some cases countries like Iran are benefitting from higher oil prices. So we've got to deal with that right away. That's why I've called for an investment of $15 billion a year over 10 years. Our goal should be, in 10 years' time, we are free of dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and we can do it. When JFK said we're going to the Moon in 10 years, nobody was sure how to do it. But we understood that if the American people make a decision to do something, it gets done. So that would be priority number one. Health care is priority number two, because that broken health care system is bad not only for families, but it's making our businesses less competitive. And number three, we've got to deal with education so that our young people are competitive in a global economy. But just one point I want to make, Tom. Senator McCain mentioned looking at our records. We do need to look at our records. Senator McCain likes to talk about earmarks a lot, and that's important -- I want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don't work, and make sure that those that do work work better and cheaper. But understand this: we also have to look at where some of our tax revenues are going. So when Senator McCain proposes a $300 billion tax cut -- a continuation not only of the Bush tax cuts but an additional $200 billion that he's going to give to big corporations, including big oil companies, $4 billion worth -- that's money out of the system. And so we've got to prioritize both our spending side and our tax policies to make sure that they're working for you. That's what I'm going to do as president of the United States. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Fiorra, I'm going to ask the American people to understand that there are some programs that we may have to eliminate. I first proposed a long time ago that we would have to examine every agency and every bureaucracy of government, and we're going to have to eliminate those that aren't working. I know a lot of them that aren't working. One of them is in defense spending, because I've taken on some of the defense contractors. I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion in a deal for an Air Force tanker that was done in a corrupt fashion. I believe that we have to eliminate the earmarks. And sometimes those projects, not the overhead projector that Senator Obama asked for but some of them that are really good projects, will have, will have to be eliminated as well. And they'll have to undergo the same scrutiny that all projects should, in competition with others. So we're going to have to tell the American people that spending is going to have to be cut in America. And I recommend a spending freeze that except for Defense, Veterans Affairs and some other vital programs, we'll just have to have across-the-board freeze. And some of those programs may not grow as much as we would like for them to. But we can establish priorities with full transparency, with full knowledge of the American people and full consultation, not done behind closed doors and shoving earmarks in the middle of the night into programs we don't, sometimes we don't even know about until months later. And by the way, I want to go back a second. Look, we can attack health care and energy at the same time. We're not, we're not, we're not rifle shots here. We are Americans. We can, with the participation of all Americans, work together and solve these problems together. Frankly I'm not going to tell that person without health insurance that, I'm sorry, you'll have to wait. I'm going to tell you, Americans, we'll get to work right away and we'll get to work together. And we can get them all done, because that's what America's been doing. less more

Watch Clip

Well, I think it starts with Washington. We've got to show that we've got good habits because if we're running up trillion-dollar debts that we're passing on to the next generation, then a lot of people are going to think, well, you know what, there's easy money out there. It means -- and I have to, again, repeat this -- it means not just looking at the spending side, but also at the revenue side. I mean, Senator McCain has -- has, you know, been talking tough about earmarks, and that's good. But earmarks account for about $18 billion of our budget. Now, when Senator McCain is proposing tax cuts that would give the average Fortune 500 CEO an additional $700,000 in tax cuts, that's not sharing a burden. And so part of the problem I think for a -- a lot of people who are listening here tonight is they don't feel as if they are sharing the burden with other folks. I mean, you know, it's tough to ask a -- a teacher who's making 30 (thousand dollars) or $35,000 a year to tighten her belt when people who are making much more than her are living pretty high on the hog. And -- and that's why, I think, it's important for the president to set a tone that says all of us are going to contribute, all of us are going to make sacrifices. And it means that, yes, we may have to cut some spending, although I disagree with Senator McCain about an across-the-board freeze. That's an example of an unfair burden-sharing. That's using a hatchet to cut the federal budget. I want to use a scalpel, so that people who need help are getting help. And those of us, like myself and Senator McCain, who don't need help aren't getting it. That's how we make sure that everybody is willing to make a few sacrifices. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Tom, we're going to have to take on entitlements, and I think we've got to do it quickly. We're going to have a lot of work to do, so I can't guarantee that we're going to do it in the next two years, but I'd like to do it in my first term as president. But -- but I think it's important to understand we're not going solve Social Security and Medicare unless we understand the rest of our tax policies. And you know, Senator McCain, I think, you know, the Straight Talk Express lost a wheel on that one. So let's be clear about my tax plan and Senator McCain's, because we're not going to be able to deal with entitlements unless we understand the revenues coming in. I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans -- 95 percent. If you make less than a quarter million dollars a year, you will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000 a year or less, your taxes will go down. Now, Senator McCain talks about small businesses. Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan. And we provide a 50 percent tax credit so that they can buy health insurance for their workers, because there are an awful lot of small businesses I meet all across America that want to do right by their workers but they just can't afford it. Some small-business owners, a lot of them, can't even afford health insurance for themselves. Now in contrast, Senator McCain wants to give a $300 billion tax cut; 200 (billion dollars) of it to the largest corporations, and 100,000 of it -- 100 billion (dollars) of it going to people like CEOs on Wall Street. He wants to give the average Fortune 500 CEO an additional $700,000 in tax cuts. That is not fair, and it doesn't work. Now, if we get our tax policies right so that they're good for the middle class, if we reverse the policies of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place, and that Senator McCain supported, then we are going to be in a position to deal with Social Security and deal with Medicare because we will have a health care plan that actually works for you, reduces spending and costs over the long term, and Social Security that is stable and solvent for all Americans and not just some. less more

Watch Clip

I think pure research and development investment on the part of the -- of the United States government is certainly appropriate. I think once it gets into productive stages that we ought to obviously turn it over to the private sector. By the way, my friends, I, I know you grow a little weary of this back and forth. There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies. And it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me. I have fought time after time against these pork barrel -- these, these, these bills that come to the floor. And they have all kinds of goodies and all kinds of things in them, for everybody, and they buy off the votes. I vote against them, my friends. I vote, I vote against them. But the point is also on oil drilling, oil drilling offshore now is vital, so that we can bridge the gap. We can bridge the gap between imported oil which is, which is a national security issue as well as any other. And it will reduce the price of a barrel of oil, because when people know there's a greater supply, then the cost of that will go down. That's fundamental economics. We've got to drill offshore, my friends, and we've got to do it now. And we can do it. And as far as nuclear power is concerned again, again look at the record. Senator Obama has approved storage and, and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. And I'll stop, Tom, and you didn't even wave. Thanks. less more

Watch Clip

Well, you know, Senator McCain, in the last debate and today again, suggested that I don't understand. It's true; there are some things I don't understand. I don't understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 while Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are setting up base camps and safe havens to train terrorists to attack us. That was Senator McCain's judgment, and it was the wrong judgment. When Senator McCain was cheerleading the president to go into Iraq, he suggested it was going to be quick and easy; we'd be greeted as liberators. That was the wrong judgment. And it's been costly to us. So one of the difficulties with Iraq is that it has put an enormous strain first of all on our troops, obviously -- and they have performed heroically and honorably, and we owe them an extraordinary debt of gratitude -- but it's also put an enormous strain on our budget. We've spent, so far, close to $700 billion. And if we continue on the path that we're on, as Senator McCain is suggesting, it's going to go well over $1 trillion. We're spending $10 billion a month in Iraq at a time when the Iraqis have a $79 billion surplus, $79 billion. And we need that $10 billion a month here in the United States, to put people back to work, to do all these wonderful things that Senator McCain suggested we should be doing but has not yet explained how he would pay for. Now, Senator McCain and I do agree, this is the greatest nation on earth. We are a force of good in the world. But there has never been a nation in the history of the world that saw its economy decline and maintained its military superiority. And the strains that have been placed on our alliances, around the world, and the respect that's been diminished over the last eight years has constrained us being able to act on something like the genocide in Darfur, because we don't have the resources or the allies to do everything that we should be doing. That's going to change when I'm president. But we can't change it unless we fundamentally change Senator McCain's and George Bush's foreign policy. It has not worked for America. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Katie, it's a terrific question. And we have a difficult situation in Pakistan. I believe that part of the reason we have a difficult situation is because we made a bad judgment going into Iraq in the first place when we hadn't finished the job of hunting down bin Laden and crushing al Qaeda. So what happened was we got distracted, we diverted resources, and ultimately bin Laden escaped, set up base camps in the mountains of Pakistan in the northwest provinces there. They are now raiding our troops in Afghanistan, destabilizing the situation. They're stronger now than at any time since 2001. And that's why I think it's so important for us to reverse course because that's the central front on terrorism. They are plotting to kill Americans right now. As Secretary Gates, the Defense secretary, said, the war against terrorism began in that region, and that's where it will end. So part of the reason I think it's so important for us to end the war in Iraq is to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do, eliminate some of the drug trafficking that's funding terrorism. But I do believe that we have to change our policies with Pakistan. We can't coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions of dollars, and then he's making peace treaties with the Taliban and militants. What I have said is we're going encourage democracy in Pakistan, expand our non-military aid to Pakistan so that they have more of a stake in working with us, but insisting that they go after these militants. And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act, and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority. less more

Watch Clip

Senator McCain, this is the guy who sang "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran;" who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of speaking softly. This is the person who, after we had -- we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where he said, next up, Baghdad. So I agree that we have to speak responsibly and we have to act responsibly. And the reason Pakistan -- the popular opinion of America had diminished in Pakistan was because we were supporting a dictator, Musharraf; had given him $10 billion over seven years; and he had suspended civil liberties. We were not promoting democracy. This is the kind of policies that ultimately end up undermining our ability to fight the war on terrorism, and it will change when I'm president. less more

Watch Clip

Another very bad day on Wall Street, as both of you know. Both of you proposed new plans this week to address the economic crisis. Senator McCain, you proposed a $52 billion plan that includes new tax cuts on capital gains, tax breaks for seniors, write-offs for stock losses, among other things. Senator Obama, you proposed $60 billion in tax cuts for middle- income and lower-income people, more tax breaks to create jobs, new spending for public works projects to create jobs. I will ask both of you: why is your plan better than his? Senator McCain, you go first. less more

Watch Clip

Well, let me -- let me say, Bob, thank you. And thanks to Hofstra. And by the way, our beloved Nancy Reagan is in the hospital tonight, so our thoughts and prayers are going with you. It's good to see you again, Senator Obama. Americans are hurting right now, and they're angry. They're hurting and they're angry. They're innocent victims of greed and excess on Wall Street and as well as Washington, D.C. And they're angry and they have every reason to be angry. And they want this country to go in a new direction. And there are elements of my proposal that you just outlined, which I won't repeat. But we also have to have a short-term fix, in my view, and long-term fixes. Let me just talk to you about one of the short-term fixes. The catalyst for this housing crisis was the Fannie and Freddie Mae that caused the subprime lending situation that now cause the housing market in America to collapse. I am convinced that until we reverse this continued decline in homeownership and put a floor under it, and so that people have not only the hope and belief they can stay in their homes and realize the American dream, but that value will come up. Now, we have allocated $750 billion. Let's take 300 of that billion and go in and buy those home-loan mortgages and negotiate with those people in their homes, 11 million homes or more, so that they can afford to pay the mortgage, stay in their home. Now, I know the criticism of this. Well, what about the citizen that stayed in their homes, that -- that -- that paid their mortgage payments? It doesn't help that person in their home if the -- if the next door neighbor's house is abandoned. And so we've got to reverse this. We ought to put the homeowners first. And I am disappointed that Secretary Paulson and others have not made that their first priority. less more

Watch Clip

He's been watching some ads of Senator McCain's. Let me tell you what I'm actually going to do. I think tax policy is a major difference between Senator McCain and myself. And we both want to cut taxes. The difference is, who we want to cut taxes for. Now, Senator McCain -- the centerpiece of his economic proposal is to provide $200 billion in additional tax breaks to some of the wealthiest corporations in America. ExxonMobil and other oil companies, for example, would get an additional $4 billion in tax breaks. What I have said is I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans -- 95 percent. If you make more -- if you make less than a quarter-million dollars a year, then you will not see your income tax go up, your capital gains tax go up, your payroll tax -- not one dime. And 95 percent of working families -- 95 percent of you out there -- will get a tax cut. In fact, independent studies have looked at our respective plans and have concluded that I provide three times the amount of tax relief to middle-class families than Senator McCain does. Now, the conversation I had with Joe the plumber, what I essentially said to him was, five years ago, when you were in the position to buy your business, you needed a tax cut then. And what I want to do is to make sure that the plumber, the nurse, the firefighter, the teacher, the young entrepreneur who doesn't yet have money, I want to give them a tax break now. And that requires us to make some important choices. Last point I'll make about small businesses -- not only do 98 percent of small businesses make less than $250,000, but I also want to give them additional tax breaks because they are the drivers of the economy. They produce the most jobs. less more

Watch Clip

-- in order to give -- in order to give additional tax cuts to Joe the plumber before he was at the point where he could make $250,000. Then ExxonMobil, which made $12 billion -- record profits -- over the last several quarters, they can afford to pay a little more so that ordinary families who are hurting out there, they -- they're trying to figure out how they're going to afford food, how they're going to save for their kids' college education -- they need a break. So, look, nobody likes taxes. I would prefer that none of us had to pay taxes, including myself. But ultimately we've got to pay for the core investments that make this economy strong, and somebody's got to do it. less more

Watch Clip

All right. Let -- let's go to another topic. It's related, so if you have other things you want to say, you can get back to that. This question goes to you first, Senator Obama. We found out yesterday that this year's deficit will reach an astounding record high of $455 billion. Some experts say it could go to a trillion dollars next year. Both of you have said you want to reduce the deficit, but the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget ran the numbers on both of your proposals, and they say the cost of your proposals, even with the savings you claim can be made, each will add more than $200 billion to the deficit. Aren't you both ignoring reality? Won't some of the programs you're proposing have to be trimmed, postponed, even eliminated? Give us some specifics on what you're going to cut back. Senator Obama. less more

Watch Clip

Well, first of all, I think, it's important for the American public to understand that the $750 billion rescue package, if it's structured properly and, as president, I will make sure it's structured properly, means that ultimately taxpayers get their money back. And that's important to understand. But there is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means. And we're going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I've done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut. I haven't made a promise about -- less more

Watch Clip

Absolutely. So let me get to that. What I want to emphasize though is that I have been a strong proponent of pay-as-you-go. Every dollar that I've proposed, I've proposed an additional cut, so that it matches. And some of the cuts, just to give you an example, we spend $15 billion a year on subsidies to insurance companies. It doesn't -- under the Medicare plan, it doesn't help seniors get any better. It's not improving our health care system. It's just a giveaway. We need to eliminate a whole host of programs that don't work, and I want to go through the federal budget line by line, page by page. Programs that don't work, we should cut. Programs that we need, we should make them work better. Now, what is true is that Senator McCain and I have a difference in terms of the need to invest in America, in the American people. I mentioned health care earlier. If we make investments now so that people have coverage, that we are preventing diseases, that will save on Medicare and Medicaid in the future. If we invest in a serious energy policy, that will save in the amount of money we're borrowing from China to send to Saudi Arabia. If we invest now in our young people and their ability to go to college, that will allow them to drive this economy into the 21st century. But what is absolutely true is that once we get through this economic crisis and some of the specific proposals to get us out of this slump, that we're not going to be able to go back our profligate ways and we're going to have to embrace a culture and an ethic of responsibility, all of us, corporations, the federal government and individuals out there who may be living beyond their means. less more

Watch Clip

Okay. All right. Energy -- on -- well, first -- second of all, energy-independent -- we have to nuclear power. We have to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much. It's wind, tide, solar, natural gas, nuclear, offshore drilling, which Senator Obama has opposed. And the point is that we become energy-independent, and we will create millions of jobs, millions of jobs in America. Okay. What -- what would I cut? I would have, first of all, an across-the-board spending freeze, okay? That -- some people say that's a hatchet. That's a hatchet, and then I would get out a scalpel, okay, because we've got -- we have presided over the largest increase -- we got to have new direction for this country. We have presided over the largest increase in government since the Great Society. Government spending has gone completely out of control. Ten trillion dollar debt we're giving to our kids; a half a trillion dollars we owe China. I know how to save billions of dollars in defense spending. I know how to eliminate programs. I have fought against -- less more

Watch Clip

Well, one of them would be the marketing assistance program. Another one would be a -- a number of subsidies for ethanol. I opposed subsidies for ethanol because I thought it distorted the market and created inflation. Senator Obama supported those subsidies. I would eliminate the tariff on imported sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil. I know how to save billions. I saved the taxpayer $6.8 billion by fighting a deal for a couple of years, as you might recall, that was a sweetheart deal between an aircraft manufacturer, DOD, and people ended up in jail. But I would fight for a line-item veto, and I would certainly veto every earmark, pork-barrel bill. Senator Obama has asked for nearly $1 billion in pork-barrel earmark projects, including $3 million for an overhead projector in a planetarium in his hometown. That's not the way we cut -- less more

Watch Clip

And I will reduce the -- I can -- we can do it with this kind of job creation of energy independence. Now, look, Americans are hurting tonight and they're angry. And I understand that. And they want a new direction. I can bring them in that direction by eliminating spending. Senator Obama talks about the budgets I voted for. He voted for the last two budgets that had $24 billion more in spending than the -- than the budget that the Bush administration proposed. He voted for the energy bill that was full of goodies for the oil companies that I opposed. So the fact is let's look at our record, Senator Obama. Let's look at -- it's graded by the National Taxpayers Union and the Citizens Against Government Waste and the other watchdog organizations. I have fought against spending. I have fought against special interests. I have fought for reform. You have to tell me one time when you have stood up with the leaders of your party on one single major issue. less more

Watch Clip

Well, Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin. They know that she's a role model to women and other -- and reformers all over America. She's a reformer. She is -- she took on a governor who was a member of her own party when she ran for governor. When she was the head of their energy and natural resources board, she saw corruption, she resigned. She's -- and -- and said this can't go on. She's given money back to the taxpayers. She's cut the size of government. She negotiated with the oil companies -- and faced them down -- a $40 billion pipeline of natural gas that's going to relieve the energy needs of the United -- of -- of what they call the "Lower 48." She's a reformer through and through, and it's time we had that breash of freath -- breath of fresh air coming in to our nation's capital and sweep out the old-boy network and the cronyism that's been so much a part of it that I've fought against for all these years. She'll be my partner. She understands reform. And by the way, she also understands special-needs families. She understands that autism is on the rise, that we got to find out what's causing it and we've got to reach out to these families and help them and give them the help they need as they raise these very special needs children. She understands that better than almost any American that I know. I'm proud of her and that she has ignited our party and people all over America that have never been involved in the political process. And I can't tell you how proud I am of her and her family. Her husband's a pretty tough guy, by the way, too. less more

Watch Clip

Oh, I think that Joe Biden is qualified in many respects, but I do point out that he's been wrong on many foreign policy and national security issues, which is supposed to be his strength. He voted against the first Gulf War. He voted against it, and obviously we had to take Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait or it would have threatened the Middle Eastern oil supply. In Iraq, he had this cockamamie idea about dividing Iraq into three countries. We're seeing Iraq united as Iraqis. It's tough, hard -- but we're seeing them -- we're now about to have an agreement for status of forces in Iraq coming up. There are several issues in which, frankly, Joe Biden and I openly and honestly disagreed on national security policy. And he's been wrong on a number of the major ones. But again, I want to come back to -- you know, notice, every time, Senator Obama says, "We need to spend more. We need to spend more. That's the answer." Why do we always have to spend more? Why can't we have transparency, accountability, reform of these agencies of government? Maybe that's why he's asked for 860 -- sought and proposed $860 billion worth of new spending and -- and wants to raise people's taxes in a time of incredible challenge and difficulty and heartache for the American families. less more

Watch Clip

I -- I think that in 10 years we can reduce our dependence so that we no longer have to import oil from the Middle East or Venezuela. I think that's about a realistic time frame. And -- and this is the most important issue that our future economy is going to face. Obviously, we've got an immediate crisis right now, but nothing's more important than us no longer borrowing $700 billion or more from China and sending it to Saudi Arabia. It's mortgaging our children's future. Now, from the start of this campaign I've identified this as one of my top priorities, and here's what I think we have to do. Number one, we do need to expand domestic production. And that means, for example, telling the oil companies the 68 million acres that they currently have leased that they're not drilling, use 'em or lose 'em. And I think that we should look at offshore drilling and implement it in a way that allows us to get some additional oil. But understand, we only have 3 (percent) to 4 percent of the world's oil reserves and we use 25 percent of the world's oil, which means that we can't drill our way out of the problem. And that's why I focused on putting resources into solar, wind, biodiesel, geothermal. These have been priorities of mine since I got to the Senate, and it is absolutely critical we -- that we develop a high- fuel-efficient car that's built not in Japan and not in South Korea, but built here in the United States of America. We -- we invented the auto industry, and the fact that we have fallen so far behind is something that we have to work on. Now, I just want to make one last point because Senator McCain mentioned NAFTA and the issue of trade, and that actually bears on this issue. I believe in free trade, but I also believe that for far too long, certainly during the course of the Bush administration with the support of Senator McCain, the attitude's been that any trade agreement is a good trade agreement. And NAFTA doesn't have -- did not have enforceable labor agreements and environmental agreements, and what I said was we should incluse (sic) those and make them enforceable in the same way that we should enforce rules against China manipulating its currency to make our exports more expensive and their exports to us cheaper. And when it comes to South Korea, we've got a trade agreement up right now -- they are sending hundreds of thousands of South Korean cars into the United States -- that's all good -- we can only get 4(,000 to 5,000 into South Korea. That is not free trade. We've got to have a president who is going to be advocating on behalf of American businesses and American workers, and I make no apology for that. less more

Watch Clip

Well, you know, I -- I -- I admire so much Senator Obama's eloquence, and you really have to pay attention to words. He said we will "look at" offshore drilling. Did you get that? "Look at." We can offshore drill now. We've got to do it now. We will reduce the cost of a barrel of oil because we show the world that we have a supply of our own. It's doable, the technology is there, and we have to drill now. Now, on the subject of free trade agreements, I am a free trader. And I need -- we need to have education and training programs for displaced workers that work, going to our community colleges. But let me give you another example of a free trade agreement that Senator Obama opposes. Right now because of previous agreements, some made by President Clinton, the goods and products that we send to Colombia, which is our largest agricultural importer of our products, there's 100 -- there's $1 billion that we -- our businesses have paid so far, in order to get our goods in there. Because of previous agreements, their goods and products come into our country for free. So Senator Obama, who has never traveled south of our border, opposes the Colombia free trade agreement; the same country that's helping us try to stop the flow of drugs, into our country, that's killing young Americans, and also the country that just freed three Americans that -- that will help us create jobs in America, because they will be a market for our goods and products without have to pay -- without us having to pay the billions of dollar -- the billion dollars and more that we've already paid. Free trade with Colombia is something that's a no-brainer. But maybe you ought to travel down there and visit them and maybe you could understand it a lot better. less more

Watch Clip

Well, let me just say that -- that this is -- he -- Senator Obama doesn't want a free trade agreement with our best ally in the region but wants to sit down across the table without precondition to -- with Hugo Chavez, the guy who has been helping FARC, the terrorist organization. Free trade between ourselves and Colombia, I -- I just recited to you the benefits of concluding that agreement -- a billion dollars of American dollars that could have gone to creating jobs and businesses in the United States, opening up those markets. So I don't think there's any doubt that Senator Obama wants to restrict trade, and he wants to raise taxes. And the last president of the United States that tried that was Herbert Hoover, and we went from a deep recession into a depression. We're not going to follow that path while I'm -- when I'm president of the United States. less more