governor romney. in the battleground state, romney used the first town hall style meeting since may to blast president for proposing extension of the bush era income tax cut for individuals earning ove over $250,000. he announced a massive tax increase. he ridiculed mr. obama as liberal reactionary whose response to last week s dismal job report is propose tax hikes this week to kill the anemic recovery. the very idea of raising taxes on mall business and job creators at the time we need more jobs is the sort of thing only extreme liberal could come up with. romney spoke at a high school where the president visited three years ago. colorado has 9% unemployment. point higher than the 8.2% national rate. in iowa today, mr. obama ignored romney s call for tax cuts for everyone, to accuse the right of favoring only the rich. they want more tax cut for wealthiest americans on top of the existing bush tax cuts. they want to give $5 trillion more in tax cuts. that figh
speaking of government slaughter in syria which has now claimed more than 11,000 lives. jill dougherty is joining us with the latest details. at the museum, president obama referred to the unhappy record of the state department during the holocaust in world war ii. now he says preventing mass atrocities is no only a moral responsibility, it s a key security issue of the united states. reporter: barack obama shook hands with people who survived the death camp more than 60 years ago. he found new meaning in the phrase never again. never again is a challenge to nations. it s a bitter truth. too often the world has failed to prevent the killing of innocents on a massive scale and we are haunted by the lives we did not save. we are seeing the the killings in bosnia, the killings in darfur. they shock our conscience, but they are the extreme of a spectrum of uneasiness and intolerance that we see every day. reporter: before the president spoke, a nobel lawyer yet and
on this holocaust remembrance day, the president gave a powerful speech at the u.s. holocaust memorial museum right near in washington, d.c. speaking of government slaughter in syria which has now claimed more than 11,000 lives. jill dougherty is joining us with the latest details. at the museum, president obama referred to the unhappy record of the state department during the holocaust in world war ii. now he says preventing mass atrocities is no only a moral responsibility, it s a key security issue of the united states. reporter: barack obama shook hands with people who survived the death camp more than 60 years ago. he found new meaning in the phrase never again. never again is a challenge to nations. it s a bitter truth. too often the world has failed to prevent the killing of innocents on a massive scale and we are haunted by the lives we did not save. we are seeing the the killings in bosnia, the killings in darfur. they shock our conscience, but they are t
to push through something on climate change, something on carbon pricing, it s really hard to see how there could be the votes for that in in another congress. and the senator didn t spell it out quite like that, but if you put together what he said, that s the picture that emerged. . . guest: the government would put a cap on the amount of emissions that utilities could permit. host: what industry are we talking about, cold? coal? guest: nuclear companies would benefit because they would have a low carbon source of wind and solar companies that provide that kind of power. the companies that will be heard would be those that are most reliant on coal. over time, the government reduce the amount of permits, they would take them away like musical chairs. over time, you have to reduce the amount of emissions you emit or you would have to pay someone else to reduce the emissions for you. you are still achieving the same environmental goal, which is lower emissions, but you are l
constitutionality that had been in effect for 100 years, and as justice stevens conclude showing, quote, great disrespect for aco-equal branch. i will try to make my questions as pointed as i can. to the extent that you can answer them briefly, i d appreciate it. we don t have a whole lot of ti time. what is your thinking on the disrespect for theongress when we take a supreme court decision and we structure a law based on those standards with the customary deference due congress on fact-finding. isn t that really what justice stevens calls it, disrespect? well, senator specter, as you know, i argued that case. as you know, i filed briefs on behalf of the united states in that case, and in those briefs the government made a similar kind of argument, that great deference was due to congress in the creation of a quite voluminous i know what you ve said. you ve talked about that a great deal. my question i very pointed. wasn t that disrespect fful? senator specter, as i