would-be republican rivals rick perry and mitt romney, including one comment that some see as disrespectful to the president. and we talk about terrorism as the world prepares to mark ten years since 9/11. the president says that kind of spectacular attack may not be the biggest threat right now. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. breaking news, political headlines, and jeanne moos, all straight ahead. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." president obama on a bus tour through the united states midwest. he's been reaching out to rural voters. but he took some time today to sit down with me for a wide-ranging one-on-one interview. we talked about the political gridlock in washington, the field of republican challengers trying to oust him from the white house, and the terror threat a decade after 9/11. but we began with what may be the most pressing issue facing the country right now. here's part one of my interview with the president of the united states. >> mr. president, thanks very much for joining us. >> great to be here. >> let's talk about jobs, jobs, jobs. issue number one. you're going to release a major new jobs program, you say, in september. here's the taken so long? >> truth is everything we've done has been related to jobs, starting back with the recovery act. but what's happened is that number one, you've seen a lot of layoffs at state and local government, and that has been an impediment to the kind of robust job growth we'd like to see, and there have been some headwinds over the last six months. japan's tsunami, the european debt crisis, what happened in terms of the arab spring that raised gas prices for consumers -- >> so give us a preview what you're going to do in september. >> well, look, there are some things that we've been talking about on this trip that we could do right away that are already pending before congress. we know that what we did in december by cutting the payroll tax so that the average family gets an extra $1,000 in their pocket makes a huge difference not only for their purchasing power but also businesses having more customers and being able to hire. we've continued to renew tax breaks for businesses that are willing to move up investments that they're planning into 2011. and we'd like to renew some of those for 2012. trade deals with korea and panama and colombia we know can create tens of thousands of jobs here in the united states. so there are a number of things that we've already got pending before congress. and what i've been saying to crowds all across the country, and it's been getting a good reception is what they want to see is democrats and republicans putting country before party and going ahead and taking action in order to move the economy forward as quickly as possible. >> but you've got something much more ambitious in mind for september. there's been reports you want to create a new department of jobs, something along those lines. is that true? >> that is not true. but what is true is i think we missed an opportunity a month ago when we could have dealt with our debt and deficit in a serious, balanced way that would have avoided these huge gyrations in the financial markets, given businesses a lot of confidence that washington had its fiscal house in order, and included in that because of the savings we'd be getting over the next 10, 20 years, more efforts on the front end to spur job creation. and given that congress failed to act, the grand bargain that i was trying to cut with john boehner didn't happen, we're going to take one more run at congress and we're going to say to them, look, here is a comprehensive approach that gets our debt and deficits under control and also accelerates job growth right now. >> is this an initiative you're going to give to the so-called super committee, or is this something separate from that? >> well, i hope the super committee takes its job seriously. and obviously, there's an added sense of urgency given how anxious i think businesses and consumers are after the debacle surrounding the debt ceiling. but my attitude is that i'm going to make my best case for where we need to go, we've made progress since the start of this recession back in 2008, it hasn't been fast enough, we've got to accelerate it, and there are two things that need to happen. number one, we've got to make sure that people have confidence, we've got our fiscal house in order and we're living within our means, eliminating programs that don't work. number two, there are some immediate things we can do around infrastructure, tax policy, that would make a difference in terms of people hiring right now. >> when you took office, you said -- and i'm sure you remember. you said, if i don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition. meaning you're going to be a one-term president. do you remember that? >> well, here's what i remember. is that when i came into office i knew i was going to have a big mess to clean up. and frankly the mess has been bigger than i think a lot of people anticipated at the time. we have made steady progress on these fronts, but we're not making progress fast enough. and what i continue to believe is that ultimately the buck star stops with me. i'm going to be accountable. i think that people understand that a lot of these problems were decades in the making. people understand that this financial crisis was the worst since the great depression. but ultimately they say, look, he's the president, we think he has good intentions, but we're impatient and we want to see things move faster. and i understand that. i'm sympathetic to it. and we're going to just keep on putting forward ideas that are going to be good for the country. we're going to need a partner from congress, and we're going to need folks to move off some of these rigid positions they've been taking in order to -- >> i want to go through some specifics on that. but let's talk about some things that you need to do. you yourself have said you support modest modifications in medicare. give me specifics. >> what i'm going to do, i'm not going to make news here, wolf, in terms of what a comprehensive plan would look like. but what i've consistently said is that medicare and healthcare costs generally are out of control, that the health reforms that we initiated are starting to reduce those costs but we're going to have to do more, particularly around medicaid and medicare. >> changing the cost-of-living index, which would reduce the amount of money for medicare, social security recipients? >> as much as possible what we'd like to do is actually reduce the cost of health care. as opposed to just shifting the cost from the government to seniors. >> but changing the cost of living, is that something you're open to? >> the problem with some of the proposals we've seen, including some of the proposals coming out of the house of representatives and the republicans there, is they don't really address what it takes to reduce costs. what they say is senior citizens, we're going to voucherize it, and whatever inflation there is you're going to have to cover out of pocket, so seniors might have to spend $6,000 more. what we say is are there modifications that can change the delivery system, and how health care is delivered so you that don't have to take five tests, you take one. so that providers are not ordering unnecessary procedures but focusing on what actually works. the more we can do those kinds of changes, and in some cases that involves empowering consumers to make better choices, then we can hopefully control these costs without seeing any radical change to the basic structure of medicare. >> why don't you support a balanced budget amendment to the constitution? >> well, i support balancing our budget. the question is do we need to change our constitution to do it? we didn't for a lot of years. and what we've always said was that the federal government needs as a actor of last resort, if we've got a war, if we've got a recession, to be able to step in in ways that states or local governments couldn't do. >> couldn't you write language into that so in case of an emergency, a war, there would be exceptions? >> i guess here's the question, is why can't congress simply make good choices? why can't the president and congress, working together, get a handle on our debt and deficits? why do we need to go through a constitutional amendment process and have a whole bunch of contortions and try to write in every single contingency that might come up instead of simply saying the same thing that families all across iowa and all across the country do, which is you know what, here's how much money we're bringing in, here's how much we're spending and if it's out of balance let's fix it. >> it's clear congress can't do that. that's why they need -- the argument is 74% according to our own cnn/orc poll want a balanced budget amendment. >> 100% of the people want congressing to act responsibly. 100% of the people want us to make serious choices. we don't need to amend our constitution. what we need is folks acting responsibly and saying here's a balanced package that would actually get our debt and our deficit to a manageable place. and here's the thing, wolf, is it doesn't require that much. our fiscal situation is so much stronger than other countries around the world including a lot of european countries. and the reason is all we have to do is make some modest changes in terms of what we spend and make some modest changes in terms of raising revenue and we could get things into balance. the problem we have is a political system in which you've got one side or the other that says here's the line in the sand, we're not going to make any changes. when i saw our republican presidential primary candidates suggesting that they would not be willing to close a single loophole or close a single special interest tax break even if they were going to get $10 of savings for every $1 of revenue that raised, that is no longer thinking in a common sense way. at that point what you're saying is ideological rigidity that is preventing us from solving problems. >> because you keep saying that there are some in congress, and you don't say who, some in congress who are more interested in political gain than really helping the country. who do you mean by that? >> well, look, i think there is no doubt that the deal that i put forward to speaker boehner, which a lot of people in my party attacked me for because they thought that we were going too far, we were being too generous in terms of trying to compromise, the fact that they couldn't accept a deal in which you had significantly more cuts than revenue, that would have done substantially more to close our deficit than the deal that ultimately we arrived at, the fact that speaker boehner and folks in his caucus couldn't say yes to that tells me that they're more interested in the politics of it than solving the problem. and i think, to his credit, i think speak yes boehner tried. i think he wanted to. but i think he had problems with members of his caucus that thought that somehow cooperation with this white house would help us politically as opposed to thinking what's it going to take to help the country as a whole? >> all right. there's much more, much more ahead with my interview with the president of the united states, including his response to his newest challenger, texas governor rick perry, who appeared to suggest, maybe even more than just appeared to suggest, that u.s. troops really don't respect the commander in chief. i probably feel about thirty. how is it that we don't act our age? [ marcie ] you keep us young. [ kurt ] we were having too much fun we weren't thinking about a will at that time. we have responsibilities to the kids and ourselves. we're the vargos and we created our wills on legalzoom. finally. [ laughter ] [ shapiro ] we created legalzoom to help you take care of the ones you love. go to legalzoom.com today and complete your will in minutes. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. [ male announcer ] they'll see you...before you see them. cops are cracking down on drinking and riding. drive sober, or get pulled over. another good thing about geico so like say you need to report a people wclaim, alright./7.g. a real person will be there to help you. then you can use geico.com to view photos of the damage, track your claim, print an estimate. you want an english muffin? they literally hand you a toasted muffin with butter and jam. (sigh) whaa. tasty. that's, that's a complete dramatization of course, but you get my point. vo: geico 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. [ male announcer ] you never know when a moment might turn into something more. and when it does men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a clinically proven low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. ♪ [ man ] tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com. the newest contender, texas governor rick perry, raised eyebrows with one controversial remark. i asked president obama about that as our interview candidate. >> rick perry, the governor of texas, republican presidential candidate now, says the men and women of the united states military want someone who's worn the uniform. he says he served in the air force. do you see a comment like that that he makes referring to you as disrespectful to the commander in chief? >> you know, mr. perry just got in the presidential race, and i think that everybody who runs for president, it probably takes them a little bit of time before they start realizing that this isn't like running for governor or running for senator or running for congress and you've got to be a little more careful about what you say. but i'll cut him some slack. he's only been at it for a few days now. >> mitt romney says corporations are people. does he have a point? >> well, if you tell me that corporations are vital to american life, that the free enterprise system has been the greatest wealth creator that we've ever seen, that corporate ceos and folks who are working in our large companies that are creating incredible products and services and that is all to the benefit of the united states of america, that i absolutely agree with. if, on the other hand, you tell me that every corporate tax break that's out there is somehow good for ordinary americans, that we have a tax code that's fair, that asking oil and gas companies, for example, not to get special exemptions that other folks don't get, and that if closing those tax loopholes, that somehow that is going to hurt america, then that i disagree with. and i think that, you know, corporations serve in important benefit but ultimately we've got to look at what's good for ordinary people, you know, how do we create jobs, how do we create economic growth, and a lot of the special interest legislation we see in washington isn't benefiting ordinary people. >> what do you think of that republican field lining up to challenge you? >> you know, i haven't been giving it too much thought. i figure that i'll let them winnow it down a little bit. when they decide who they want their standard bearer to be, then i'll be ready for them. >> i was in north korea last december. and every time i raised the issue of hunger in north korea, which is a huge problem, starvation, the north korean handlers would say to me, well, what about hunger in america? 1 out of 7 americans, including a lot of children, are hungry, they would say. and in fact, last week 46 million americans now rely on food stamps, really to survive. what does that say about the wealthiest country in the world, that 46 million americans rely on food stamps in order to put food on the table? >> well, what it says is, first of all, we've had a terrible recession. and that means that's strained a lot of families' budgets. and so you have a lot of folks who consider themselves middle-class, working families who are going through a tough spot. that's why we have food stamp programs in place. that's why it's important we're not trying to reduce our budget deficit on the backs of those who are most in need. on the other hand, keep in mind that america is the world's bread basket. agricultural exports are incredibly important to the u.s. economy. we see the incredible bounty in places like iowa here. and the problem we have is not that we don't have enough food, which is the problem in a place like north korea. the problem is that the distribution of income and wealth in this country has been a problem for some time. wages and incomes for ordinary families have not gone up for the last decade. even before this last recession hit. and that's why it's so important, in addition to creating economic growth, in addition to seeing corporate profits go up, in addition to seeing the stock market go up, we've got to make sure that we're investing in people, investing in innovation, investing in infrastructure, doing those things that are going to put people back to work, and give them more income so that they can live the kind of american dream that all of us want for our kids and our grandkids. >> i've covered the middle east for a long time. i've covered terrorism for a long time. and i have to tell you, i'm worried that on the tenth anniversary or approaching the tenth anniversary of 9/11 al qaeda, or what's left of al qaeda or their supporters will try to do something to seek revenge for your killing bin laden. how worried should we be about that? how worried are you about that? >> well, look, we are vigilant and constantly monitoring potential risks of terrorist attacks. and i think that the men and women in our intelligence agencies as well as the fbi have done a terrific job, and department of homeland security. but the risk is always there. and obviously, on a seminal event like the tenth anniversary of 9/11 that makes us more concerned. it means we've got heightened awareness. the biggest concern we have right now is not the launching of a major terrorist operation, although that risk is always there. the risk that we're especially concerned over right now is the lone wolf terrorist. somebody with a single weapon being able to carry out wide-scale massacres of the sort that we saw in norway recently. when you've got one person who is deranged or driven by a hateful ideology, they can do a lot of damage, and it's a lot harder to trace those lone wolf operators. so we're spending a lot of time monitoring and gathering information. i think that we generally have to stay vigilant. there may be a little extra vigilance during 9/11. on the other hand, keep in mind the extraordinary progress we've made over the last couple years in degrading al qaeda's capabilities. they are a much weaker organization with much less capability than they had just two or three years ago. >> so what i hear you saying is we don't have to worry about a spectacular 9/11 event, a lone wolf could do some damage, kill a lot of people, but not a nuclear, radiological or anything like that? >> look, as pr