0 them, are given opportunity. i have seized that opportunity and done well. but president obama told me i did not build the factor alone. that the government somehow is partially responsible for my success well, it is true i take a road to work the long island expressway. believe me, that is not helping me succeed, mr. president, that road is a mess. and you won't fix it. by contrast, the president has added more than 130,000 people to the federal payroll. estimated cost to the taxpayer about $10 billion a year now, most of those federal employees work hard but their salaries and benefits are provided by the taxpayers in the private sector. the employees of news corps. we give to the country by funding government and expanding business so more want to suck on the tit of the state. if i can say that oon your show give a little more spice to it. that is europe. the question you are asking, i think, is are we there? i don't think that the 2012 election is a definitive test of your proposition. the reason is obama did not have a opponent who presented a clear and strong argument for reagan knight perspective of stronger government, less taxes, less dependency. you know, romney was a good man but he basically ran on the economy, lousy economy, we need a new ceo in washington. it didn't work. i think we will get a good tis of this in 2016. we are going to have the four years of obama's hyper liberalism, the kind of stuff he elucidated and enuns dated yesterday in the inaugural address. and i would say that if our ideology, conservative, small government ideology is correct, it will leave a mess behind. but we will also need as conservatives, republicans if you like, a standard bearer in 2016 who can make the case. and there is not a dearth of them. we have a very strong bench. we have got ryan. we have got rubio. we have got the governors, there is a whole young generation of conservatives who can make the case that will be the test. although i will say that if liberals keep winning elections, then your theory of a fundamental change in the change of the electorate and the sense of dependency at which point it becomes a point of no return would be right. i'm just saying we he don't know history will tell us. >> bill: there is something wrong with we the people. there is something wrong now in this country. in the election of 2010 of the tamera emerged and republicans did well. they took the house back from the democrats and the surge was to the right and to a smaller government, more responsible government. that evaporated so quickly in front of my eyes and your eyes all of the momentum evaporated. it all went away in less than two years. i don't know why, that's on the folks, is it not? >> no. i think, in fact, i think that's an argument for the other side and i will tell you why. you can't get a fundamental change in the philosophy of a country in two years. what does happen you run the 2010 rejection. what was the difference between 2010 and 2012? 2010 there was no presidential candidate at the top of the ticket. it was a purely ideological election which was largely on obama care. the revulsion against obama care. the single most intrusive legislation in three decades. >> bill: if there was so many revulsion why didn't it carry through to the election of 2012. >> the can dated chosen in 2012 had passed romney care which was the equivalent of obama care. >> bill: vote against the guy. architect of big liberal machine that now is exposed. remember in 2008, barack obama was a much more moderate guy according to barack obama. all right? he is actually the same guy, we know that but the folks turned real fast, charles. i will give you the last word. >> >> bill, you are dancing around the issue. you are saying why would they elect the guy who is the engineer of obama care because the alternative is the guy who did romney care. nobody thought that romney was going to prop that up. he said he never offered a strong conservative alternative. if you had run a reagan who i admit is exceptional in his charisma and be able to explain things. reagan would have won. those were conditions that republicans lost the election and they lost it because they couldn't make the case. the case is there to be made. and they need a candidate who will make it i think the country would respond. >> bill: all right, charles. thanks very much. always interesting to talk with you. someone who may see it differently, george stephanopoulos will weigh in on the ideological battle. also, tom brokaw saying that supporting gun control is like supporting civil rights. we're coming right back.