I am absolutely committed to the cause of open Government and freedom of information.
I know sometimes people get the impression that in Washington nothing gets done on a bipartisan basis. But that is just not true.
The only way to stop Iran from obtaining a bomb -- at least I believe -- is to change the regime.
You want us to talk to them from a position of strength and from an allied position of strength.
It seems to me kind of an illogical step.
That kind of macho posturing did not strengthen America, it made us weaker.
I think the president is wise to do that.
Is President Obama's 'Talk of Talk' seen as a sign of weakness?
I think it's because of President Obama's diplomacy, his work, and his recasting of American foreign policy.
You have to have force backing -- you have to obviously have the credible threat of force backing the diplomacy.
Is President Obama mix of diplomacy and pressure working? Is he getting results or just lip service?
Even more important than the dialogue with Iran is the setup that President Obama did going into this.
I do not think we considered it a revolving fund, but wanted to get out of debt as soon as we could.
I am very concerned that part of the new programming has not even gotten up and going, specifically the mortgage part of the new program.
Isn't this huge debt and the deficit as important as all of these other factors?
We do not feel it out in the marketplace that it is getting into the home mortgage area enough.
It is my belief that had we stuck to that, maybe the stabilization of the housing market and the banks would have been enough.
I think the freedom of the press is too important to rely upon philanthropy or the government.
