Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Washington Post national political reporter Jonathan Weisman was online Friday, July 11 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

The transcript follows.

Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to the daily Post Politics Podcast.

Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts

____________________

Jonathan Weisman: Okay, folks. Needless to say a big, big week in politics, lots of bashing of the mainstream media and various other bad karma coming my way. So without further delay, let me stick my toe into the lion's den. (I'm no Daniel, by the way.)

_______________________

Oak Park, Mich.: With his wife apparently a target of a federal corruption investigation, is it a conflict of interest for John Conyers to remain chairman of the committee controlling the FBI budget?

Jonathan Weisman: It would be, but he's not. That would be the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, chaired by Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), who is also under investigation. Mollohan has recused himself of any dealing with the Justice Department/FBI budget. Take from that what you will.

_______________________

Wilmington, N.C.: Your piece on Sen. McCain's Social Security comments included the following: "Young people, he said, 'are paying so much that they are paying into a system that they won't receive benefits from on its present track that it's on ... I think it's terrible to ask people to pay in to a system that they won't receive benefits from. That's why we have to fix it.' " That's a remarkable and shocking state of affairs. Is it true young people "won't receive benefits from" social security? I have not seen the projection that supports that dire contention. Have you?

washingtonpost.com: The Trail: McCain Sparks Controversy with Social Security 'Disgrace' Comments (washingtonpost.com, July 9)

Jonathan Weisman: I had a feeling this would come up, as there seems to be an orchestrated campaign around it. First of all, this was not a piece or an article, it was a blog posting, and therefore had to be short and pithy.

Second, I will now opine. No, young people will not get nothing. Under the intermediate-range forecasts by the Social Security and Medicare Trustees, if nothing is done by the year of insolvency, Social Security would be able to pay only 75 percent of promised benefits. Even at 75 percent, the size of those benefits would be larger in real terms than they are today, but buying power would be less because promised benefits grow with inflation and standard of living improvements.

_______________________

McCain Question (with Hidden Media Bash): I've long appreciated the fact that when you speak in public a massive amount, inevitably some stupid stuff is going to come out of your mouth -- which is why "gaffe"-focused political journalism is so problematic for our democracy. But when it comes to joking about killing Iranians, I personally don't get the joke. I appreciate that it was a failed attempt at a joke, but the underlying premise ... is that it would be funny to kill Iranians. Is that the "straight talk we can believe in (my friends)"?

Jonathan Weisman: I presume you are speaking of McCain's laugh-riot joke about exporting cigarettes to Tehran. Duly noted by the evil mainstream media.

_______________________

Washington: So Bush and his administration want more "public comments" on the issue of global warming? What, one can only wonder, can these "public comments" add to the already broad and nearly unanimous scientific consensus that global warming is a serious threat to the planet and its inhabitants? With the president's term coming to an end, what does he have to lose in moving forward with action on this issue? Could it be that Bush still is not convinced of global warming's reality and threat? Is that even possible? Thanks!

washingtonpost.com: EPA Won't Act on Emissions This Year (Post, July 11)

Jonathan Weisman: I would venture that this is not about President Bush's beliefs in global warming -- it is about not wanting to force legislative or regulatory actions during an election year when the economy is sucking wind.

_______________________

Anonymous: How's things with you and the McCain campaign these days?

Jonathan Weisman: I sense a "when did you stop beating your wife?" element in this question.

_______________________

Salinas, Calif.: Hi Jonathan. In his feature yesterday regarding the Obama campaign assuming the burden of retiring Clinton campaign debt, Matthew Mosk briefly touched on something of interest to me. How prevalent do you think is the impression out there that Sen. Clinton ran the last months of her quest on a figurative Obama campaign credit card, knowing that her candidacy was done, but also knowing that she had the leverage of her supporters to ultimately use against the presumptive nominee?

washingtonpost.com: Donors Asked To Give for Two: Clinton Debt Adds to Obama Burden (Post, July 11)

Jonathan Weisman: I don't think much. She is a stubborn woman and was on a winning streak at that time. Bill Clinton also was whispering in her ear that Obama just couldn't be handed the nomination by the superdelegates if he was losing every contest by double digits. That didn't come crashing down until the night of the North Carolina-Indiana primaries.

_______________________

New York: Sad to say, but I think Republicans are going to have to come up with something better than this kitsch, retro "flip-flop" line of attack if they want to beat Obama. Not to concern troll or anything, but according to polling, the only demonstrable way that Obama has been damaged in this campaign was Rev. Wright -- so that "guilty by proxy" tactic is probably the type of strategy they should be exploiting. It would need to be a highly unsavory, race-baiting sort of attack, but being unsavory and laced with bigotry hasn't stopped conservatives in the past (e.g., Helms et al) so I doubt very much it would stop them this time, do you?

Jonathan Weisman: I agree that Wright is not going away, but the guilt-by-proxy line of attack will be far broader than that. The Republicans are going after vice presidential vetter Eric Holder, old Chicago friend Valerie Jarrett, Obama supporter Chris Dodd, etc. They are trying to see what sticks.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: Enough of Dr. Phil? I've got to admit that it was not the political thing to say -- the Democrats have been crying about the economy for years and really want a Republican response they can call "let them eat cake" -- but Phil Gramm does have a point. The economy is not that bad -- it can get better in a hurry -- but even McCain has to disavow him, and Chris Matthews was having a field day. Even Newt had to disagree. What is your take? Do the Democrats whine about the economy? Is that their only hope?

Jonathan Weisman: I agree that as of now, Phil Gramm's assessment that we are not technically in a recession is probably true. But as he told me yesterday, most of the '70s was not a recession either, and the economy stunk. I think the economy is in very, very bad shape. It is eking out some growth based on the economic stimulus checks and the continued inflow of money from China and from the petrodollars that we send to the Middle East and that come sloshing back here in search of stocks and real estate to invest in. But average Americans don't feel that -- what they feel are skyrocketing energy and food prices and plunging housing values. If the government has to bail out Freddie and Fannie, watch out.

Beyond the greater Washington area, the pain is very, very real.

_______________________

What's Up?: Jonathan, Love your work, not sure why you started out this conversation suggesting you anticipated mainstream media bashing, hate, etc. I realize you may have had plenty of such notes piled up, but those of us (readers, the public, you know) who enjoy these chats didn't come to today's talk with a chip on our shoulders and are now kind of put off. Please take a note from Tigger in the Winnie the Pooh or something and remember that at least it's Friday. Despite the grumpy tone-setting, here's my substantive question: How worried is the Obama campaign about the steady drop in donations, with the added burden of the Clinton debt? I'm plenty worried, but am hoping this was somewhat anticipated. Also, is the Clinton debt larger than usual in such circumstances, or a pretty routine amount? Sorry to be dumb, but I don't know.

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks for the pick-me-up. And about your question -- they seem remarkably nonplussed, but that said, Obama is having to do a lot of formal fundraisers that he had been able to avoid. That hurts him because it takes him out of swing states and into blue territory, like New York and California. He is doing two fundraisers in Chicago. It's hard to imagine how much more he can milk his home town before Mrs. O'Leary's cow runs dry.

_______________________

Oakland, Calif.: Why isn't McCain getting the same wall-to-wall coverage as Obama's bitter comments when McCain's adviser said that all Americans are whiners?

Jonathan Weisman: Phil Gramm's comments were draped across the top of our paper today. They led at least one evening newscast and were featured in all of them.

That said, there is a big difference between what a friend and adviser said and what the candidate himself said. If McCain had said we were a bunch of whiners, I'd imagine it would end his campaign. But he did not.

It was Obama himself who said small-town voters are bitter.

_______________________

Honesty at last: Before leaving the G8 summit this week, The Independent (British paper) reports George Bush "told his fellow leaders: 'Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter.' " I hope he isn't still thinking this will be regarded as one of his administration's accomplishments.

Jonathan Weisman: I doubt it, but I don't think he's going to do anything about it either. The day after The Post reported that he had committed to some greenhouse gas reductions for his successors, we reported today that he had no intention of doing anything about it before he left office.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: How potentially bad is the statehouse scandal in Pennsylvania for Obama's chances?

Jonathan Weisman: I don't think it will have much impact. Obama has a steady lead in the Pennsylvania polls, and despite expectations that the state would be close in 2000 and 2004, the Democrats won fairly handily.

_______________________

2041 is year of insolvency: Let's remind the readers just when Social Security is supposed going to run into trouble -- 33 years from now, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Where's this "crisis" I keep hearing about? Isn't Medicare (and health care in general) really where the crisis is? Aren't the GOP plans to turn Social Security into a 401(k) program just a gift to the financial industry?

Jonathan Weisman: Yes, even President Bush's Medicare and Social Security trustees say Medicare is a much, much bigger problem than Social Security, and much more difficult to solve. Certainly private accounts would be helpful to the mutual fund industry, but to say that is the motivation is to radically simplify all of the forces at work.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: "Beyond the greater Washington area, the pain is very, very real." Good answer, I agree.

Jonathan Weisman: Washington is the only Metropolitan area that suffered no job losses in the 2001 recession, and it remains a bright spot even now -- but the outer suburbs are being hit hard by the mortgage crisis. We might not be totally recession-proof, but we're still pretty darned close.

_______________________

Southwest Nebraska: When are we going to refer to McCain's wife as Cindy Anheuser-Busch McCain ala Theresa Heinz Kerry? The offer from InBev increased by $5 per share -- how much wealthier would Cindy Anheuser-Busch be? Would Bud still be as popular among the "good ol' boys?"

washingtonpost.com: McCain's company, while part of the Budweiser distribution network, is not owned by Anheuser-Busch, and thus is not party to the sale.

Jonathan Weisman: Yes, she'd probably make out like a bandit, but it doesn't look like the sale is going through. The Republicans really went after Theresa Kerry in 2004. The Democrats are leaving Cindy alone, in part at Obama's urging.

_______________________

Whining?: You forgot to mention health care -- 47 million fellow Americans are without health insurance, including my son and his wife. They are still paying on the premature birth of a son in 1999 and have recent medical expenses. Now he is uninsurable because of preexisting conditions. Whining? No, I'm outraged!

Jonathan Weisman: Good point. Yes, health care also stinks.

_______________________

Question about media bashing: Is any of the "media bashing" you read during these chats in any way constructive? Do you think that any of the points you read from chatters have any value, or is it all from folks who don't seem to understand how the media rules work? Have any criticisms of how the political media operates ever made you change the way you report a story?

Jonathan Weisman: Sure, I think having people watch over us and offer criticism is helpful. And I think it makes us more conscientious in our writing. That said, a lot of critics do not accept the imperative of objectivity. Unless we pillory one candidate or another, we are stooges. I can't tell you how many times a single article has yielded e-mails calling me a Republican lackey and a Democratic stooge.

_______________________

Washington: In the past, the Post has not hesitated to expose its readers to curse word from certain politicians (Cheney leaps to mind). So why, when Jesse Jackson Sr. says that he wants to cut Barack Obama's [still can't print it] off, does The Post decide to insulate its readers? Why does Jackson get protection that other political figures do not?

Jonathan Weisman: I'm glad you asked. We did print Cheney's "f--- off" insult to Sen. Leahy and did not use "n-ts" in print. But when I said Jackson said he wanted to castrate Obama, I think I told you what he said. It would be a little more difficult to describe what Cheney said without using the expletive, as it is not readily translatable.

_______________________

This Bud's For You: I'm for Obama and don't particularly like Bud, but in my opinion, there is no worse electoral strategy conceivable than to condemn beer. You might be better off spitting on the flag.

Jonathan Weisman: And no more elitist an approach than to embrace a fine Belgian hefeweizen instead of a good ol' Bud.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I can understand the Republicans going after a Chicago friend of Obama, but Eric Holder? Can't they buy a clue? Eric Holder went through confirmation twice-- first for Assistant Attorney General, and then again for U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia -- and the second confirmation was under a Republican Senate. Republicans are becoming more idiotic by the hour.

Jonathan Weisman: Yes, but those confirmations preceded his approval of the Marc Rich pardon and his alleged involvement in the pardons of the Puerto Rican and Weather Underground terrorists. That is the target.

_______________________

Stockholm, Sweden, by way of Atlanta: Jonathan, what would have happened to Social Security benefits if Bush had succeeded in privatizing the system, given the current market?

Jonathan Weisman: Unless you found some remarkable hedge, you'd be in deep trouble, and all Bush wanted to make available were standard stocks and bonds. This always has been a problem with private accounts. Congress and the government have shown themselves unwilling to stand on the sidelines when, oh, Bear Stearns, goes under, when foreclosures skyrocket, etc. What would happen if our government-issued retirement accounts tanked? Would our lawmakers really let us enter old age as beggars?

_______________________

Rosslyn, Va.: I read the article today about Obama's fundraising numbers going down. I know he won't do it, but out of curiosity, is there a way for Obama to change his mind and take public financing, or is it already too late?

Jonathan Weisman: Too late and he won't. Even if they can't raise the staggering $300 million they hoped, they still think they can certainly raise more than the public financing limit.

_______________________

Cleveland: "That said, there is a big difference between what a friend and adviser said and what the candidate himself said." So why was there the wall-to-wall coverage of Wesley Clark's comments on John McCain when Clark isn't Obama's friend and barely is his adviser?

Jonathan Weisman: I still was hearing coverage today of Phil Gramm's comments, and McCain roundly denounced Gramm yesterday, perhaps successfully quieting the issue. Obama dithered on Clark. That said, the cable networks did go overboard on Wes Clark and did in many ways misconstrue his remarks. The Post and other newspapers didn't really write that much about it.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: The conventional wisdom seems to be that Sen. Obama needs someone with foreign policy experience on his ticket, but do you want to bet that if he does do that, the press spins it as Obama admitting that needed someone with foreign policy heft and thus is doubting his own judgment of foreign policy crises?

Jonathan Weisman: I find it hilarious that you guys think we have it in for Obama. Read the conservative press and see what they think about the press coverage of the presumptive Democratic nominee.

_______________________

Who won the week?: I am wondering what the conventional wisdom is in Washington right now as to who won the week? My guess is Obama, but I read elsewhere that McCain won. How is that possible, and what determines this?

Jonathan Weisman: I hate to weigh in, but given the make-or-break importance of the economy, the Gramm comments alone were enough to put McCain on the losing end. They also overshadowed Obama's FISA vote, which almost seems forgotten.

_______________________

Regarding Gramm comment and McCain culpability: But Gramm is one of the primary architects of an economic plan for a candidate who admits that he knows little about economics. All during the Wright affair, when Obama supporters pointed out that Obama didn't make the inflammatory statements and that his actions certainly didn't match the rhetoric of Wright, media figures pointed out the long relationship between Wright and Obama as evidence of the importance of the story.

Now, when Gramm (who is McCain's economic brain) makes a disparaging comment about the economy, we're supposed to shrug it off. I'm not trying to be snarky or anything, but this kind of pro-McCain logic (whether conscious or not) is why y'all in the media are getting so many angry comments from us on the left who see the unfair standards that Obama is held to versus McCain.

Jonathan Weisman: WHO IS TELLING YOU TO SHRUG IT OFF? NOT THE FRONT PAGE OF THE WASHINGTON POST. NOT THE EVENING NEWS. NOT CNN. WHERE, IN THE LORD'S NAME IS THIS COMING FROM?

_______________________

Social Security Insolvency: The crisis for Social Security seems to recede each year. For example, I can remember when it was supposed to run out of funds in the year 2020 or so (okay, I'm old) and now it's 2040 or thereabouts. Every year, someone releases an estimate for Social Security to be insolvent, and it is further in the future. If we need to solve the "problem," we need to understand what the problem is -- and McCain seems to think the problem is the way Social Security has been devised to work. Or else he really doesn't know what the problem is, but everyone tells him there is one.

Jonathan Weisman: I actually wrote a story on just the phenomenon, and there's a reason for it. The trustees use remarkably pessimistic out-year forecasts of economic growth, but every year they get to update their projections with actual growth numbers. Because growth almost always is better than expected, the insolvency date gets pushed further into the trustees' bleak-out years. Now, after this year's stagnation, insolvency might move slightly forward.

_______________________

Carrboro, N.C.: A question about McCain's weird refusal to answer a question about some insurance company's willingness to cover Viagra but not birth control. Have you seen the video, and do you think it will have an impact on McCain's outreach to women voters?

Jonathan Weisman: I did see the video, and it did stomp on the message that Carly Fiorina was trying to put out the day before, that McCain gets it. I'm not sure if it'll have an impact or simply confirm impressions among the converted.

_______________________

Anonymous: Why is $150 or $200 or $300 a barrel for oil a bubble? Isn't it just good ol' unregulated, free-market American capitalism? If the price you charge for your goods or services doubles, triples or more, yet the demand drops a small amount, aren't you a genius? Soon, mortgages will be in double digits, and the money made from that will overcompensate for lack of demand. Maybe Gramm is right?

Jonathan Weisman: I think the consensus is that oil prices may have a bit of a speculative froth, but it probably isn't much more than $10 or so. In other words, yes, oil really is this pricey, and is not likely to decline by much. I'm not sure what that has to do with Phil Gramm.

_______________________

Don't take it personally: As one of the media-bashers in these chats, I just want to let you know that when I bring up troubles with "the media" I'm not talking about your work -- I'm talking about The Entire Village. There are good journalists and bad in the world ... the trouble apparently is that there is so much bad out there that it outshines the good sometimes. The Post isn't immune from doing the wrong thing (I remember some Solomon pieces that curled my hair, for example), but generally does a better job than others -- especially the cable networks (and not just Fox, either). Yikers!

Jonathan Weisman: Printed as is. And Mr. Solomon now leads the Washington Times.

_______________________

Carly Fiorina: I am interested in more information on Carly Fiorina's comments on birth control and Viagra. I am an insurance agent that specializes in employer-based health insurance. Most laws governing insurance are determined by each state, so I would like to know what states allow employers to exclude birth control but cover Viagra. My state doesn't have mandatory coverage for birth control, but everyone covers it, and everyone covers Viagra. Large employers that are self-insured can exclude these things -- like a Catholic Archdiocese excluding birth control and abortion from their coverage -- but they may well cover Viagra. But this is the exception.

Even though a self-insured plan could exclude birth control and cover Viagra, as their agent I would tell them that this was a bad idea and that they might want to check with their own legal experts. The biggest complaint I hear from self insured employer groups is the exact opposite: They want to cover birth control, but not Viagra! So, maybe I'm an insurance geek and no one else cares, but I would like to know specifically where Ms. Fiorina gets her information from, and exactly how prevalent this is throughout the country. Thank you.

Jonathan Weisman: Wholly moley, you certainly know more about this than me, and probably Carly Fiorina. The coverage-for-Viagra-but-not-for-birth-control line has been out there for years. She didn't discover it. It is a cri de coeur of the modern woman's rights movement.

_______________________

Re: Biased Coverage: Personally, I think the problem is that Obama really does get the overwhelming bulk of the coverage, for better or worse. He's new, he's shiny -- he's like a new toy (I'm an Obama supporter, by the way; this isn't meant to disparage him). With the coverage so heavily slanted towards him -- both positive and negative -- it makes it easier for both sides to find bias. The right sees him get more positive press than McCain, while the left sees him get more negative press. Truth be told, he's just getting more press.

Jonathan Weisman: I think you have a good point. But McCain is in part at fault for that imbalance. Last week, he was busy not making news in Colombia and Mexico before taking the entire long Fourth of July weekend off. Obama had the stage to himself, and he put it to good use with his "values" tour of the red states. McCain is taking this weekend off as well, while Obama travels to San Diego to address La Raza on Sunday.

_______________________

Thank you for maintaining the distinction: Between the print press -- particularly, dare I say it, respectable newspapers like The Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, etc. -- and cable news, which is so polluted by its need to manufacture 24 hours worth of "breaking news" that it has lost all credibility with the thinking person.

Jonathan Weisman: The cable outfits are finding that it is far cheaper to populate the screen with bloviators in a studio than to go out and collect news. It's working, too.

_______________________

Deep breaths...: Listen: The media isn't telling you to do anything. You are perfectly free to learn information from several sources and form your own opinion. Phil Gramm said a stupid, stupid thing and it has been covered. I've read several stories on it this morning already. No one was told to shrug off anything, and this will continue to burn into McCain's campaign so long as the economy is in the toilet. It's like children fighting over how much cake they get -- everything has to be fair, but it has to be fair to their candidate first.

Jonathan Weisman: So there!

_______________________

Re: "Washington is the only Metropolitan area that suffered no job losses in the 2001 recession": I'm not sure that is entirely true -- don't forget, actual job losses are offset by actual job gains to come up with the statistical number. People tend to forget that while the D.C. metro area does statistically better than most of the country when it comes to the economy, that is because there are pockets of the area that do extremely well. In truth, much of the D.C. metro area is suffering the same economic problems as the rest of the country.

Jonathan Weisman: I'm talking aggregate numbers, and I speak the truth. But of course, I live in Washington -- I see poverty every single day.

_______________________

Gainesville, Fla.: Hi, J.W. Thanks for these chats -- excellent and informative. One thing I don't understand is why so many official (as well as unofficial) Obama spokespeople (mainly white males) keep appearing on TV news shows petulantly insisting they don't need or want or care about Clinton's supporters; that they can get along just fine without them. Why add salt to the wound? And can they do without them?

Jonathan Weisman: I don't think that is the official line, but they are perhaps about to flip about their predictions that Clinton's supporters will just fall into line, regardless of what Obama does.

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: From a mathematician -- the projections (not predictions) of the Social Security Administration are based on unknowable assumptions and are no better than reading the entrails of a goat (with a certified shaman).

Jonathan Weisman: You have hurt their feelings terribly.

_______________________

Changing the subject: Do you think that demands on the military are going to kill off "don't ask, don't tell"? No other industry can afford to discriminate and discard qualified employees on supposed moral grounds.

Jonathan Weisman: They could selectively. When the military booted out a bunch of gay Arabic translators, I'm sure military intelligence wanted to scream. I'm not sure how much "don't ask, don't tell" is hurting overall recruiting.

_______________________

Olney, Md.: I am amazed that a person would think Cindy Hensley McCain should be called Cindy Anheuser-Busch McCain. Theresa Heinz Kerry's previous married name was Heinz because her husband's name was that. She used it herself; she could have used her true middle name or her maiden name, but she wanted to use that. How could using her real name be a disparagement, and using a fake middle name for Cindy McCain not be a partisan commentary?

Jonathan Weisman: I agree. Also, Theresa's husband was a bone fide Heinz of the ketchup fortune. Cindy's dad made a mint as a beer distributor, but he is not of the Anheuser-Busch family.

_______________________

Re: 2041: Although the statement "let's remind the readers just when Social Security is supposed going to run into trouble -- 33 years from now" is correct, the more important date will occur about 2011, when Social Security stops running a surplus and starts to cash the IOUs that have been issued by the Treasury. That means real tax dollars going out of the rest of the budget to shore up Social Security. Put on your asbestos undies and get ready for some big, bloody budget battles then!

Jonathan Weisman: You are right that the earlier date is when the budget crunch begins. The bonds that Social Security holds are real, but someone will have to pay to redeem them. Also, the federal government has been living off that surplus; when it's gone, everything will feel the pinch.

_______________________

"The Press" as a Topic: Thank you, also, for taking questions about "the press" head-on. I think there's real value here for regular ol' people (like me) to learn about how and why journalists do what they do, and there's value for reporters to hear from readers when they notice bad things happening in the Fourth Estate. I think Web back-and-forths like this one are gold!

Jonathan Weisman: Thank you, and I look forward to real questions about how we do our job, not just random accusations.

_______________________

Washington: "The imperative of objectivity"? You don't really believe that you folks in the mainstream media are objective in any sense, do you? For example, in this chat today you take it upon yourself to ascribe lack of money as the reason for Bush's passivity on global warming. That reflects your generous willingness to paint Bush in the best light, unrelated to the facts of the matter. You just as well could have said yes, Bush is again expressing his disbelief in man-made global warming, to help his oily friends make more money.

Jonathan Weisman: Ha, that's funny. So you think my saying Bush doesn't want to do anything about global warming in an economic downturn paints him in a good light? Someone else surely would differ. We all see things through our prism.

_______________________

Jonathan Weisman: All right guys, out of time, and a congressman is on the phone. So sorry for leaving questions on the table -- and I have a lot of 'em.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.