Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Revisiting Coverage of Republican Debate; Key Backers Hold California Rally for McCain; Al Qaeda Commander Killed; Stocks Rally; Brutal Winter; Spears Hospitalized; Stolen Kidneys

Aired January 31, 2008 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Good afternoon, everyone. From the CNN World Headquarters in Atlanta, I'm Don Lemon.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Fredricka Whitfield in today for Kyra Phillips.

LEMON: In just a few moments, we'll bring you a replay of last night's GOP debate. It was at the Reagan Library, hosted, of course, by Anderson Cooper. You're looking at that replay last night. Anderson Cooper introducing Former First Lady Nancy Reagan, there. And at last night's debate it included Governor Mike Huckabee, Congressman Ron Paul, Senator John McCain and of course Governor Mitt Romney. We're going to have a small picture of them on the right until the actual first question gets started and a big picture of us should be on the left. But you won't miss anything you're going to --

WHITFIELD: Yes, and it's worth revisiting of course, because this was really, perhaps, one of the most contentious of Republican debates that we've seen thus far, particularly between John McCain and Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts.

And now John McCain, later on today, expecting to get a pretty key endorsement from the California governor, as well as receiving endorsements from other key Republicans throughout the United States, Georgia in particular. So, we will pause the debate later on this hour when of course the California governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, appears at an event where he will be endorsing John McCain for president. It happens about a half an hour from now.

LEMON: And Fredricka we're also expecting a speech from President Bush this hour. He's talking about the War on Terror. We'll bring that to you, of course, when it happens.

WHITFIELD: Right. And we'll be looking ahead to tonight's debate between the Democrats, a field that has narrowed now to these two major candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It is their last chance to square off before Super Tuesday. That's 8:00 p.m. Eastern, tonight with our Wolf Blitzer as host.

LEMON: And of course you'll remember the last Democratic debate, of course John Edwards was part of that debate. Won't be a part of the debate tonight because, as you know, he suspended his candidacy yesterday. But it is going to be contentious. WHITFIELD: Oh yes.

LEMON: And this one was contentious as well last night, for the Republicans. And a beautiful backdrop, we're looking at the plane there at the Reagan Library. Just a gorgeous, gorgeous setting. But again, this one was so contentious as it comes to the Republicans, we want to play it for you again.

WHITFIELD: That's right. And you know, folks are -- we at least we heard John McCain and Mitt Romney go at it during the debate. But it was Mike Huckabee who jumped in and said, wait a minute, it is not just about you two. There are others who are in the race.

LEMON: A la John Edwards.

WHITFIELD: Right. Exactly. So we'll be seeing that again. We thought it was worth revisiting. And we'll be bringing that to you momentarily.

LEMON: Yes, absolutely. Of course they are talking about who is the most conservative. Talking about the war on Iraq. And of course John McCain's saying, hey, you're taking some of my comments out of context and a lot of that going on last night for the debate. But again, as we look at this setting, Fredricka, as well look at this, of course, all of the debates have been set in sort of -- we've had sort of a newsroom kind of setting.

WHITFIELD: Oh yes.

LEMON: But again, this beautiful setting at the Reagan Library and now this debate at the Reagan Library. Let's listen in now. Anderson is asking the first question.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON COOPER, DEBATE MODERATOR: The first question is actually a question that will go to all of you, but I'll start with Governor Romney.

Ronald Reagan himself asked this question during a debate. During a 1980 debate, he suggested Americans determine who to vote for by asking themselves, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

So tonight, in terms of the economy, are Americans better off than they were eight years ago?

MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, if you're voting for George Bush, you'd be very interested in knowing the answer to that. If you're voting for Mitt Romney, you'd like to know, "Are you better off in Massachusetts after four years of my term in office?" And the answer would be decidedly yes.

I came into a state which was very much in a deep ditch. It was losing money every month. We had a $3 billion budget gap. We had people losing jobs every single month. During my predecessor's term, we'd lost 160,000 jobs. We kept losing jobs for a couple of years. We got it turned around, began adding jobs back. We won some huge contracts to bring in some new employers into the state. Some of them haven't even built their facilities yet. We solved our budget problem, $3 billion budget gap, without raising taxes. We were able to do that in a way that I think surprised folks.

COOPER: Let me just interrupt. The question was: Are Americans better off than they were eight years ago? And as you know, there are a lot of Americans out right now who are very interested in the answer. They're not feeling particularly good about their home sales -- the value of their homes dropping down or the unemployment rate rising.

How do you feel America is doing?

ROMNEY: Well, again, I'm pleased with what I do while I was -- as governor and happy to talk about that record.

COOPER: Are you running for governor or are you running for president, though?

ROMNEY: But I'm not running on President Bush's record. President Bush can talk about his record. Washington is badly broken. I think we recognize that. Washington has not dealt with the problems that we have in this nation. It hasn't reduced our burdens on our middle class, hasn't solved the Social Security problems, hasn't dealt with the health care crisis that we have in this country, hasn't improved our schools as much as we'd like to get them improved.

Nevertheless, this president did pull us out of a deep recession. He put in place two tax cuts which did get the country out of a recession and helped rebuild the country. Now we see ourselves headed apparently towards one again. We hope not.

ROMNEY: Whether there's a recession technically or not, one thing we know -- middle-income families are feeling squeezed and people are losing homes and people are having a hard time paying for their gasoline and they're having a hard time paying for heating oil in places that that's a big part of their life.

And as a result, we've got people that feel there needs to be a change in Washington and that's something I represent.

COOPER: Senator McCain, are Americans better off than they were eight years ago?

JOHN MCCAIN (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think you could argue that Americans overall are better off, because we have had a pretty good prosperous time, with low unemployment and low inflation and a lot of good things have happened. A lot of jobs have been created.

But let's have some straight talk. Things are tough right now. Americans are uncertain about this housing crisis. Americans are uncertain about the economy, as we see the stock market bounce up and down, but more importantly, the economy particularly in some parts of the country, state of Michigan, Governor Romney and I campaigned, not to my success, I might add, and other parts of the country are probably better off.

But I think what we're trying to do to fix this economy is important. We've got to address the housing, subprime housing problem. We need to, obviously, have this package go through the Congress as quickly as possible.

We need to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which I voted for twice to do so. I think we need to eliminate the alternate minimum tax that sits out there and challenges 25 million American families.

COOPER: It sounds like that we're not better off is what you're saying.

MCCAIN: Pardon me?

COOPER: It sounds like you're saying we're not better off.

MCCAIN: I think we are better off overall if you look at the entire eight-year period, when you look at the millions of jobs that have been created, the improvement in the economy, et cetera.

What I'm trying to emphasize, Anderson, that we are in a very serious challenge right now, with a lot of Americans very uncertain about their future, and we've got to give them some comfort.

We've got to give them some stimulus. We've got to give them some tax relief. We've got to stop this outrageous squandering spending that causes us to have to borrow money from China, and we've got to get our fiscal house in order. I think we went on a spending spree that, frankly, betrayed Ronald Reagan's principles about tax cuts and restraint of spending.

COOPER: Let me just give the question now to Senator -- I'm going to ask everyone.

So, Governor Huckabee, if you can, briefly: Are we better off than we were eight years ago?

MIKE HUCKABEE (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't think we are. And the real issue, though, let's not blame President Bush for all of this. We've got a Congress who sat around on their hands and done nothing but spend a lot of money and they're spending, leaving us $9 trillion in debt that we're passing on to our grandchildren.

I don't blame the president solely for that. So I think if we're asking is George Bush responsible for all this, no. But are we better off? Well, let's look at some factors.

Right now, home sales are -- new home starts, anyway, are down 40 percent. That's going to have a cascading impact on everybody who sells lumber, who is in the building trades.

If you talk to people who are driving trucks across America today, their fuel prices are significantly higher than they were a year ago. They're hurting because they're not making a lot more money to haul something, but they're spending a lot more money to get it done.

And all over our economy, with unemployment up to five percent across the nation, that means there are a lot of families today that don't have a paycheck and if you don't have a paycheck, then it's hard to put groceries on the table and it's hard to pay the rent.

And I think what Americans are looking for is somebody to just honest with them and straight with them and tell them that, no, it's not better and it's not going to get better unless we have some serious leadership in Washington that says that we're going to have to start having policies that touch the people not just at the top, but the people at the bottom.

And they feel like they're invisible to a lot of people in government today.

COOPER: Congressman Paul, 61 percent of Americans think there is a recession already -- 61 percent of Americans say there's already a recession. Are we better off than we were eight years ago?

RON PAUL (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: No, no, we're not better off. We're worse off, but it's partially this administration's fault and it's the Congress. But it also involves an economic system that we've had for a long time and a monetary system that we've had and a foreign policy that's coming to an end and we have to admit this.

The Republicans were elected in 1994 to change direction of the country, because people sensed there was something wrong, we were going the wrong direction, but we didn't do anything. In the year 2000, we did, also. We were elected in the year 2000 to have a humble foreign policy and not police the world, and yet what are we doing now? We're bogged down in another war. We're bankrupting our country and we have an empire that we're trying to defend which costs us $1 trillion a year.

And the standard of living is going down today. It's going down and the middle class is hurting because of the monetary policy. When you destroy a currency, the middle class gets wiped out. Poor countries don't even have middle classes. We used to have one and they're on the ropes right now. But it has to do with a fiscal policy, monetary policy, and foreign policy of way too much spending, but it took a lot of years for us to get here. The people in this country have been begging for a change in direction, and they haven't had it. It's time we gave it to them.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: We've got a lot to get to on the economy. To begin with, let's go to Janet Hook of the L.A. Times.

JANET HOOK, LA TIMES: Governor Romney, you've spent the last several days warning voters that John McCain as president would follow, quote, "a liberal, Democratic course." But, by most measures, doesn't he have a pretty mainstream conservative record? ROMNEY: I'm sure on many issues he does, and he's a good Republican. I wouldn't question those credentials at all. But there are a number of pieces of legislation where his views are out of the mainstream, at least in my view, of conservative Republican thought.

So, for instance, he's opposed to drilling in ANWR, I believe. If I'm correct -- correct me, Senator. He voted twice against the Bush tax cuts. Only two Republicans did that. He is a co-author of McCain-Feingold, which I think took a whack at the First Amendment and I do believe, as well, hurt our party pretty significantly. And I think it's made money have an even greater influence in politics today, not less influence.

He also was one of the co-authors of McCain-Kennedy, the first bill, by the way, not that bad. About five percent or ten percent of the people, by our calculation, got a form of amnesty. Most people went home. Under the final version of McCain-Kennedy, everybody who was here illegally, other than those who committed crimes, was eligible to receive a Z-visa. For $3,000, they got to stay here for the rest of their life. That's not a Republican thought.

And then now McCain-Lieberman, which is a unilateral -- meaning U.S.-only imposed -- cap-and-trade program, which puts a burden, as much as 50 cents a gallon, on gasoline in this country. It basically says Americans are going to pay for the cost of global warming, not the Chinese and Indians and forth. So those views are outside the mainstream of Republican conservative thought. And I guess I'd also note that, if you get endorsed by the New York Times, you're probably not a conservative.

COOPER: Senator McCain?

MCCAIN: Let me note that I was endorsed by your two hometown newspapers who know you best, including the very conservative Boston Herald...

ROMNEY: I'd say the same thing.

MCCAIN: ... who know you well better than anybody. So I'll guarantee the Arizona Republic will be endorsing me, my friend.

Let me just say I'm proud of my conservative record. It's one of reaching across the aisle to get things done for Americans, obviously, whether it be McCain-Lieberman that established the 9/11 commission, and then the legislation that implemented that, or whether it be working across the aisle in the Armed Services Committee to provide the men and women with what they need to defend this nation.

And I'm proud of that record. And I heard Governor Romney describe his record. As I understand it, his record was that he raised taxes by $730 million. He called them "fees." I'm sure the people that had to pay it, whether they called them bananas, they still had to pay $730 million extra.

His job creation was the third worst in the country, as far as job creation is concerned. And, as we all know, he has saddled the people of Massachusetts with a $245 million debt because of the big government-mandated health care system.

And while the rest of the country was losing seven percent of the manufacturing jobs while he was governor, 14 percent of the manufacturing jobs left the state of Massachusetts. So I am proud of my record, and I am proud of reaching across the aisle and getting things done. That's what the American people want us to do.

And the legislation and the activities I've done, particularly in this America's defense, particularly in the fact that I've been involved in every major national security challenge this nation has faced.

And, by the way, I think it would be hard for people like Jack Kemp, and Tom Ridge, former head of the Department of Homeland Security, and Phil Gramm, and all of the long list of conservatives that support me, both governors, conservative governors, and, in fact, your former lieutenant governor, who is spending a lot of time on the campaign trail with us.

But the point is that I'm proud of the people that have surrounded me and are supporting me. And whether they come from one part of the spectrum or the other, strong conservatives are ones who are supporting me, and I'm proud of their support. And I'll rely on people to judge me by the company that I keep.

COOPER: Governor Romney?

ROMNEY: OK, I got a little work to do here. Let me help you with the facts here, Senator. First of all, my lieutenant governor, Kerry Healey, endorsed me, and is supporting me, and is working all over the state for me. My predecessor in office, Governor Swift, Governor Swift is supporting you.

ROMNEY: When you say that our state ranked number three in job creation, the study you're relying upon is a study that included her term in office. And during her term in office, 141,000 jobs were lost. During my term in office, we added jobs. And from the lowest point we added 60,000 new jobs. So that study, unfortunately, included the wrong data. With regards to fees, we raised fees $240 million. Not $730 million. Facts are stubborn things. We audited our fee increase, because, of course, we cared.

Now, why did we raise fees $240 million? We had a $3 billion budget shortfall, we decided we were not going to raise taxes, and we found that some fees hadn't been raised in as many as 20 years. These were not broad-based fees for things like getting your driver's license or your license plate for your car, but instead something like the cost of a sign on the interstate and how much it was going to cost to publish a McDonald's or a Burger King sign on the interstate.

We went from, like, $200 a sign to $2,000 a sign to raise money for our state in a way that was consistent with the what the market had done over the ensuing years. And let's see -- with regards to my health care plan, you know, a lot of people talk about health care. I'm the only one that got the job done. I got health insurance for all our citizens. We had 460,000 people without insurance. We got 300 of them -- 300,000 of them signed up for insurance now. I'm proud of what we accomplished. The bill that I submitted to the legislature didn't cost $1 more than what we were already spending. However, the legislature and now the new Democratic governor have added some bells and whistles, and they're willing to pay for them.

I wouldn't do that if I were governor. I would veto the items they put in place there, but they're entitled to make changes if they want to. They're still running a balanced budget. I wouldn't have added the money they did. And by the way, no debt was left. I left a rainy day fund of over $2 billion. Facts are stubborn things. I'm proud of my record.

COOPER: Governor Huckabee, Rush Limbaugh says if you or Senator McCain were nominated, would be the nominee, you would "destroy the Republican Party."

Your reaction?

HUCKABEE: You know, I wish Rush loved me as much as I love Rush. I think he's a great voice for conservatism. It doesn't mean he's infallible. And on this he's very wrong.

And I want to make sure everybody understands, this isn't a two- man race. There's another guy who would like to stay down here on the far right of the stage.

You want to talk conservative credentials? Let me get in on that. I created the first-ever broad-based tax cuts in the 160-year history of my state when I became governor with a 90 percent Democrat legislature. I also balanced the budget every one of the 10 and a half years. I'm the only person that's sitting here today that has consistently supported a human life amendment that's been part of our Republican platform since 1980, and also supports the marriage amendment to our Constitution, two conservative hallmarks.

I believe in less government. I believe in lower taxes, not higher. I think it's important to streamline the federal government like we streamlined some services in Arkansas. Simple things like getting a driver's car tag, because it used to take a couple of days and about seven pieces of paper. We streamlined it so it could be done on the Internet in four and a half minutes.

We consolidated state agencies. We cut 11 percent out of the budget. One of the things that Rush Limbaugh once praised me for was creating what I called the No -- Tax Me More Fund. And the way that worked was that we had a lot of people in our legislature that wanted us to raise taxes. And I said we don't need to raise taxes, we need to cut our spending.

And so I created a fund called the Tax Me More Fund and said there's nothing in the law that says that you can't just pay more if you want to. And I had envelopes printed, and I said, anybody who wants to pay more taxes, just fill it up with whatever will make you feel better and send it right in.

And it proved that a whole lot of people didn't really want to pay more taxes after all, because after about a year and a half, there was only about $1,200 in the account, $1,000 of which had been given by a liberal legislator. So if we're going to talk conservatism, I'd like to be in on the discussion.

COOPER: Let's talk more about that. Jim VandeHei from Politico.

JIM VANDEHEI, POLITICO: The first question from the readers, Governor Romney, is from Jonathan Rubin (ph) in Fairfax, Virginia:

"As governor of Massachusetts, Senator McCain just pointed out you raised hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue through so-called fees and loophole closings. You passed a health care bill forcing individuals to buy insurance on the threat of a fine. How do you reconcile that policy with your claim to be the authentic conservative?"

ROMNEY: Well, let's talk about each.

I mentioned fees, and I think it's appropriate if the state is providing a service to someone that's not a requirement to have a car or a driver's license, but instead, let's say, we're going to be taking out an oil tank from your back yard because it's leaking into the ground and the state's going to provide that service. But to charge a fee sufficient to do so makes a lot of sense.

And so the fees ought to be adjusted from time to time to compose the amount of what the cost is of providing that service. And if there hasn't been a fee raised in a couple of decades, you probably have some inflation in there you ought to adjust for.

But then, secondly, with regards to my health care plan, let me describe what I think is the ultimate conservative approach. In this country, you have today about 47 million people that don't have health insurance. We went out and tried to find out why they don't. We found out that about half of them could afford to buy insurance if it were reasonably priced. They could afford to buy it, but they weren't buying it.

And we asked them why. And they said, "Well, why should we buy it? If we get sick, we can go to the hospital and get care for free." And we said: You know what? If somebody could afford insurance, they should either buy the insurance or pay their own way. They don't have to buy insurance if they don't want to, but pay their own way. But they shouldn't be allowed to just show up at the hospital and say, somebody else should pay for me.

And so we said: No more free riders. It was like bringing "workfare" to welfare. We said: If you can afford insurance, then either have the insurance or get a health savings account. Pay your own way, but no more free ride. And that was what the mandate did. It said, you have got to come with either the insurance or a health savings account or the like. I think it's the conservative approach, to make sure that people who can afford care are getting it at their expense, not at the expense of the taxpayers and government. That I consider to be a step towards socialism.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Our next question is from Janet Hook of the L.A. Times.

HOOK: This is for Senator McCain. Senator McCain, Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed that California be allowed to implement much tougher environmental regulations on emission requirements than apply to the rest of the country. This is an initiative that conservatives generally oppose, and the Bush administration rejected California's request.

Do you side with the governor or with the Bush administration?

MCCAIN: Well, there's some physical danger. I have to agree...

(LAUGHTER) ... with the governor.

Look, I'm a federalist. And I believe the states should decide to enormous degrees what happens within those states, including off their coasts. The people of California have decided they don't want oil drilling off their coasts. The people of Louisiana have decided that they do.

I applaud the governor's efforts and that of other states in this region and other states across America to try to eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change.

Now, suppose that the governor and I are wrong, and there's no such thing as climate change. And we adopt these green technologies, of which America and the innovative skills we have and the entrepreneurship and the free market which is embodied by Senator Lieberman's and mine cap-and-trade proposal is enacted, and there's no such thing as climate change. Then all we've done is give our kids a cleaner world.

But suppose we do nothing. Suppose we do nothing, and we don't eliminate this $400 billion dependence we have on foreign oil. Some of that money goes to terrorist organizations and also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. Then what kind of a world have we given our children?

The state of California and the state of Arizona, we Westerners care very much about our environment and we want to act. And it's no secret that I have disagreed with the Bush administration in not being more active in addressing the issue of climate change, whether it be through cap-and-trade, through tax incentives for R&D for green technologies and many other measures that I think need to be taken.

We are feeling here in California pollution from China. It is a global issue, and we have to address it globally. And I would not agree to any global agreement without India and China being part of it. But I want to assure you that we have an obligation to try to stem these greenhouse gas emissions. And one of the ways is through the use of nuclear power. The French generate 80 percent of their electricity with nuclear power.

I think that -- by the way, we now have a pro-American president in France, which shows if you live long enough, anything is possible in this world. But the point is, young Americans care. Californians care. People all over this country care. And we have to address this issue. We can do it. The greatness and strength of America is in our innovative capability and our ability to develop these green technologies.

General Electric, the world's largest corporation, is committed to green technologies. We can do it. And to somehow believe that it will cost more money if we unleash the innovative and entrepreneurship of America I think does not have confidence in the ability of Americans to address this issue.

COOPER: Governor Romney, what did you think of Senator McCain's response? And just to remind you, the original question is do you side with Governor Schwarzenegger or with the Bush administration on this issue?

ROMNEY: Well, I side with states to be able to make their own regulations with regards to emissions within their own states. But let's talk about our policies with regards to greenhouse gases and global warming.

I think we all agree that America should become energy independent. The consequences of us continuing to buy over $1 billion of oil a day from people who oftentimes use this money against us is bad for our economy; it's bad for our foreign policy; and all that energy being used is probably bad for our environment.

It's probably warming our environment. And we want that to stop. So a unilateral action to get ourselves off of foreign oil makes all the sense in the world. Nuclear power, biodiesel, biofuel, all the renewables, liquefied coal, where you sequester the carbon dioxide, those things make all the sense in the world.

But when you put in place a new cap or a mandate, and particularly if you don't have any safety valve as to how much the cost of that cap might be, you would impose on the American people, if you do it unilaterally, without involving all the world, you'd impose on the American people a huge new effective tax: 20 percent on utilities, 50 cents a gallon for gasoline -- that's according to the energy information agency -- would be imposed on us.

And here's what happens. I've lived in the business world. I've lived in the real economy for 25 years of my life. What happens if you do that? You put a big burden on energy in this country as the energy-intensive industries say, "We're going to move our new facilities from America to China, where they don't have those agreements." And you end up polluting and putting just as much CO-2 in the air because the big energy users go there. That's why these ideas make sense, but only on a global basis. They don't call it "America warming." They call it "global warming." That's why you've got to have a president that understands the real economy.

COOPER: Just so I'm clear, you said you side with the states. That means you side with Governor Schwarzenegger on this one?

ROMNEY: I side with states being able to make their own decisions, even if I don't always agree with the decisions they make.

COOPER: Governor Huckabee?

HUCKABEE: Well, I was a governor 10 1/2 years. I was chairman of the National Governors Association, which means that my fellow governors selected me to chair the organization of all 50 governors.

Let me tell you why I believe that Governor Schwarzenegger ought to be able to carry out the plan, because, if he's right, every other state is going to copy him. And if he's wrong, every other state is going to recruit the jobs that he lost in California to their own states.

The genius of our system has always been that, if you have states acting as laboratories of good government, rather than mess it up for all 50 states, you get the chance to find out, does it work? And if it does, we all copy it, and then we make a little change, and we claim it for our own.

If it doesn't work, we do everything we can to make sure that the jobs that maybe he loses we get in our own state. It's the genius of our founding fathers when they had the idea of federalism. Thomas Jefferson was right, and Alexander Hamilton was wrong. That debate we thought was settled.

But we've got a federal government that wants to give us unfunded mandates at the state level and doesn't want us to experiment with ideas in good government that might solve a lot of the problems that our country faces.

COOPER: Congressman Paul, do you agree with Governor Schwarzenegger on this one?

PAUL: Yes, I think California should do what they want, and we all recognize that. But one thing that hasn't been emphasized here that should be emphasized when we're dealing with the environment and gas house -- you know, greenhouse gases is property rights.

We neglected during the industrial revolution property rights, and governments and big corporations got together and colluded. And that's what has to be reversed. You have to emphasize the property rights.

But I would like to take one minute, since I didn't get a chance to answer this discussion on conservative versus liberal. COOPER: We're going to have -- I promise you we're going to have -- you're going to have another opportunity to do that. I promise you, coming up in like two minutes or two questions.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANDERSON: I just want to go right now to Janet Hook for a question to Governor Huckabee.

HOOK: Let's turn for a minute to the troubled economy we're trying to deal with. Governor Huckabee, President Bush and some of your opponents on the stage here believe that giving income tax rebates is the best way to stimulate the economy. You've disagreed and suggested that spending federal highway money to widen I-95 from Bangor to Miami would do more to help the nation's economy. Now, how is that idea different from the big- government projects that we usually associate with Democrats?

HUCKABEE: Well, if we end up with the rebates, we're going to borrow the $150 billion from China. And when we turn it into rebates, most people are going to go out and buy some consumables like a pair of shoes that they probably don't even need, but they're going to buy them, and they're most likely an import from China. My point is, whose economy are we stimulating when we do that?

The Heritage Foundation did a pretty interesting study on past rebates and found that it does not really stimulate the economy in the way that we hope that it will.

My point was that if you really want an economic stimulus package, look at what infrastructure investment does. And we've got a crumbling infrastructure. I don't have to tell the people of California that their traffic is clogged. And the reason that we have a problem is that because we're not addressing it. Every billion dollars we spend on highway construction results in 47,500 jobs. But the fact is the average American is sitting in traffic 38 hours a year.

HUCKABEE: That's a full work week, not on vacation, not spent with their kids, stuck in traffic, just sitting there behind the wheel, pointing fingers, usually one at a time, at other motorists and very upset with what's going on around them in this traffic.

The point is we are burning a lot of fuel up in the air, polluting the environment. We're wasting time. Parents never get home to their kids' soccer games and recitals. And the real said thing is we have bridges falling down on people in the United States of America.

Now, my point is, and it's not necessarily just I-95 from Bangor to Miami, I said that when I was in Florida. Today we might look at a western highway that would go down the California coast.

But my point is that infrastructure in this country has been neglected, whether it's our airports, our bridges, our roads, and I don't think there's a governor in this state that wouldn't tell you that you'll create more jobs and you'll build it with American workers, American concrete and American steel. That's stimulus.

COOPER: Let's ask the other governor on the stage. Governor Romney, what do you think about that?

ROMNEY: There's no question but that investment in infrastructure makes enormous sense for our country. It's good for business, it's good for the economy, and as the governor that watched the completion -- well, almost the completion of the big dig, I think that was -- I don't know how many governors watched that $15 billion project.

They do create a lot of good jobs and they help our economy. They're great things. But, unfortunately, a road project isn't going to stimulate the economy to the timeframe we have right now at the tipping point. And that's...

COOPER: Was the big dig good, by the way?

ROMNEY: As someone once said, at least badly, of course. So someone has remarked that it's the biggest car was in America and most expensive, too. It's solved a problem, but it cost way too much money to do. It was very badly managed. But that being said, an economic stimulus plan has to put money in the hands of consumers and businesses and homeowners now and the reason we're asking Congress to move within 30 days is we want to get that out there now so the economy doesn't tip down.

Building a road project, you have to get designs, you have eminent domain, you get the engineers to approve it. It takes years and years and years to get a road project. So it's a wonderful idea, but it's not related to the short-term economic stimulus.

COOPER: Congressman Paul?

PAUL: Well, you know, the governor says that you have to borrow for a handout of a check from the Chinese. Where are you going to get the money to build the highway?

Same old thing. We have a foreign policy where we blow up bridges overseas and then we tax the people to go over and rebuild the bridges overseas and our bridges are falling down and our infrastructure is falling down. So, yes, this money should be spent back here at home. We have a $1 trillion foreign operation to operate our empire. That's where the money is. You can't keep borrowing from China. You can't keep printing the money.

We have to cut some spending. That's what nobody here talks about. Where do you cut spending if you want to spend some money? We need lower taxes, less regulations, and we need to free up the market. We can't expect the government to do everything. We have to faith and confidence that the market works, but you can't do any of that unless you look at the monetary system.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Next question to Senator McCain from Jim Vandehei. VANDEHEI: We're staying on the economy here. As you well know, foreclosures last year were up 75 percent. A lot of people are losing homes. A lot of people who have adjustable rate mortgages are about to have them adjust up.

Amanda Oro (ph) from Casey, Illinois wants to know if you have a plan to help people with bad credit get lower interest rates so they can keep those homes and avoid foreclosure.

MCCAIN: Yes, and it's tough and it's tough here in California, it's tough in Arizona, it's tough particularly all over, but it's very tough particularly in the high growth states.

And I think the efforts that have been made so far are laudable. We may have to go further, but the fact that the FHA and the other organizations of government under Secretary Paulson's direction, and I think he is doing a good job of sitting down and fixing at least a significant number of these problems.

I think that we've got to return to the principal that you don't lend money that can't pay it back. I think that there's some greedy people on Wall Street that perhaps need to be punished. I think there's got to be a huge amount more of transparency as to how this whole thing came about so we can prevent it from happening again.

When a town on Norway is somehow affected by the housing situation in the United States of America, we've gotten ourselves into a very interesting dilemma. If necessary, we're going to have to take additional actions and particularly in cleaning up a mortgage. A mortgage should be one page and there should be big letters at the bottom that says, "I understand this document."

We ought to adjust the mortgages so people who were eligible for better terms, but were somehow convinced to accept the mortgages which were more onerous on them. We need to fix the rating systems, which clearly were erroneous in their ratings, which led people to believe that there were these institutions which were stable, which clearly were not. So I think what we've done so far is good. I think we may have to take further steps if this subprime lending situation continues to be serious.

And finally, could I just mention on the issue of rebates, fine, because part of this is psychological. Part of the problem we have, of course, in any recession is psychological. And I'm still optimistic that nothing is inevitable.

I still rely on the innovation and the talent of the United States of America. But we've got to make the tax cuts permanent. We need to get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax.

We need to give people a depreciation in one year for their business and investment. We need to encourage research and development and tax credits that are associated with it.

And we've got to stop spending. We've got to stop -- one place where Ron Paul and I are in total agreement, spending is out of control. And I'm tired of borrowing money from China.

COOPER: Let's pick up on that with Janet Hook from the Los Angeles Times -- Janet?

HOOK: Senator McCain, you're talking about making the tax cuts permanent. And as Governor Romney pointed out before, you opposed the Bush tax cuts the first time around.

Now, more recently you've been saying that the reason why you opposed the tax cuts at first was because they weren't offset by spending cuts. But back when you actually voted against the tax cuts in Congress, you said you opposed them because they favored the wealthy too much.

So which is it? And if they were too skewed to the wealthy at first, are they still too skewed to the wealthy?

MCCAIN: Actually, I think lower and middle income Americans need more help. Obviously, I think that's the case today. That's one reason why we're giving them rebates.

I was part of the Reagan revolution. I was there with Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm and Warren Rudman and all these other fighters that wanted to change a terrible economic situation in America with 10 percent unemployment and 20 percent interest rates. I was proud to be a foot soldier, support those tax cuts, and they had spending restraints associated with it.

I made it very clear when I ran in 2000 that I had a package of tax cuts which were very important and very impactful, but I also had restraints in spending. And I disagreed when spending got out of control. And I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint.

And guess what? Spending got out of control. Republicans lost the 2006 election not over the war in Iraq, over spending. Our base became disenchanted. If we had done what I wanted to do, we would not only have had the spending restraint, but we'd be talking about additional tax cuts today. I'm proud of my record. I'm proud of my record as a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution, and now I'm prepared to lead in restraining spending.

COOPER: Governor Romney, what do you think of Senator McCain's response?

ROMNEY: I appreciate his response and appreciate the fact he was part of the Reagan revolution. I think that the Bush revolution and the downturn that we faced when he came in office suggested that we needed a tax cut.

There's no question in my mind that Ronald Reagan would have said sign it and vote for it. And Senator McCain was one of two that did not. And again, the justification at the time was because it represents a tax cut for the rich.

I believe in getting rates down. I think that builds our economy. When we talk about spending, however, I hope people in the country understand that most people in Washington, most politicians, generally want to talk about the $2 and $3 and $4 relative items. And they want to talk about the big one.

Right now, federal spending is about 60 percent for entitlements, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and that's growing like crazy. It will be 70 percent entitlements plus interest by the time of the next president's second term. And then, the military is about 20 percent today. No one is talking about cutting the military, we ought to grow it.

So people talk about the 20 percent, and how we have to go after that 20 percent. There's not enough of the 20 percent to go after if we don't go after the entitlement problem. You listen to the folks running for president, no one wants to talk about it. So, we have a talk about it.

We have to put together a plan that says we're going to reign in the excessive growth in those areas, promising to meet the obligations we made to seniors. We're not going to change the deal on seniors, but we're going to have to change the deal for 20 and 30 and 40-year- olds, or we're going to bankrupt our country.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Hello. While you've been watching last night's contentious debate between Republican candidates there during that aired debate we had last night, we want to go straight to Los Angeles where we are about to hear an important endorsement from California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger endorsing John McCain. Let's listen in.

LEMON: It kind of gives you an idea of exactly what's been going on. As soon as one of them takes to the podium, either the governor or McCain, and you see Rudy Giuliani there as well. We will get to them, but now it's just introductions. It had been expected all along, since last night we have been hearing that Arnold Schwarzenegger would endorse John McCain for President.

Of course, Rudy Giuliani, giving his official statement yesterday, his official response dropping out of the race, saying that he, as well, would support John McCain. We have several analysts standing by who is going to talk to us about this -- exactly what this means for the Republican Party. Of course, as we have been listening to last night's Republican debate.

WHITFIELD: In the front row, front and center of the debate last night was Governor Schwarzenegger alongside Nancy Reagan listening to that debate. So, it's no surprise that he would come out strongly today to give his point of view on his choosing in this important '08 race.

LEMON: Yes, and at the Kodak Theatre now in California as well. CNN's Senior Political Analyst, Mr. Bill Schneider can talk to us about all of this. Bill, we're looking at -- I'm not so sure if you can see here, but we're seeing John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and also Arnold Schwarzenegger in the front row here as they are preparing to speak.

What does this mean for the Republican Party and for those who are still standing in this race?

BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: This could be a very big deal. Remember, in California, only registered Republicans can participate in the Republican primary. Now Arnold Schwarzenegger's success has always been his appeal not just to Republicans, where he does do well, but also to Democrats and Independents.

They don't matter in this case. Only registered Republicans are voting. Schwarzenegger's endorsement, Giuliani's endorsement, we've got to see if it holds sway with the people who are going to be participating in this primary on Tuesday.

They are very conservative voters but they haven't done very well in recent years in California, so they know what they have to do to win, which is appeal to voters outside the base. The calculation is they look at McCain, they look at Giuliani, they look at Schwarzenegger and they've got to say, you know, these are guys who know how to win elections, even if we don't agree with them on every issue.

WHITFIELD: And, Bill, symbolically this is extraordinary, too, because you are talking about both New York and California with the largest delegates at stake for both Republicans and the Democrats. Here you've got Rudy Giuliani who still hopes to believe that New Yorkers back him wholeheartedly. Of course, Governor Schwarzenegger as you said, both Republicans and Democrats, seem to support him.

SCHNEIDER: That's right. Here you have the two biggest states, bi-coastal. New York is also holding a primary Super Tuesday. Only Republicans can vote in New York. Giuliani is popular in New York, although the latest polls show that if he had stayed in the race, McCain might well have beaten him in his home state of New York.

McCain is likely to win New York, but Giuliani is a national figure. He was very popular, was on top of the polls for a long time because of his national celebrity status more than anything else. Didn't do so well as a candidate. A lot of core Republicans have some doubts about him. That's why Schwarzenegger is probably even more important. Schwarzenegger is a winner and he's won twice here in California.

LEMON: You've got to look at this. You've been talking about the stars of the Republican Party, New York and California. But to see Arnold Schwarzenegger in this position, of course the last thing -- if you had seen his movies in the '80s, the last thing you would have thought is that this person would have ended up being a politician and being the governor of California.

When you look at that, Bill, and you look at these two players here from both coasts, they're really the honchos. And again, it is interesting to see Arnold Schwarzenegger in this position. Where we're taking him live, and the Republican Party is seriously counting on his endorsement.

SCHNEIDER: Ten years ago if you'd have said Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California, people would have laughed. It was even in a movie that he was a politician. It was unbelievable. But of course, he is most importantly, an outsider. He is not a professional politician, or at least he wasn't for most of his career.

LEMON: Does that help, Bill, that he's an outsider?

SCHNEIDER: Yes, it does help, because everybody wants to be an outsider this year. Mitt Romney is running against John McCain saying, I'm the outsider because I'm outside Washington. McCain is a Washington insider. But Giuliani and Schwarzenegger both made their careers, and their reputations and their celebrity status outside of Washington, and really outside of politics.

WHITFIELD: And, too, Bill, because every candidate, Republican or Democrat, really is running on the platform of change, because that is what is appealing to most American voters. Let's talk about endorsements. Bill, do they really matter? Does it matter that Governor Schwarzenegger, that Rudy Giuliani are endorsing McCain?

SCHNEIDER: I'm not sure it is going to make a decisive difference, but it matters on the margin. I mean, I don't think people will go out to the polls and say I'm going to vote for John McCain because Arnold is for him, but it does enhance the McCain image as a winner, number one.

And also, someone who can appeal outside the ranks of just conservative Republicans. Because here in California, the voters here know, conservative Republicans have trouble winning since the days of Ronald Reagan. Since then, Republicans have fallen on hard times. And they know what it takes to win. And Schwarzenegger is basically putting his arm around John McCain and saying, you know what my fellow Republicans? This guy's a winner.

LEMON: Speaking of that, I mean we've been talking about -- Bill, all of this, who's going to get what endorsement. Not exactly sure if that matters, but I tell you what certainly matters, that is money. We know John McCain's campaign has been struggling as of late.

Probably doing a lot better now, but not as well obviously as the Democratic candidates we've been hearing raising so much money. Does this help in his efforts to draw up support especially when it comes to money?

SCHNEIDER: Money is very important. But, you know what? There ain't no time left to spend or raise any money. They've only got a few days. What are you going to do with it? It takes a lot of money to run in California, but an event like this which we're covering, which all the stations in California are going to take not of, this even is worth a whole lot of television ads, and a whole lot of money. What could be better than Giuliani, Schwarzenegger and McCain all in a row? This replaces money. It's called free media. LEMON: A one-off, as we call it. Right?

WHITFIELD: Yes. We're talking about money. We are talking about the Republicans, and now Governor Schwarzenegger is about to take the helm there.

GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R), CALIFORNIA: Thank you very much, Randy, for the nice introduction. And of course, I think it is very important that you all know that there will be a quiz afterwards, where you will be asked all the detailed questions that you he just given you, to make sure that you remember all of this stuff.

But anyway, it is nice to be here today, and I want to thank Senator McCain and Mayor Rudy Giuliani for being here today. We want to thank, of course, Bruce and also Randy for taking us around and giving us a tour of this wonderful facility here. And we want to thank you for hosting us here today.

This is an appropriate place where we can talk about our shared commitment to protecting the environment and to stimulate the economy at the same time. Because this is exactly what Solar Integrated technology is all about. And I think that we have talked about that so many times, that you can protect the environment and protect the economy at the same time.

I have just talked to one of the workers here when I walked through this great facility. And I said, "How do you like your job? How do you like the things that you're doing here?" And that worker said that, "I am happy every morning when I get up. Because I am producing something that is cleaning our environment, that is fighting global warming, and we are creating new jobs." I said, "Why don't you go out and give my speech? That's exactly what this whole thing is about."

And it's exactly what it's about, because they are producing here the large-scale solar panels that are being used for schools, for factories, for distribution centers and for businesses, for warehouses all over the world. And it's exactly again what is so important, that the world becomes the marketplace.

And I was yesterday with President Bush, where we talked about eliminating trade barriers and selling our goods all over the world. And of course, for California, this is a big, big win-win situation, because we have the best products in the world. This company here is a perfect example of that.

Just in the past year, just to show you, when we talk about protecting the economy and protecting the environment, I mean, here we have an economy that is now flattening out, that is leveling off, that is not really producing what we anticipated because of the housing crisis and because of the mortgage crisis, the subprime crisis. And here this company is increasing its productivity over this last year by 100 percent. So this is really extraordinary.

We are creating jobs; we're protecting the environment; and we're fighting global warming. And that is music to my ears. And this is music, I know, to Senator McCain's ears and also to Mayor Giuliani's ears.

And of course, Senator McCain and I, we have talked about this many times. As a matter of fact we did a year ago at an event here, talking about global warming and how this is the future. The future is clean technology, energy independence and clean investment.

So venture capital is coming into California in huge amounts. Forty percent of the venture capital that's being invested in green clean technology is invested right here in California. Solar energy is a great way to fight global warming.

And with companies like this one here, and with policies that we have in California, if it is rolling back the greenhouse gas emissions to the 1990 level by the year 2020 or whether it's the tailpipe emission standards or whether it is the low carbon fuel standards, all of those things will create a great, great future for California and for the United States and the world.

Now talking about a great future, this is the very reason why I am endorsing Senator McCain to be the next president of the United States, because I am interested in a great future. And I think that Senator McCain has proven over and over again that he is reaching across the aisle in order to get things done. There are people out there that talk about reaching across the aisle, but he has shown the action, over and over again.

He's also crusaded to end wasteful spending in Washington, which is so important. And he's a crusader, has a great vision in protecting the environment and also protecting simultaneously the economy. He has incredible credentials in national security and, of course, he is a fantastic, outstanding public servant. He's a great American hero and an extraordinary leader. This is why I am endorsing him to be our next president of the United States.

So let's hear it for Senator McCain. Thank you very much.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Governor. And I'm very honored by your endorsement and your support.

I'm also very honored to be with my friend, the mayor of New York City, the man who united America at a time of great tragedy, a man who gave us courage and hope and was a symbol of the tenacity and resilience of America and the American people following the tragedy of 9/11. I went to New York City. I went to Ground Zero. And I was so honored to be in the presence of an American hero, and I'm grateful for his support and his continued leadership on issues of national security.

Governor Schwarzenegger, I can only say that I'm very pleased and honored, of course, to be in a neighboring state. I continue to negotiate with Governor Schwarzenegger concerning the treatment of some of my constituents who come to San Diego and are mistreated during the winter months. I also would like to have some of that money back for Arizona. And I also told him that it's been an honor but I would like to lay down the burden of being the third Senator from the state of California, since the Republican Party has not been well represented there for some time. But I'm very honored to know that this governor has taken the lead from this great state to protect the environment. He knows not only the importance to California, but to the world. He knows that what happens in China today can affect and is affecting the state of California.

He has led not only in California, but in this region, an embrace of green technologies, an embrace of practices which will encourage companies such as Solar Integrated Technologies here, which are doing magnificent things, not only all over the country, but increasingly all over the world.

Governor Schwarzenegger, I commit to you that you and I and all of the others that are committed to the globe, not just our home states, but to this planet, to hand our children a cleaner planet than the one we have today. That's our commitment. And that's going to require global cooperation. And that's going to require an agreement that includes India and China. And it also includes the free market, capitalist incentives such as we see right here at Solar Integrated.

We don't have to have increased costs to Americans. In fact, with the development of green technologies, we can have reduced costs to the American consumer, with the development of new technologies. The world's largest corporation, General Electric, along with one of the world's smallest corporations, to be honest with you -- you certainly began very small and you will get a lot bigger -- are joining together the development of green technologies to save this planet.

And I'd like to put the question again to the American people. Let's continue the debate on climate change. Let's continue to accumulate the scientific evidence. But suppose that those of us who believe that climate change is real and that we must act immediately are wrong. And we embrace these new technologies and we reduce greenhouse gas emissions by making this a national priority. And we are wrong and all we've done is give our kids a cleaner planet.

But suppose we're right and do nothing. Suppose we are right and do nothing. What is our obligation? What is our obligation to our children and our grandchildren as to what kind of planet we hand them?

And I also want to add one other aspect of this that is also of great importance. We are spending $400 billion a year on imported oil. That money is going to many countries that are not friends of ours. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations who want to do bad things to America. We can eliminate, over time, that dependence on foreign oil, and green technologies is one of the key ways in achieving that absolute vital national security requirement.

Again, I'd like to thank the governor. I thank him for his leadership. I thank him for being the great American success story. This is a story that's an inspiration, not only to young citizens of the state of California, but all over America and all over the world. He came to this country with not very much except his strengths, his talents and his ambition, and he is now the governor of the largest state in America.

And I'm proud to be in his company. And I know that he serves as a role model and a guide to millions of Americans and people throughout the world. And that's why I'm doubly honored by this great, great American success story that has taken the time and the effort to endorse my candidacy and help me on the road to the presidency of the United States.

And now I'd like to ask my friend and comrade, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, to make comments.

RUDY GIULIANI (R), FORMER MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY: Thank you very much. This is just another indication of why John McCain should be the next president of the United States. He is looking into the future.

This is -- this is our future: alternatives to oil, making America energy diversified, making America energy independent as much as possible. It serves so many purposes that the governor has indicated. This is just a very intelligent, really good thing to do.

I want to thank Randy and Bruce for having us here and point out that this is now a matter of national security, as well as protecting our environment, as well as protecting against global warming. And as the governor and the senator pointed out, this is a great industry, a great way to enter and to take advantage of the global economy, because everything being produced here is needed in great abundance in China, India and all over the world, and America should be the leader in this area. And this company, which has been such a quick success, is really doing wonderful work.

Thank you very much for having us here. And Governor, thank you for supporting Senator McCain, who will be the next president of the United States. Because this is a man who is moving us into our future, understands how to do it and also understands how to keep us safe.

LEMON: Former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani there, really ending this endorsement announcement here. Arnold Schwarzenegger, of course, stepping up to the microphone now. Both men are endorsing John McCain for president.

Very interesting that Rudy Giuliani, Fredricka, spoke after John McCain. He's really the person at the center of attention here. Wonder if we may be looking at that's a ticket. I asked a panel we had on, a political panel we had on yesterday. And I said, "Do you think that Charlie Crist..."

WHITFIELD: Yes.

LEMON: "... and Rudy Giuliani may be vying for the second?" I'm not sure if they really got what I was asking, because there have been lots of photo ops. They have been singing each other's praises here. So it seems to me...

WHITFIELD: Sure. It is no coincidence. All of this taking place within the past 48 hours. And that's kind of the question that comes to mind, you know, for me, right away, by seeing these two sharing the spotlight here. Our Bill Schneider is watching and listening to all of this, as well.

And so Bill, you know, there has to be some real strategizing going on here. To see John McCain, Governor Schwarzenegger, as well as former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani, here all together. We talked about the delegates that are at stake for both New York and California. But let's look beyond that. Are we looking at, potentially, the ticket, of a John McCain and a Rudy Giuliani?

SCHNEIDER: There's going to be endless speculation, no matter who gets the nomination, who will be on the ticket. And we got a leisure of time. We've got months and months before the convention. And that's going to be the story going on for a long time.

WHITFIELD: Yes. I wonder if you're testing the waters here.

SCHNEIDER: Well, it's possible. But you know what? There are going to be a lot of candidates testing the water once it's clear who the nominee is. Let me give you the Schneider rule for picking a running mate.

WHITFIELD: OK, bring it on!

SCHNEIDER: Write this down. There are ten reasons why a candidate picks a running mate. All right? Number 1, pick someone who will help you win. The other nine reasons don't matter.

WHITFIELD: I got you.

SCHNEIDER: They are so fixated. They are so fixated on winning the election, they will pick anyone. I'd like to say, the devil himself, if that's going to help them get elected president.

WHITFIELD: Excellent. I'm not going to forget these ten reasons: to help you win, times ten. I love it.

Bill Schneider, thank you so much. We'll keep checking back with you. And of course, momentarily, we'll be going back to last night's GOP debate that many folks wanted to see again. And that's why we've been bringing it to you this last hour.

But first let's go to Don with some breaking news.

LEMON: Yes, we have some breaking news that you just saw on the screen there as those gentlemen were speaking in California. But here's the interesting information that we want to bring you.

An al Qaeda commander, an operative, we are getting news, CNN is getting news that he has been killed. Abu Laith al-Libi, he is a senior al Qaeda terrorist, been active in operational planning and training, has been killed. Of course, that's what we're bringing you here.

Again, he was believed to be in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and they may know who he is. I'm going to talk to our senior Arab affairs editor, Octavia Nasr, in just a bit. But they may know who he is, because he has some distinguishing, distinctive -- distinctive marks on his back and also some dental work that would confirm that -- if it is, in fact, he who has died. Breaking news, a senior al Qaeda operative has been killed. We're going to get some analysis on it on the other side of the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: And our breaking news here in the CNN NEWSROOM, the death of an al Qaeda operative, Abu Laith al-Libi, believed to have been in Afghanistan/Pakistan. We want to get analysis now from our senior Arab affairs editor, Octavia Nasr. She joins us now.

Where did they find him, because I said -- as I said, he was believed to be in Pakistan, Afghanistan on the border there.

OCTAVIA NASR, CNN ARAB AFFAIRS EDITOR: Right. Of course, this information is yet to be confirmed where exactly he was killed.

What we do know right now is that Islamist Web sites have posted a message saying that he is dead, that he was killed. And that is big. That is huge. Because, if you look at him -- you're looking an interview here that Sahad (ph) had conducted with him, and it was posted, this interview, last year in April 2007. Basically, he's -- he's a wanted terrorist. On the list of wanted terrorists, he ranks fourth. He's right after Osama Laden, Zawahiri, Mullah Omar, and then him.

LEMON: So he's right there. He's right there at the top?

NASR: He's high on the list. Now where they got him, we are not sure. Islamist Web sites are saying in Afghanistan. He was believed to have been on the border there between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

LEMON: Well, let's talk about the confirmation, because as I said, he has some distinctive marks on his body, which would give confirmation that he -- that it is, in fact, he who's been killed. And those are scars on his back.

NASR: There are scars on his back. He's -- he's easy to identify. As I said, I mean, you look at this video, he is not someone who is in the shadows. I mean, he's someone who is out there. The U.S. government, the intelligence community, has information on him.

Look at this picture. This is -- like I said, this was released in April of 2007. So we do know what he looks like as -- you know, as of that date at least. He has identifiable marks, according to the intelligence community, as I said, those marks, as if he was hit by a belt.

LEMON: Or a whip, it says here.

NASR: Right.

LEMON: And then also has a dental bridge.

NASR: Yes. So you know, if you look at the intelligence Web sites, you're going to find a lot of identifying marks for him and other terrorists.

LEMON: OK.

NASR: So it's not going to hard to identify him.

LEMON: Just real quick, because we have to go to Fredricka. But I wanted to talk to you about what this means as a concern to al Qaeda and the operation at the top.

NASR: You know, already the announcement itself is congratulating people for him dying as a martyr. So when it comes to al Qaeda, you know, they're quick to announce these things. They don't hide them. And basically, they say that he is a martyr. Who's next?

LEMON: Senior Arab affairs editor Octavia Nasr, we appreciate it. Thank you -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Don. Well, let's go to Nic Robertson, a senior international correspondent, who's right now in Kenya, joining us on the phone there, where he will soon be reporting on the continued violence there.

But for now, Nic, you have been along this border between Pakistan and Afghanistan many times, reporting on the continued search for operatives such as al-Libi. Give me an idea just how difficult, likely, this kind of routing out may have been and how much of a victory this might be and for whom.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It certainly will have been hard to track him down. We know that, because he is a very senior al Qaeda leader, and he is -- he is the first one in quite some time to have been successfully targeted.

And I think that's an indication itself how difficult it is to get timely intelligence information, either through electronic eavesdropping or through having intelligence assets on the ground, perhaps spies working within loose al Qaeda cells. That's something that's very, very difficult to achieve and can only be done, usually, with the help of other regional intelligence agencies.

But how important is this? It will obviously be an important psychological blow for al Qaeda leadership. It shows them that they are vulnerable. It is also a blow -- we understand he was involved in the operations and training for al Qaeda in the region of Afghanistan and Pakistan, where they're trying to build support and strength, where they have been feeling, to some degree, invulnerable from these type of attacks. But there's another very significant way that this may harm al Qaeda. This is speculation at this time, but we do know that Abu Laith al-Libi, a Libyan, was once a member of the Libyan Islamic fighting group, a Jihadi in Libya. We know that al Qaeda has said that it's going to build its strength in North Africa, in the Maghreb region, in Libya, in Tunisia, in Morocco, in Algeria and in Mauritania, as well. Al Qaeda has begun to use bases of support and training bases in some of those countries to perpetrate operations inside Europe and in those countries, as well.

A Frenchman was recently killed in one area. Al Qaeda has said that it will strike in the weakest of those countries. This is speculation that Abu al-Libi, a Libyan, may have been very useful for al Qaeda's leadership in trying to build that new and regenerate that network of al Qaeda in those North African countries. So this may be a much more significant blow against al Qaeda's leadership than just losing a key operative on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Nic.

And let's talk about who might be able to claim victory on this. The coalition forces, might this be the cooperation of citizens on the ground who were in that -- along that border region, which many coalition forces have said, prior, have been rather reticent to supply intelligence?

ROBERTSON: I think it would be reasonable to assume that anyone on the ground in that region, a local person, either -- either side of the Afghan/Pakistan border, would be unlikely to stand up in their community and claim and say, "I helped United States or whomever track down and kill Abu al-Libi." That would almost be a death sentence for them in those communities, because those communities are not supportive, generally speaking, of U.S. efforts to track and kill al Qaeda in that area.

However, there are extremely, extremely valuable bounties on the head of Osama bin Laden and his key lieutenants in terms of millions of dollars, which to people who live in that region would be a significant amount of money. We don't know. But had they received that money, then there would obviously be a possibility they would be whisked out of the region and given a restart of a life in another country, in a much safer environment.

But it's unlikely that anyone on the ground would claim this to be a success. It does appear to be a success for U.S. and coalition forces operating in the region, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Nic Robertson, thanks so much for your reporting -- Don.

LEMON: And just as you guys were speaking there, getting confirmation, CNN has learned that he did die, was killed, in Pakistan, Fredricka. Of course, we're going to continue to monitor this developing story. Can we go over here when we talk? We're going to continue to monitor this developing story here in the CNN NEWSROOM. And also, the replay of last night's GOP debate.

WHITFIELD: Right.

LEMON: But if it's breaking, you won't miss it. We're back in a moment in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Let's talk about another issue which a lot of Americans watching tonight want to talk about, immigration. Jim VandeHei, what's the question?

VANDEHEI: Obviously, we're here in California, where one-third of the population is Hispanic, Latino. Immigration's been a huge issue in this campaign from the beginning.

Governor Huckabee, Brian Barry (ph) of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, wants to know, in order to curb illegal immigration, do you propose making changes in the law that would give citizenship only to children who are born to parents who are legally in this country at the time the child is born?

HUCKABEE: I think the Supreme Court's already ruled on that. The real issue is that doesn't fix the problem.

What we've got to do is to have a secure border fence, something I propose that we do within 18 months of taking office. If we don't have a secure fence and have just this open door that people can come in and out at will, we'll -- we're never going to deal with this issue effectively and responsibly.

And today many Americans are angry, not that people want to come here. And I have repeatedly said, I'm going to say it again, people in this country, I think, are grateful to God they're in a land that people are trying to break into and not one they're trying to break out of. So it's not that we're building a fence so we can keep our people in or keep people out, but that people who do come here would have to come legally.

And touching the issue of -- of those born here, it is not the challenge. It's two things. It's first, making sure that that fence is built, I think, within 18 months. And the second thing is that we have a process where the people who are here would have to go to the back of the line and start over.

And it's not to be cruel. I want to make sure you understand. It's to make that everybody who's living in our boundaries has their head up and lives in the light, not the darkness, and doesn't run and hide every time they see a police car. We owe it, not just to people who have waited in line a long time, we owe it to people who want to live here and work here. But create a system that is legal, that makes sense, and that actually protects our borders but protects the dignity and worth of every person.

VANDEHEI: Governor Romney, I interviewed you in New Hampshire a couple weeks ago. We talked a little bit about illegal immigration. You've taken a very hard stance against illegal immigration. You said at the time that you felt that there's -- for a lot of illegal immigrants that are here, under your plan, we could deport many of them within 90 days. How could that happen? How could we do that?

ROMNEY: I think you may be confusing me with somebody else. But perhaps not. Let me tell you what my plan is.

VANDEHEI: At the time -- I can just give you the quote...

ROMNEY: OK.

VANDEHEI: ... if you like. You said that many of those can be deported immediately but that would allow slower deportation process for those with families and deeper roots. And we asked how quickly, you said you thought as quickly as 90 days.

ROMNEY: My plan is this, which is for those that have come here illegally and are here illegally today, no amnesty.

Now, how do people return home? Under the ideal setting, at least in my view, you say to those who have just come in recently, we're going to send you back home immediately, we're not going to let you stay here. You just go back home.

For those that have been here, let's say, five years, and have kids in school, you allow kids to complete the school year, you allow people to make their arrangements, and allow them to return back home. Those that have been here a long time, with kids that have responsibilities here and so forth, you let stay enough time to organize their affairs and go home.

But the key is this: These individuals are free to get in line with everyone else that wants to become a permanent resident or citizen. But no special pathway, no special deal that says because you're here illegally, you get to stay here for the rest of your life. And that's what I found to be so offensive with the Z visa, which was in the McCain-Kennedy bill. It said to all illegal aliens, unless you're a criminal, you're all allowed to stay here for $3,000 for the rest of your life. And that's a mistake.

In my view, let us have a fixed period of time -- 90 days for some, depending on their circumstances, others longer, to the end of the school year -- even longer potentially. Do it in a humane and compassionate way, but say to those who have come here legally, you must return home, you must get in line with everybody else that wants to come here.

There are millions throughout the world who want to come to this country legally. It's a wonderful privilege. But those that have come here illegally should not be given a better deal.

I was just at the swearing in of some 700 citizens just a day or two ago in Tampa, Florida, and it was a thrilling thing to see these folks coming out, shaking their hands. People who come here legally are a great source of vitality and strength for our country.

COOPER: Let's follow up...

ROMNEY: But illegal immigration, that's got to end.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Janet Hook with the L.A. Times with a follow-up question.

(APPLAUSE)

HOOK: Senator McCain, let me just take the issue to you, because you obviously have been very involved in it. During this campaign, you, like your rivals, have been putting the first priority, heaviest emphasis on border security. But your original immigration proposal back in 2006 was much broader and included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were already here.

What I'm wondering is -- and you seem to be downplaying that part. At this point, if your original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, would you vote for it?

MCCAIN: It won't. It won't. That's why we went through the debate...

HOOK: But if it did?

MCCAIN: No, it would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate -- it won't. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever -- that proposal.

But, look, we're all in agreement as to what we need to do. Everybody knows it. We can fight some more about it, about who wanted this or who wanted that. But the fact is, we all know the American people want the border secured first.

MCCAIN: We will secure the borders first when I am president of the United States. I know how to do that. I come from a border state, where we know about building walls, and vehicle barriers, and sensors, and all of the things necessary.

I will have the border state governors certify the borders are secured. And then we will move onto the other aspects of this issue, probably as importantly as tamper-proof biometric documents, which then, unless an employer hires someone with those documents, that employer will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that will cause a lot of people to leave voluntarily.

There's two million people who are here who have committed crimes. They have to be rounded up and deported. And we're all basically in agreement there are humanitarian situations. It varies with how long they've been here, et cetera, et cetera. We are all committed to carrying out the mandate of the American people, which is a national security issue, which is securing the borders. That was part of the original proposal, but the American people didn't trust or have confidence in us that we would do it. So we now know we have to secure the borders first, and that is what needs to be done. That's what I'll do as president of the United States.

COOPER: So I just want to confirm that you would not vote for your bill as it originally was?

MCCAIN: My bill will not be voted on; it will not be voted on. I will sit and work with Democrats and Republicans and with all people. And we will have the principals securing the borders first. And then, if you want me to go through the description all over again, I would be glad to. We will secure the borders first. That's the responsibility and the priority of the American people.

COOPER: Actually, we're going to be taking a short break. But before we do, one other question.

This one goes to Governor Huckabee. On July 6, 1981, which is actually Nancy Reagan's birthday, Ronald Reagan wrote in his diary about Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. And the Reagan Library has graciously allowed us to actually have the original Reagan diary right here on the desk. I'm a little too nervous to actually even touch it, but that is the Ronald Reagan's original diary.

And in it, he wrote by his hand, he said, "Called Judge O'Connor in Arizona and told her she was my nominee for Supreme Court. Already the flak is starting, and from my own supporters. Right-to-life people say she's pro-abortion. She declares abortion is personally repugnant to her. I think she'll make a good justice." That's Ronald Reagan's words from his own book. Governor Huckabee, was she the right choice?

HUCKABEE: History will have to determine that, and I'm not going to come to the Reagan Library and say anything about Ronald Reagan's decisions. I'm not that stupid. If I was, I'd have no business being president.

I think we need to talk about why the issue of right-to-life is important. For many of us, this is not a political issue; this is an issue of principle and conviction. And it goes to the heart of who we are as a country. If we value each other as human beings and believe that everybody has equal worth, and that that intrinsic value is not affected by net worth, or ancestry, or last name, or job description, or ability, or disability, then the issue of the sanctity of human life is far bigger than just being anti-abortion.

It's about being pro-life and exercising that deep conviction held by our founding fathers that all of us are equal and no one is more equal than another, recognizing that once we ever decide that some people are more equal or less equal than others, then we start moving that line, and it may include us some day. And that's why for many of us -- and me included. Let me be very clear: I'm pro-life. I value every human being. And I would always make every decision always on the side of life every time I could, without equivocation.

COOPER: Yes or no, Congressman Paul, was Sandra Day O'Connor the right choice?

PAUL: I wouldn't have appointed her, because I would have looked for somebody that I would have seen as a much stricter constitutionalist.

COOPER: Senator McCain?

MCCAIN: I'm proud of Sandra Day O'Connor as a fellow Arizonan. And my heart goes out to her family in that situation that they have today. And I'm proud of her. The judges I would appoint are along the lines of Justices Roberts and Alito, who have a proven record of strict interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm not going to second-guess President Reagan.

COOPER: Governor Romney?

ROMNEY: I would approve justices -- I would have favored justices like Roberts and Alito, Scalia and Thomas. I like justices that follow the Constitution, do not make law from the bench. I would have much rather had a justice of that nature.

COOPER: We're going to pause for a quick commercial break. The debate continues when we return.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: And welcome back to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, our continuing debate.

We have about a little bit more than 30 minutes left to go. A lot of questions to get to, so let's get started. This first one to Governor Romney.

Peggy Noonan, President Bush's former -- excuse me, President Reagan's former speechwriter, recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal, and I quote, "George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart, and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration, and other issues."

Is the Republican Party better off than it was eight years ago?

ROMNEY: I don't think we would say it's better off than it was eight years ago, to be truthful. I think the eight years that you've seen -- and I don't blame that on President Bush. I blame that on Washington.

I look at what he tried to do. He took on some tough issues. He took on Social Security, for instance, put forward a plan to reform Social Security, and the other side of the aisle said, "What, me, worry? "We've got no problem." And they were unwilling to become engaged and take that on.

He was hit by something which completely took his agenda off course, and that was the Iraq conflict and the attack of 9/11, and Afghanistan. All these things came together. He did something for our party that was important to do, which is to show that when someone attacks America, there will be consequences. And he kept us safe these last six years. And...

(APPLAUSE)

... that's a very important legacy that he left for the Republican Party in a positive way. And I watched with horror as I watched the Democratic candidates for president all having a competition. When asked, "Is it more important that we win in Iraq or that we get out?" It was very clear in the answer of all three candidates getting out was more important than winning, and they're wrong. And I'm pleased that this president has stood for strength.

There are places, however, that I think you look and say we have weakened ourselves. One is with regards to spending. We have overspent in Washington. Even discretionary funds have gone up well above inflation. I count the inflation less 1 percent, but that was a problem. We did not deal with entitlements. He tried. He did not get the support he needed. He did fight for better schools. I think No Child Left Behind takes the ball forward, not backward.

COOPER: OK.

ROMNEY: So we made some progress. But we're in the house that Reagan built. It's important that we, as Republicans, stay in the house that Reagan built. If we want to take the White House again, social, economic and foreign policy conservatives have to come together.

COOPER: Let's talk about foreign policy. You're all going to be able to weigh in on the question of Iraq.

(APPLAUSE)

Let's go right now to Janet for the first question.

HOOK: Yes. I'd like to start with Governor Romney.

Obviously, Iraq is still a major issue in this campaign, and over the last few days there's been a real back-and-forth going on here. Senator McCain has said over and over again that you supported a timetable for a phased withdrawal from Iraq. Is that true?

ROMNEY: Absolutely, unequivocal -- if I can get that word out -- unequivocally, absolutely no. I have never, ever supported a specific timetable for exit from Iraq. And it's offensive to me that someone would suggest that I have. And I have noted that everyone from "Time" magazine to Bill Bennett over there to actually CNN's own analysts, he said it was a lie and it's absolutely wrong. I do not support that, never have. We've had -- we've -- and Senator McCain pointed to an interview I had back in April with ABC, when I said that our president and their prime minister should have timetables and milestones.

We have timetables and milestones for progress that we're making together. But I never suggested a date specific to withdraw and, actually, she asked me a question and that question was: "If Congress were to give you a date specific for withdrawal, would you, Senator, veto it?" I said I'd veto it. I'm opposed to setting a specific date for withdrawal. By the way, we've had, since that time, 10-12 debates. Senator McCain never raised that question in any of those debates.

If he ever wondered what my position was, he could have raised it. I instead have pointed out time and time again, and let me make it absolutely clear again tonight, I will not pull our troops out until we have brought success in Iraq, and that means, for me, that we do not have safe havens for al Qaeda or Hezbollah or anyone else, that our troops have secured the population from that kind of threat, that they will not have safe havens from which they could launch attacks against us.

And if there's any misunderstanding, those words should make it perfectly clear, as have every single debate that I've attended...

COOPER: Senator...

ROMNEY: ... fifteen debates. I do not propose nor have I ever proposed a public or secret date for withdrawal. It's just simply wrong.

And by the way, raising it a few days before the Florida primary, when there was very little time for me to correct the record, when the question that was most frequently asked is, "Oh, you're for a specific date of withdrawal," sort of falls in the kind of dirty tricks that I think Ronald Reagan would have found to be reprehensible.

(APPLAUSE)

COOPER: Senator McCain, tough words.

MCCAIN: Well, of course, he said he wanted a timetable. Before that, we have to understand that we lost the 2006 election and the Democrats thought that they had a mandate. They thought they had a mandate to get us out of Iraq.

And I was prepared to sacrifice whatever was necessary in order to stand up for what I believed in. Now, in December of 2006, after the election, Governor Romney was asked what he thought about the surge. He said, at that time, "I won't weigh in. I'm a governor."

At the time, he didn't want to weigh in because he was a governor, I was out there on the front lines with my friends saying, "We not only can't withdraw, but we've got to have additional troops over there in order for us to have a chance to succeed." Then in April, April was a very interesting year (sic) in 2007. That's when Harry Reid said the war is lost and we've got to get out. And the buzzword was "timetables, timetables."

Governor, the right answer to that question was "no," not what you said, and that was we don't want to have them lay in the weeds until we leave and Maliki and the president should enter into some kind of agreement for, quote, "timetables." "Timetables" was the buzzword for the...

ROMNEY: Why don't you use the whole quote, Senator?

MCCAIN: ... withdrawal. That...

ROMNEY: Why don't you use the whole quote? Why do you insist on...

MCCAIN: I'm using the whole quote, where you said "I won't"...

ROMNEY: ... not using the actual quote? That's not what I said.

MCCAIN: The actual quote is, "We don't want them to lay in the weeds until we leave." That is the actual quote and I'm sure...

ROMNEY: What does that mean?

MCCAIN: ... fact-checkers --

ROMNEY: What is the meaning?

MCCAIN: It means a timetable until we leave.

ROMNEY: Listen, Senator, let's...

COOPER: Let me jump in, because the quote that I have...

ROMNEY: Is it not fair -- is it not fair to have the person who's being accused of having a position he doesn't have be the expert on what his position is?

How is it that you're the expert on my position, when my position has been very clear?

(APPLAUSE)

I'll tell you, this is...

MCCAIN: I'm the expert. I'm the expert on this. When you said...

ROMNEY: This is the kind -- this is the kind -- this is...

MCCAIN: ... "I won't weigh in. I'm a governor." You couldn't weigh in because you were a governor... ROMNEY: That's a separate point.

MCCAIN: ... back when we were having the fight over it.

ROMNEY: That's a separate point.

MCCAIN: The fact is...

ROMNEY: That's a separate point.

MCCAIN: ... that I have fought for this surge. I have said we need to have this succeed. I know the situation in Iraq and I am proud to have supported this president and supported the fact that we are succeeding in Iraq today.

ROMNEY: There's...

MCCAIN: If we had done -- if we had waited and laid in the weeds until we leave, then al Qaeda would have won and we would be facing a disastrous situation in the...

COOPER: There's two separate issues being discussed...

MCCAIN: ... today.

COOPER: ... and I just want to clarify both of them. First of all...

MCCAIN: These are...

COOPER: ... Senator McCain...

MCCAIN: ... quotes that I am giving you that are direct quotes.

COOPER: So, Senator McCain, the quote is from Governor Romney on GMA that you've been quoting. The actual quote is, "Well, there's no question that the president and Prime Minister al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones ..."

MCCAIN: Timetables and milestones.

COOPER: "... that they speak about, but those shouldn't be for public pronouncement. You don't want the enemy to understand how long they have to wait in the weeds until you're going to be gone."

MCCAIN: You don't have to...

COOPER: He does not say he is supporting a withdrawal.

MCCAIN: ... wait until the enemy lays in the weeds until we leave. That means that we were leaving.

COOPER: It's open to interpretation.

MCCAIN: If we weren't leaving, how could the enemy lay in the weeds? (CROSSTALK)

ROMNEY: Senator, if you have question on this, if you have a question on this, you can just ask it.

MCCAIN: I'm sorry you did not have -- could not weigh in as governor on the surge when it was the critical issue. And I'm sorry...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: ... so let me just allow you to respond to the issue of the going to be gone, laying in the weeds question.

MCCAIN: Timetables was the buzzword for those that wanted to get out.

COOPER: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: And you're saying, point blank, you did not want to get out then. What did you mean by that statement?

ROMNEY: That we have a series of timetables and milestones for working on the progress that they're making, the progress we're making, the rule of law, what their soldiers are doing, what our soldiers are doing.

COOPER: OK.

ROMNEY: How many troops they're able to recruit, how well trained are they. And as a matter of fact, the individual asked in the following question, "do you have a specific time, would you support Congress if they gave you a specific time?" I said "absolutely not."

COOPER: Let me -- OK, on the...

ROMNEY: By the way, this has been around. If this was a question, it could have been raised in April or May.

COOPER: On the second issue...

ROMNEY: But it was raised...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: I want to give you an opportunity...

MCCAIN: It was raised many times. I raised it many times, as to whether you have the experience and the judgment to lead this country in the war against radical Islamic extremism. I've raised that many times.

ROMNEY: Senator McCain... MCCAIN: And I will continue to raise it.

COOPER: I want to give you, Governor Romney...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: ... a chance to respond to the other accusation.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: All right. Let's just focus on this, the second one, which is the issue that Senator McCain raised, which was actually going to be my next question to you. Was that, you were asked about back in the surge, when you were a governor, and you did say you would not take a position.

This was in January -- excuse me -- December of 2006. Two months later, you announced you were running for president. Why two months before you were running for president were you not willing to take a position on supporting or not supporting a surge?

ROMNEY: Look, as governor of the state, there are a lot of issues of a federal nature that I didn't take a position on. I was running a state. My responsibility was for running a state. When I became a governor, I took a whole series of positions on national issues. That's normal and natural.

With regard to the surge, the briefing that I received -- I received an early briefing from Fred Kagan on the size of our military. After I received that, I said I support increasing our military by at least 100,000. And then just prior to the president's announcement of the surge, I spoke again with Fred Kagan, and he laid out the philosophy of the surge, his vision for it. As you know, many consider him one of the authors of the surge idea. And when he gave me that report, I met with my staff and announced that day that I supported a surge. The president announced later that day the entire program.

So I supported it as a candidate for president, Number 1. Number two, with regards to this idea that I favor a specific date for withdrawal -- I do not. We've had, I believe since that interview that the senator quotes, we've had 10 or 12 debates. He's never raised that issue with me. He's never said, "are you for a date specific?"

I've been asked that question time and again. Last debate we had, I said I will not leave Iraq until we have secured Iraq, make sure it will never become a safe haven.

And what's interesting here is it's an attempt to do the Washington-style old politics, which is lay a charge out there, regardless of whether it's true or not, don't check it, don't talk to the other candidate, just throw it out there, get it in the media and the stream.

There's not a single media source that I've seen that hasn't said it wasn't reprehensible. Even the New York Times said it was wrong. The Washington Post -- they endorsed you -- The Washington Post gave you three Pinocchios for it. It's simply -- it's simply wrong, and the senator knows it.

COOPER: I want to give, Senator, final comment on this subject, and then we have a lot more about Iraq that we are going to talk to the other candidates about as well.

(CROSSTALK)

MCCAIN: ... in the debate. It wasn't -- it wasn't -- and when he said what he said in December, it was after the election. President Bush fired Rumsfeld, and we announced that we are going to have a new strategy. That was the critical time. Timetables was the buzzwords. Timetables were the ones.

And as far as Washington politics is concerned, I think my friend Governor Huckabee, sir, will attest the millions of dollars of attack ads and negative ads you leveled against him in Iowa, the millions of dollars of attack ads you have attacked against me in New Hampshire, and have ever since.

A lot of it is your own money. You're free to do with it what you want to. You can spend it all. But the fact is that...

(LAUGHTER)

... your negative ads, my friend, have set the tone, unfortunately, in this campaign.

I say to you again, the debate after the election of 2006 was whether we were going to have timetables for withdrawal or not. Timetables were the buzzword. That was the Iraq Study Group. That was what the Democrats said we wanted to do. Your answer should have been no.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Don Lemon.

WHITFIELD: And I'm Fredricka Whitfield, in for Kyra Phillips.

We'll get back to the GOP in just a few minutes.

LEMON: But first, a look at some of the day's other headlines here in the NEWSROOM.

WHITFIELD: We're working our sources around the world for details about the death of a senior al Qaeda commander. His name, Abu Laith al-Libi. CNN justice correspondent, Kelli Arena, is standing by with more on what we know.

How did this happen?

KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, two Western officials tell CNN that al Qaeda commander, Abu Laith al-Libi, has indeed been killed. Now, he's described as a senior al Qaeda member. He doesn't have a very long official affiliation with al Qaeda, but he has become, according to officials, very integral to that organization. Osama bin Laden apparently very dependent upon his military and organizing skills.

He's very active in operational planning and training. And he's actually not too far right now below in rank behind Osama bin Laden. It is believed that he played a role in the bombing at Bagram Air Base early last year, while Vice President Cheney was there. You might remember that, Fred.

Officials tell us that he was killed on the Pakistan side of the border, in Waziristan. Officials say that al-Libi obviously has had direct contact with bin Laden. And interestingly, he's of Libyan descent, and that's important, Fred, because al Qaeda has been trying to build alliances and recruit in North Africa, and al-Libi was instrumental in that effort, according to the officials that we spoke to.

Now, here's the catch. We are still not exactly clear on how he was killed or by who. And we're working on those details. Some witnesses in the area say that they saw what they thought was a drone. We have not been able to confirm that in any official way.

As I say, we are working our sources. We'll get back to you as soon as we know more -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right,. Kelli Arena in Washington. Thank you.

ARENA: You're welcome.

LEMON: California's governor throwing his weight behind John McCain. As you saw here live on CNN, Arnold Schwarzenegger endorsed the Arizona senator today, calling McCain a crusader for ending wasteful spending in Washington and an outstanding public servant.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R), CALIFORNIA: Now, talking about a great future, this is the very reason why I am endorsing Senator McCain to be the next President of the United States, because I'm interested in a great future. And I think that Senator McCain has proven over and over again that he is reaching across the aisle in order to get things done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Also standing with McCain, literally -- I should probably say physically and politically -- former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who folded his own campaign yesterday. California is a winner-take-all state and a big prize. The Republican who wins there claims 170 delegates to the GOP convention.

Thirty-two million dollars, that's what the Barack Obama campaign reports raising in January alone. That's roughly equal to Obama's best three-month fund-raising haul last year. A campaign source tells CNN the Illinois senator received contributions from 170,000 new donors. No word yet on how much the Clinton camp raised.

WHITFIELD: And there it is, the venue for -- right there, there it is, the venue for tonight's Democratic debate. The world-famous Kodak Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard, it's being set up today with space for two candidates, not three, given yesterday's bow-out by John Edwards. Of course, you can see the debate live right here beginning at 8:00 p.m. Eastern, and we'll replay it tomorrow at noon Eastern, 9:00 a.m. Pacific.

And with all eyes on Hollywood, what should you expect in tonight's Democratic debate? For the best debate coverage, the latest endorsements, the Political Ticker, I-Reports and analysis, check out cnnpolitics.com.

(WEATHER REPORT)

WHITFIELD: All right. Now back to CNN's coverage of the GOP debate at the Reagan Library.

LEMON: More news when that concludes.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: I want to go to Jim VandeHei with a question for Congressman Paul.

VANDEHEI: Congressman Paul, this comes from Jay Majumdar (ph) from Roswell, Georgia. And he wants to know if you agree with Senator McCain's statement that the United States might need to have U.S. troops in Iraq for as long as even 100 years?

PAUL: I don't even think they should have gone, so keeping them for 100 years, where's the money going to come from?

(APPLAUSE)

You know, the country is in bankruptcy. And when I listen to this argument, I mean, I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with. They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy, whether we should have interventionism or non-interventionism, whether we should be defending this country or whether we should be the policemen of the world, whether we should be running our empire or not, and how are going to have guns and butter?

You know, the '70s were horrible because we paid for the guns and butters of the '60s. Now we're doing the same thing. And nobody even seems to care. The dollar is crashing, and you're talking about these technicalities about who said what when?

I mean, in 1952, we Republicans were elected to stop the war in Korea. In 1968, we were elected to stop the war in Vietnam. And, tragically, we didn't stop it very fast -- 30,000 more men died. So when I talk about these long-term stays, I think, "How many men are you willing to let die for this, for something that has nothing to do with our national security?"

There were no al Qaeda there. It had nothing do with 9/11. And there was no threat to our national security. They never committed aggression. It's unconstitutional. It's an undeclared war. And we have these silly arguments going on about who said what when. I think it's time to debate foreign policy and why we don't follow the Constitution and only go to war with a declaration of war.

(APPLAUSE)

COOPER: Governor Huckabee, the idea of a 100-year involvement of the U.S. -- the idea of a 100-year involvement by the U.S. in Iraq?

HUCKABEE: Well, first of all, I didn't come here to umpire a ballgame between these two. I came here to get a chance to swing at a few myself. So I'd appreciate maybe a question that we could talk about that would involve some of us down here at the end who've been left out of the discussion for the last few minutes.

COOPER: The question right now is John McCain had at one point talked about a 100-year involvement by the U.S. in Iraq as being OK. If it does...

HUCKABEE: Let's hope it doesn't take that long, but the one thing I do agree with is that we need to leave with victory, and we need to leave with honor. And the reason we need to is because, if we leave a bigger mess in Iraq than is there now, it is not just going to affect Iraq. It's going to affect the rest of the Middle East. It will erupt in a completely destabilized environment into which that vacuum is exactly the kind of situation that al Qaeda can build a strong base.

Iran would love to be able to see a destabilized Iraq, because they've been fighting in Iraq and for Iraq for a long time. If we leave it vulnerable, all we've done is create a situation that the rest of the world is going to have to be back into sooner or later for all of our interests.

And with all due respect, Congressman Paul -- and I do think you're right, we don't want to be there for 100 years -- but however long it takes to get out of there with victory and with honor, we owe it to those who have gone to make sure that they did not go in vain. And we need to make sure that future sons and daughters of America don't have to go back and do it over.

COOPER: Also, for accuracy's sake, I just want to point out Senator McCain was talking about 100-year involvement in the same way as the U.S. being involved in South Korea, not at the current situation that it is now.

Janet Hook, you have another question on foreign policy for Governor Huckabee.

HOOK: I have another one for you, Governor Huckabee.

MCCAIN: You're not going to let me address the quote that you attributed to me?

COOPER: All right, fine, if you could briefly.

MCCAIN: Thank you. It's a false argument. It's a false argument. We are going to be there for some period of time, but it's American casualties, not American presence. We've got troops right next door in Kuwait. We'll probably have them there for a long time. We have troops in Bosnia. We've had troops in South Korea for some 50 years. By the way, President Eisenhower didn't bail us out of Korea.

But the point is that we need to protect America's national security interest. It's not a matter of presence. It's a matter of casualties. We are succeeding. We are succeeding. And I unequivocally put my career and my political fortunes on the line and unequivocally said we're going to support this surge.

We're not going to talk about timetables or anything else; we're going to talk about winning and what's necessary to win. And I'm the only one that said that Rumsfeld had to go and the Petraeus strategy is the one that can succeed. That's because I have the experience, the knowledge, and the judgment.

And I believe that Americans will come home with honor. And the fact is -- and the fact is that it's not American presence, because America, as the world's superpower, is going to have to be a lot of places in the world. It's how they come home. And as president, I will follow in this tradition of sticking to my principles no matter what and bring our troops home with honor.

COOPER: Janet Hook from the Los Angeles Times -- Janet?

HOOK: OK. Governor Huckabee, we're going to shower you with questions now, OK?

HUCKABEE: Well, good. I'd like to be here tonight. Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

HOOK: President Bush once said he looked into the eyes of Russian President Vladimir Putin and found him to be, "very straightforward and trustworthy," and that he "got a sense of his soul." Senator McCain says he looks into Putin's eyes and he sees three letters -- KGB.

When you look at President Putin, what do you see?

HUCKABEE: Well, I don't know that I can read people's souls that well, and I've spent a lot of my life looking at people and talking to them. But I look at people's actions, because you can look into their eyes and their eyes can lie, but their actions don't.

And when people take actions that cause us to give concern to human rights violations, to oppression -- and I don't care what their eyes are saying -- their actions are speaking a whole lot louder than their eyes ever will. And we need to be looking at what people are doing, not just what they're saying, and recognizing that our foreign policy needs to reflect an extraordinary strength.

We need to make sure that the rest of the world knows that we're going to have a military that they're not wanting to engage for any purpose. And I do believe that President Reagan was right, you have peace through strength, not vulnerability. We've got to an Army that is well-staffed, well-trained, well- financed, and that is prepared for anything. And hopefully because it is so well-prepared, it never has to be used.

We can't continue to have one that is stretched and pulled, and particularly -- and I'm very sensitive to this having been a governor and watched some of our National Guard troops spend three out of five years in active duty -- if we're going to engage them, we have to make sure we've got enough troop strength of regular Army and our Air Force and Navy that we don't have to have extended deployments out of our guard and reserve units.

COOPER: Governor Huckabee -- excuse me -- Governor Romney, your thoughts on Vladimir Putin?

ROMNEY: Well, Putin is heading down the same road that we've seen authoritarian leaders in Russia and the former Soviet Union head down before, and it's very troubling. You see a leader who wants to reestablish Russia as one of the great powers of the world, potentially a superpower, potentially the superpower.

And he has -- the evidence of that, of course, is his elimination of the free press, his terrorizing and imprisoning political prisoners, and unexplained murders that are occurring. It's a -- it's another repressive regime, which he is overseeing. And the question is what do you in a circumstance like that and what it portends for the future of the world.

What we have today in the world is four major, if you will, strategies at play. One, they're the nations with the energy, like Russia. They're trying to use energy as a way to take over the world.

Then there's China, which is saying we're going to use communism, plus sort of a Wild West form of a free enterprise. We're going to give nuclear weapons -- or nuclear technology to the Iranians, we're going to buy oil from the Sudanese. You've got China. Then you've got al Qaeda, which says we want to bring everybody down.

And then finally there's us, the only major power in the world that says we believe in free enterprise and freedom for the individual. And this great battle is going on right now, and it's essential for us to strengthen other friends like ourselves, and to confront one by one these other strategies and help turn them towards modernity so that the world our kids inherent does not have to know war.

Will there be war? Of course there will always be terrible events in the world. But let's do everything in our power to keep war from occurring. Move these voices of moderation and having such strength in our own military that people never question our ability to respond. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Some questions about leadership now -- Janet Hook.

HOOK: I want to start with Senator McCain.

There's been a lot of discussion lately about the importance of leadership and management experience. What makes you more qualified than Mitt Romney, a successful CEO and businessman, to manage our economy?

MCCAIN: Because I know how to lead. I know how to lead. I led the largest squadron in the United States Navy. And I did it out of patriotism, not for profit. And I can hire lots of managers, but leadership is a quality that people look for. And I have the vision and the knowledge and the background to take on the transcendent issue of the 21st century, which is radical Islamic extremism.

I've been involved in every single major national security crisis since -- in the last 20 years. I'm proud to have played a role in those, and I'm proud to have played a role in making sure that we didn't raise the white flag and surrender in Iraq, as the Democrats wanted us to do and we would have done if we had set timetables for a withdrawal.

So, the fact is -- so the fact is that I have the qualifications and the knowledge and the background and the judgment. I don't need any on-the-job training. I had the great honor of serving this country in uniform for 22 years. I had the great honor of being inspired while I was in the prison camps of North Vietnam by the news of a governor and his wife who cared very much about those of us who were in captivity.

And when I came home, I was inspired by him, and I voted for him, and I supported him, and I was proud to be a leader in the Reagan revolution -- I mean, a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution, as we fought these wars together with unshakable courage and principle. And I'm prepared to follow in his tradition and in his footsteps.

COOPER: Governor Romney, I've got to let you in on this. Is Senator McCain a better leader in terms of the economy?

ROMNEY: No. He's a fine man and a man I respect, and I particularly respect his service in the military and his integrity and courage for our nation. I do believe that as people over the centuries have considered who ought to lead our country, they don't look to senators. They look to governors. And they look to governors because they have the experience of being executive leaders. They're actually leading something. They're making something happening. They're running something. They're leading an organization.

Senators and congressmen are fine people, but they're legislators. They sit in committees. They're committee chairs. And they call that leadership. In my view, the key leadership of my life was 25 years in the private sector, helping build business, turn a business around, start a business successfully, then going off to the Olympics, helping turn the Olympics around.

You don't do that as a manager; you do that as a leader. We shouldn't demean the people who are starting up small businesses, or middle-sized businesses, or people who run volunteer organizations. They're leaders. You can't go out and hire managers to run these things. These are people who are leading our economy. They help lift our country.

I think in order to have somebody fix our economy and strengthen it -- and it's our economy that's the root of our strength to provide for our military, for our families -- we have to have a strong economy -- you've got to have somebody who's actually done some work in the private economy, who understands how it works.

COOPER: Congressman...

ROMNEY: Then I went on to...

(APPLAUSE)

... to become a governor. I went on to become a governor. And as a governor, you're also a leader. You're the commander-in- chief of your National Guard. You're in charge of the state police. You're in charge, in my case, of tens of thousands of employees. You work together with the legislature to get the job done.

I'm proud of my experience as a leader, and I will use that leadership skill, which has honed my sense of judgment, temperament, wisdom, decision making capacity, and ability to deliberate on tough issues to make sure you get them right, to make sure that we have the right kind of leadership in the White House.

COOPER: Jim VandeHei has a follow-up question. We'll get to all of you, I promise.

VANDEHEI: Let's turn that around. Even today, Rudy Giuliani endorsed John McCain and said that there would be no better commander- in-chief. What makes you more qualified than John McCain to run the military as commander-in-chief?

ROMNEY: You know, I'm sure that are those who'd say, you know, to be the commander-in-chief you have to serve in the military. And one of the two great regrets I have in life is I didn't serve in the military. I'd love to have.

But I don't believe that you have to have served in the military to be a great commander-in-chief or to be a great foreign policy expert. I think you're going to see in our foreign policy and in the military, we're going to face challenges not like the challenges of old, where I'd liken it to playing checkers with the red side and the black side. It's more like three-dimensional chess. And you're going to have to have people of unusual capacity in bringing in the perspectives of the entire world and thinking about how you move your pieces and how you make changes that can strengthen America's position. You see, my objective is to keep America the strongest nation on Earth, economically, militarily, and, if you will, from the spirit of our people. I believe I can do that by virtue of a lifetime of experience leading, making decisions. But, you know, some of our great leaders -- look at Abraham Lincoln, was not a military expert, but turned out to be one of the best in the history of this country.

COOPER: I'm going to ask you all for follow-ups on this, but, Senator McCain, I just want to give you an opportunity to follow up on that. Is Governor Romney ready to be a military commander?

MCCAIN: Oh, I'm sure that, as I say, he's a fine man. And I think he managed companies, and he bought, and he sold, and sometimes people lost their jobs. That's the nature of that business.

But the fact is -- but the fact is we're at a time in our history -- we're in a time in our history where you can't afford any on-the- job training. And I believe that my experience and background qualifies me to lead. And that's why I've gotten the support of four former secretaries of state, two of them in the Reagan administration. That's why I've gotten the support of General Norman Schwarzkopf.

That's why I've gotten the support of over 100 retired Army generals and admirals. Literally every national security expert from the Reagan and other administrations are supporting my candidacy, including the former head of the Department of Homeland Security, my friend, Governor Tom Ridge, who believe that I have the qualities necessary to lead.

COOPER: Congressman Paul...

MCCAIN: I hope that some people judge me by those that are supporting me.

COOPER: Congressman Paul, what makes you capable of being a leader both on the economy and the military?

PAUL: OK. The Constitution is very clear that the president is commander in chief of the military, but the president is not the commander in chief of the economy or of the people. And when we get asked questions like how are you going to manage the economy, it's a reflection of conventional wisdom, but of a lot of lack of understanding of how the economy works.

The president is not supposed to manage and run the economy. The people are supposed to do this. The government is supposed to give them sound money, low taxes, less regulation. The people are supposed to run it. But here, we're assuming that the president is supposed to run the economy. We're not supposed to manage. We're not supposed to manage the people's...

COOPER: What role do you think the federal government should have -- I mean, does the federal government in your opinion have a role in stimulating the economy?

PAUL: Yes, by lower taxes and less regulation. They could do a whole lot by having sound money, where we don't print the money out of thin air. That causes the business cycle. That causes your bubbles. We're always dealing with the symptoms of the disease and never saying, "how did this come about?" You know, it comes about because we have a Federal Reserve that creates money and prints it out of thin air. There is a lot of malinvestment.

That's the most important thing to understand about the inflation of the monetary system, is the malinvestment. Then, later on, people suffer. You wipe out the middle class. But the evil of it all is the vehicle for financing wars that we shouldn't be in and a welfare state that we shouldn't be doing.

So, yes, we have a role to play, but it's a negative role. We want the people to be free. We don't want to manage the people and tell them how to live. And we need a commander-in-chief. But the most important thing as a commander-in-chief is not moving troops around, as much as it is having a wise foreign policy that doesn't get us involved in so many things that we get trapped in and we linger year after year. We've been doing this for so long.

And I like President Bush's argument that we have a humble foreign policy when he ran in 2000, and that we not be the policemen of the world.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Governor Huckabee, what makes you qualified on economic issues, on the military?

HUCKABEE: Well, first of all, let me say -- a while ago, you said you were going to shower me with questions, and I think then you turned the spigot off. So, I want to make sure I get a little time here to -- to get some time.

I want to just say that I agree with something that Governor Romney said. He talked about that governors are well prepared to be presidents. And I think he's right about that. And if that's the case, then I appreciate his endorsement, because I've been a governor and led a state longer than anybody running for president, Democrat or Republican. I've actually managed a government for 10 and a half years.

There's something a lot of people don't think about. When you're a governor, you actually manage a microcosm of the federal government. Every agency that you have at the federal level, you have at the state level. You are familiar with the whole game board. You understand what those agencies do, because you interrelate with them as a governor every single day.

But you know what the biggest frustration is? Washington doesn't understand how states operate, but states understand how Washington operates, and that's the fundamental difference. We understand, because unfunded mandates come stomping down on top of us, wrecking our state budgets, creating a complete imbalance of power, ignoring the 10th Amendment. And that's one reason that a lot of us are ready to say it's time for a new type of leadership that respects the 10th Amendment, that respects the fact that governors are out there fighting to try to build a decent education system, create jobs, make sure that we can give families a chance to have a decent way of living. And that we get governments off the backs of mothers and fathers who ought to be raising kids without a whole lot of government interference.

Those are the reasons that I think when a governor gets to the White House, he does understand that leadership is about looking at all of those issues and realizing that there is no such thing as an isolated issue. Education, health care, economic development -- they're all tied together, Anderson.

And this is something that I don't hear coming often from people, who, with all due respect, in the legislative branch, have the luxury of picking out particular issues that they can specialize in. Governors don't get to specialize. They have to be able to handle on any given day several dozen different issues and see how they integrate together for a strong economy, a strong sense of security. And that's how it works.

COOPER: You've said repeatedly you want a presidential candidate -- or you think voters want a presidential candidate, quote, "who looks more like the guy they work with than the guy who laid them off." What exactly do you mean by that? I mean, what about leadership, ability, experience?

HUCKABEE: That's exactly -- real leadership recognizes what your decisions do to people at the bottom. That's what I mean by it, Anderson. You can't have a president who sees a whole bunch of America as invisible. If you make a decision at the top and you don't understand how it affects the person all the way at the bottom, then you're not ready to lead. Leadership is about seeing the whole field.

HUCKABEE: And that's what I'm talking about. And that's why -- listen, our Republican Party is going to be in trouble if we creating policies and acting like we don't understand what those folks are feeling out there waiting the tables, handling bags, driving the trucks, and moving the freight around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: We only have about four minutes left. And this is a time restriction that all the campaigns put on us. We would be happy to have this debate go on all night long, but I know everyone has a lot ahead and a lot on their plates. So this is a question that will go to each of you. Each of you has about a minute to answer.

We'll start with Governor Romney.

Would, and if so, why -- why would Ronald Reagan endorse you? Would Ronald Reagan endorse you? And if so, why?

ROMNEY: Absolutely. Ronald Reagan would look at the issues that are being debated right here and say, one, we're going to win in Iraq, and I'm not going to walk out of Iraq until we win in Iraq.

Ronald Reagan would say lower taxes. Ronald Reagan would say lower spending. Ronald Reagan would -- is pro-life. He would also say I want to have an amendment to protect marriage. Ronald Reagan would say, as I do, that Washington is broken. And like Ronald Reagan, I'd go to Washington as an outsider -- not owing favors, not lobbyists on every elbow.

I would be able to be the independent outsider that Ronald Reagan was, and he brought change to Washington. Ronald Reagan would say, yes, let's drill in ANWR. Ronald Reagan would say, no way are we going to have amnesty again. Ronald Reagan saw it, it didn't work. Let's not do it again.

Ronald Reagan would say no to a 50-cent-per-gallon charge on Americans for energy that the rest of the world doesn't have to pay. Ronald Reagan would have said absolutely no way to McCain- Feingold. I would be with Ronald Reagan. And this party, it has a choice, what the heart and soul of this party is going to be, and it's going to have to be in the house that Ronald Reagan built.

COOPER: Your campaigns wanted this tight, so let's keep it tight.

Senator McCain, would Ronald Reagan endorse you?

(APPLAUSE)

MCCAIN: Ronald Reagan would not approve of someone who changes their positions depending on what the year is.

Ronald Reagan -- Ronald Reagan came with an unshakable set of principles, and there were many times, like when he had to deploy the (INAUDIBLE) cruise missile to Europe and there were hundreds of thousands of demonstrators against it, he stood with it. Ronald Reagan had a deal in Reykjavik that everybody wanted him to take, but he stuck with his principles.

I think he knows that I stick with my principles. I put my political career on the line because I knew what would happen if we failed in Iraq. I hope that the experience I had serving as a foot soldier in his revolution would make him proud for me to continue that legacy of sticking to principle and doing what you believe in, no matter what.

COOPER: Congressman Paul?

(APPLAUSE)

PAUL: I supported Ronald Reagan in 1976, and there were only four members of Congress that did. And also in 1980. Ronald Reagan came and campaigned for me in 1978. I'm not sure exactly what he would do right now, but I do know that he was very sympathetic to the gold standard, and he told me personally that no great nation that went off the gold standard ever remained great. And he was very, very serious about that. So he had a sound understanding about monetary policy. And for that reason, I would say look to Ronald Reagan's ideas on money because he, too, was concerned about runaway inflation and what it does to a country when you ruin the currency. And that's what's happening today. The dollar is going down and our country is going to be on the ropes if we don't reverse that trend.

COOPER: Governor Huckabee?

(APPLAUSE)

HUCKABEE: I think it would be incredibly presumptuous and even arrogant for me to try to suggest what Ronald Reagan would do, that he would endorse any of us against the others.

Let me just say this, I'm not going to pretend he would endorse me. I wish he would. I would love that, but I endorse him, and I'm going to tell you why. It wasn't just his specific policies, but Ronald Reagan was something more than just a policy wonk. He was a man who loved this country, and he inspired this country to believe in itself again.

What made Ronald Reagan a great president was not just the intricacies of his policies, though they were good policies. It was that he loved America and saw it as a good nation and a great nation because of the greatness of its people. And if we can recapture that, that's when we recapture the Reagan spirit.

It's that spirit that has a can-do attitude about America's futures and that makes us love our country whether we're Democrats or Republicans. And that's what I believe Ronald Reagan did -- he brought this country back together and made us believe in ourselves. And whether he believes in us, I hope we still believe in those things which made him a great leader and a great American.

(APPLAUSE)

COOPER: Gentleman, good luck to you all. Thank you very much for attending this debate tonight.

LEMON: And that was Anderson Cooper moderating the final debate among the Republican candidates before Super Tuesday. Tonight, the setting for the Democrats is the Kodak Theatre in Los Angeles. Senators Clinton and Obama with face off with our Wolf Blitzer moderating that one. It's at 8:00 p.m. Eastern right here on CNN. We'll replay it tomorrow at noon Eastern, 9:00 a.m. Pacific.

WHITFIELD: And just when you thought China's brutal winter couldn't get any worse, it actually does. And that spells more holiday misery for millions.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Right now it is 2:43 p.m. Here are three of the stories we're working on in the CNN NEWSROOM. A source confirmed for CNN that a senior al Qaeda commander has been killed in Pakistan. Abu Laith al-Libi was active in planning and training along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border. He is said to have ranked not far below Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.

A guilty plea today from a man accused of killing a hiker in the north Georgia mountains. Gary Michael Hilton pleaded guilty to the murder of Meredith Emerson. He also is a suspect in several other killings.

And prosecutors investigating the disappearance killing of an American teenage say they're looking into new evidence now. Natalee Holloway vanished in Aruba in 2005. Prosecutors say they're now investigating evidence from a Dutch reporter.

LEMON: Well, we have been replaying last night's debate but we're hearing stocks have turned around in a big way. Susan Lisovicz is at the New York Stock Exchange with the very latest on that.

Hi, Susan.

SUSAN LISOVICZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We've only got an hour and 15 minutes left in the session. So let me give you a market check. Yes, a surprising rally on this final day of a very tough month. Stocks opened sharply to the downside this morning. The Dow was down nearly 200 points at the low on a weak consumer spending report in December and a big jump in weekly claims for unemployment benefits.

But the bulls stepped in late morning on reports that a bailout for bond insurers is nearing reality. That niche in the financial sector is the latest casualty in the housing crisis because they ensure insure billions of dollars worth of mortgage backed securities.

MBIA, one of the big players in the field, posted a loss of $2.3 billion. That's a quarterly loss, by the way. The company's CEO told analysts in a conference call this morning, however, that he is confident of the firm's ability to raise more capital. So a lot of relief. Financial stocks leading the rally. MBIA shares up five percent. Ambac, which is another bond insurer, is up eight percent. Capital One is up seven percent.

And the Dow Industrials are up. Check out the big board. A nice reversal of fortune. Triple-digit gains. The blue chips up 127 points at 12,570. The Nasdaq is up 30 points or 1.25 percent. So a nice rally late in the session. And I'll have more on that story about bonds and the financial sector in the next hour. Don and Fred, back to you.

LEMON: Who are you? I mean, usually the bearer of bad news. Now you're -- you know, it's all roses these days.

LISOVICZ: That's why I was so eager to get in here and tell it to you, Don. Enjoy it while it lasts.

LEMON: All right. While it lasts. All right, thank you, Susan.

LISOVICZ: You're welcome.

WHITFIELD: Well, here is something that China really didn't need any more of, more snow. The country has not seen anything like this in 50 years. At least 63 people have died of the bitter cold. Highways and many rail lines are frozen solid, stranding millions of people hoping to get home for the lunar new year.

Well, for many migrant workers, it's the only time they get to see their families all year. Well now they're being urged to stay put until the weather clears. Something tells me it's going to be a long time before that happens.

Chad Myers in the Weather Center keeping a close watch on the weather, of course, in this country, but let's talk about China and how this is really a brutal winter for those folks.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Well, it is. And China's roughly the exact same size as the United States. So to say, is the weather bad in China, that would say is the weather bad in the United States. Probably somewhere, but it's probably good someplace else.

Where most of the people actually live, in the southeastern China, temperatures are above freezing today for the first time in a while. There's more cloud cover in the north up into the Hunan province. As we start to move up further into the mountains, temperatures are, obviously, below freezing and nothing melting up there at all and actually more snow is in the forecast for those people there. So this has been kind of a brutal couple days there. Almost a week now going on and it's not getting a whole lot better.

We will see severe weather, though, into Baton Rouge, into New Orleans today. Look at this line of storms, all the way from Mississippi, all the way down through Louisiana. Baton Rouge, you're right in the middle of this tornado watch box. So you are, New Orleans. A lot of the festivities are being canceled in New Orleans for today. Then back up into Jackson, some rain showers. Farther to the north, heavy, heavy snow. That snow will be into St. Louis tonight. Could be many inches on the ground by morning -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: Wow. All right. Thanks so much. A big brrr out there, Chad.

All right, Don.

LEMON: Thank you, Fred. Britney Spears' latest post-midnight run to the hospital. Look at that. With a huge police escort.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: All right, everybody, so this is what it's come to. For the second time in a month, pop star Britney Spears is in a Los Angeles hospital. She was taken there overnight with a vast -- this is it -- police escort, keeping the paps at a distance. CNN's Kareen Wynter is live in L.A. with the very latest on this.

I said, has it come to this? And, really, not making fun of this. I'm hearing they had to close airspace. Has she been committed? Is this what the final straw in getting her to go to the hospital?

KAREEN WYNTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Don, I just want to say how ironic it is that we're ending the month the way we started off. And it's so unfortunate. January 3rd, you remember that day, that's when Britney Spears was first hospitalized. She was sent to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. At that time it had to do with a custody dispute.

Well, this time, and this is what some celebrity news web sites are reporting. We have not, not been able to confirm as yet. But it was reportedly her psychiatrist who stepped in, who staged this huge, dramatic intervention. Even going as far as working with local law enforcement officials to get them in there, to avoid the media circus that we saw the first time around, and to take her here to UCLA Medical Center.

We've been here all morning long. And as you can imagine, Don, the hospital, they're not releasing anything in terms of a condition or a statement on Spears. But it's been widely reported that she's under a 72-hour psychiatric hold. It's called a 5150 here in California, just to get a little technical for you.

And basically that's when a law enforcement official or maybe a health expert deems that you may be a threat to yourself or to others around you and they say, hey, we have to kind of hold you for a certain time and observe you. And so that may be what's going on, observation, maybe some tests. No confirmation from the hospital -- Don.

LEMON: Yes, and it's probably sort of a procedure in order to get some sort of control on the situation in order to have her go in and get some help. You have to follow certain steps because she is an adult in charge of her own life. OK. So what are we going to see tonight, Kareen, on "SHOWBIZ TONIGHT"?

WYNTER: I'm sure you've already guessed. Coming up, a lot more on Britney Spears. The Spears' crisis. Is she, Don, in fact, in danger? And we'll talk a little bit more about this second hospitalization. How's it going to affect the entire custody battle that's currently going on between Spears and her ex-husband Kevin Federline. It will all be on "SHOWBIZ TONIGHT," later on 11:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific. You do not want to miss that show -- Don.

LEMON: All right. Kareen Wynter, thank you very much for that.

WYNTER: Sure.

WHITFIELD: All right. A job offer leads to robbery? And you won't believe that was stolen from this man. Police in India say he's far from the only victim.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Police in India swooped down on hospitals and private homes, busting up an organ-transplant racket that has sold up to 500 kidneys over the past nine years.

CNN's Sara Sidner has the story of one man who bears the scars.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Twenty-eight-year-old Shakil is recovering now, but winces as he recounts the day he says his kidney was forcibly cut from his body.

SHAKIL, VICTIM (through translator): Two armed guards took me to another room. They took blood samples, forced me onto a stretcher and then they gave me an injection. When I woke up, I had pain in my waist and I was dizzy.

SIDNER: Shakil's family sits with him, shattered. He is the family's eldest son and only breadwinner. Now he cannot work.

ABDULLAH, VICTIM'S FATHER (through translator): I feel helpless. When I heard what happened to him, I just felt so upset. What can I do now? Our lives are ruined. Is this my fate?

SIDNER: The two men lying in hospital beds next to Shakil share a similar story. Police say they all bear the scars of a vicious scheme to harvest kidneys from the poor and sell them to wealthy patients.

SALIM, VICTIM (through translator): I had no idea. I was tricked.

SIDNER: All say they were approached by a man who promised them a well-paying job, but instead brought them to a home on Gurgaon, on the outskirts of Delhi. Police raided the home, discovered the men and an operating room. Two patients from the U.S. and Greece allegedly awaiting transplants were detained along with the doctor.

MAHENDRA LAL, GURGAON POLICE COMMISSIONER: He has confessed that he did help perform approximately 500.

SIDNER: In how much time?

LAL: In a period of 10 years or so.

SIDNER: Police say the mastermind is this man, Dr. Amitt Kumar. He is now missing and a manhunt is underway. Under Indian law, the sale of human organs is illegal, but India has a flourishing black market. There have long been reports of poor Indians selling their kidneys, or in some cases having the organs forcibly removed. Back at the hospital, Shakil's father went. This time in anger.

ABDULLAH: I might be old, but if that doctor were in front of me, I'd kill him. He's ruined my son's life.

SIDNER: The surgeon now looking after the victim says, despite the accusations, the surgery on these men was done exceptionally well.

DR. SANJAY NARULA, SURGEON (through translator): The surgery has been done professionally. There's no doubt. It has been done by somebody who's qualified and who seems to know his job.

SIDNER: For now, in Indian, organ donation is restricted to blood relatives and close personal friends leaving thousands of people desperate for kidneys and perhaps encouraging a thriving illegal market. But this latest case has shocked lawmakers into action. The health ministry now says it's working on new legislation to stop the trade of organs here.

Sara Sidner, CNN, New Delhi.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: And the next hour of the NEWSROOM starts right now.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxantshop.com