[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] But, first, I would love your reaction to some of today's news given this rare opportunity to have you on the show. You have called the issues with the Obamacare Web site a, quote, "practical reality check" on President Obama's ambitions. What do you mean by that?
[Charles Krauthammer, Syndicated Columnist:] Well, I mean, the centerpiece of the liberal enterprise as portrayed by Obama, he is a very ideologically ambitious president. And he sees himself as sort of the anti-Ronald Reagan, beginning a new kind of liberalism and adding, you know, the most important element of social Democratic governance which is health care. And that's been his objective. This would be his legacy. If he can't get the thing to work, and it collapses, I think it will jeopardize liberal enterprise, the expansion of the welfare state for a generation to come. And what we heard today, the interview that you just had, with that lady in Chicago, is even worse. It isn't just technical issues. It is the fact that the government, as we heard, mass decided if you have your insurance and you like it, the government will decide that it is junk. The government will decide you have no idea how to decide on your own what you ought to do. A kind of crushing paternalism which I think is quite shocking and it is a symbol of this entire enterprise. Again, if that, if people rebel against that, they are upset of the breaking of the promise on the paternalistic imposition, that could really undermine the liberal enterprise.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] And Charles, what are you saying to Democrats who pushed back and say at least Obama's trying to do something about the tens of millions of uninsured and trying to improve care? The Republican Party hasn't really done anything along those lines.
[Krauthammer:] The problem with what Obama did is that he had a discreet problem, the underinsured and uninsured. And I believe a decent society ought to look after them and to find a way to do it. But instead of discreetly attacking that problem, what he decided to do is to take advantage of that and to completely remake one-sixth of the American economy. There is no reason whatsoever that the woman you interviewed in Chicago would have to lose her insurance and change her plan because some experts in Washington have decided that there is a better way and what she decided when you are trying to insure the uninsured. It is an example of liberal overreach. Instead of addressing a problem discreetly, narrowly, they decided to review one- sixth of the economy that's what you are getting the pushback, generally from American people and specifically from conservatives whose warrant against this for 4 12 years.
[Tapper:] Let's turn to your book which is a collection of articles and essays you published throughout your career from your early days. Believe it or not, for some viewers, the "New Republic," and then on to the "Time" magazine and then "the Washington Post," you coined the term, maybe a decade ago about, called Bush derangement syndrome, your psychiatrist, an acute onset of paranoia and otherwise normal people and reaction to the policies, the presidency. Name the existence of George W. Bush, you say. There is, without it seems to be, an Obama derangement syndrome as well. Do you think that one is any more acute than the other? Have you been to be able diagnose more cases the other?
[Krauthammer:] Well, to start with, it was largely tongue-in-cheek giving it a serious diagnosis. As you know, when you try ironing in journalism, also the iron is missed. I mean, I actually had a phrase. It came from Howard Dean and I write about it in the column. Howard Dean had been on a
[Tapper:] It is a great book of some of your most provocative and interesting essays. One final question, Charles, in 1994 you wrote a column about how voters loathe politicians. And I'm wondering now if almost 20 years after you wrote that column if you think things are the same, better, or worse.
[Krauthammer:] I think that the things are worse. The government the people are more divided ideologically and part of the reason I wrote the book and part of the reason I included a lot of the politics in there, I do originally intended writing about, you know, the wonderful elegant and beautiful things in life, poetry and music, all the columns on that. But in the end you have to get the politics right. And even though we despise and often despair about the state of the practice of politics and don't like the Congress, and don't like the process, in the end you have to get the politics right because if you don't, all the other things, things that matter will be swept away. And that's why we have to include in our own life, staying involved in politics even though it is a rather grubby and grasp occupation. And it is essential a homage to politics and all of its checkered elements.
[Tapper:] All right. The book is called "things that matter, three decades of passions, past times and politics." Charles Krauthammer, thank you so much. Congratulation and best of luck to the book.
[Krauthammer:] Thank you very much.
[Tapper:] Let's check in with our political panel in the greenroom. Ana Navarro, a state lawmaker in Nevada assemblyman Jim Wheeler, he is now apologizing after saying he would hold his nose and vote to re- institutionalized slavery if that's what his constituents really wanted. So, I guess there is such thing as being too responsive to voters, Ana.
[Ana Navarro, Republican Strategist:] Well, Jake, I think maybe he should do less holding of his nose and more holding of his tongue. You know, obviously this is a very stupid thing. I'm glad Ryan, the governor of Nevada, has condemned it strongly.
[Tapper:] Stick around. More of the LEAD coming up.