these final straw. >> what, then, as a culture, a society, what is our responsibility, knowing this, what should we be doing? we can't remove all adverse social conditions, although we should work on that. what about our culture? why does america, related to this, the fact that america is the most violent developed nation on earth by far. body elseven comes close. why is that? do we have bad social conditio? no, but our culture has always glorified manliness with a gun, manliness with me, you are messinwith the ultimate cause i am going to plug you. deeply held cultural beliefs, you're going to have huge

problems. what can we do? we should begin deconstruction some of these things that lead to problems. address social issues and help people deal with the psychological problems. we have to address things in several ways. >> before we ask questions, you guys must be great teachers, do you get that sense? i am serious. i woul love to take a history class from one of you too. you have written 24 books, this is your 24. is that a balancing act? >> tha is a tough question. i am not a great teacher. they are related to each other.

sometimes faculty members make it seem as if they are so related, more than they are. there's always tension, where you put your time. if you areood in the classroom, you have to put in the time, down with students, comparing individually with them, all the tngs that go with that. that takes time awafrom the writing. they seek each other in terms of -- as john and i both care about to our readers are, we are both trying desperately not to just right for narrow academic audiences, that is something that does work for you, you are trying to think about someone who is not quite as the first in the subject, how do i make this explicable and understandable land at the same time try not to sacrifice, at some analytical

rigor, try not to sacrifice what you want to say. that is a trick. that is, in to teaching and wring. >> ilended teaching and writing. especially interested in addressing groups, speaking to oups outsidehe academic community, there was a young professor in the 1970s, i spoke to him at 150 illinois communities over the years. i currently speak odime novel desperadoes. sometimes the feedback that you get from peopl the question you learn to expec from people is helpful. even in talking about this topic, talking about illinois outls i got out to talk about them in various communities started a few years ago, i was finishing this book, and a

couple different occasions, after talking about things, somebody downstate, near st. louis, was talking about a place wher another gunight takes place in the book, in calhoun county, in ctain areas, at illinois and mississippi come together and after i was done speaking, a 93-year-old man comes of to be to shake my hand, said i think this was a wonderful talk and that wanted to tell you i own the land where the gun fight took place. not at the time because it took place earlier but he bought it from the guy who owned it, he heard about the gun fight where they killed another share for supposedly did from the actual owner, from of e other locals when he was a young y. i interviewed him, got more information for the ball.

sometimes people with a particular interest can contribute to that also. it is always exciting to me. >> another organizer, after i finished the book, in trinidad, colorado, in southeast colorado, i went to the historical society and there was old woman running the place, i mentioned that i just finish this book, she looked at me and said i dress up and go into the schools and play mother jones. then she points to her husband, more decrepit than she was, his mother spoke from a railroad car out there, she never heard a woman's where so much. >> before we take some questions i must tell you these books, there is nothing more exciting to me. scholarly sound, narrative

nonfiction. to not be somehow put off by the notes and index and other things in the back. these two are good reads. these are just wonderful reads. i am not at the history department, i am or sure all that stuff is right too. i like reading it. you get a sense they can pull off a good narrative here. we wou love to take some questions. stepped up to this microphone. you will be next, young man. >> about the media picking what we give our attention to as crime, the memorial day massacre, in comparison withhe valentine's day massacre, i think this ito protect the capitalists and the tribune would be an example of that.

i disagree that there are good reasons for incarcerating people, better rsons noto because i don't bieve in locking up the innocent. but jails are use towork as the money draft and blood tax to fight wars and works calls -- cause criminal enterises that cause more damage than that crimals do. use therame innocent people in order to keep an americ death squad. in order to keep going the american death squad which affect american a international forei policy. question. >> now is the question. >> was it really joh mallinger

who was killed? >> good question. >> the identification of the eye, there was not that of john mallinger. >> i scott up when someone dies, it actually changes on death. ther have been books written, this is part of the legend, that it wasn't john malnger who was killed. john sayles the film maker, even wrote a short story with that premise, doubling in hollywood. there was a very bad movie a few years ago starring -- i forget, with that premise that the lender escaped. ose who were close to him, who had every reason to think it was him, his family, for example, no one at the time, none of those folksobjected, none of them said it wasn't on villager who

was lying there. he looked not as good as he might have after plastic surgery and being shot four times and so on but the evidence is that it was dylan jetblue very good evidence that it was. >> i've been to ask one question, i you excit to have th book come out at the same time that johnny depp is coming? some way you can put johnny depp, starring in a new movie? >> that gets more @ttention for the book which is grea >> we will see. happens -- i was aiming r e same thing they work, the 70 fifth anniversary of the ledger access. everyone shows up at the

eater. >> the maxwells still a suits, went to prison. use it really a victim? are you a victim of your environment? or put someone in the same situation, where his jeans controlled enough? >> wouldn't take much for me to become a criminal. >> everybody has their own complex configuration of those things, not only genetic predisposition, but also psychological issues, they will differ from person to person. you take people and put them in the same kinds of pressures d cultural norms and you are going to get different behaviors but that doesn't mean ey are not

responding to severe pressures to do what they do and be who they are. we need to comprehend that so that we have better justice administration more effective. >> there is no doubt that different people would react differently. i dot mean to sidestep the question but another way to think of it is in terms of contingency. it is not as if someone decides to be a celebrity criminal. it is a slippery slope. circumstances, there are circumstances under which some people would take the first step and the first step having been taken, there is a logical second step, circumstances created in the second step, he commits the first prime -- at can't imagine hitting an old man t take his moy. but maybe if i imagine a little

harder, there would be some circumstance under which that would happen but i don't think i could do that. i could imagine ifomething happened that put me in jail for so long and the guyho was probably more responsible than the hires a lawyer and get off with two year dillinger makes a clean breast of it, it will go well, he gets 9 years, his buddy gets a lawyer and serves two. you can imagine that circumstance, up one leading to anotr, earning a living was very difficult. you see what i am saying? i don't mean to say any of us would do it, but a lot of us could do it. >> that is the point. >> my question is an offoot to what we are talking about phobos maxwells a

external circumstance. religion, i was wondering if either of these folks had any organizedeligion or anything like that in their lives? >> good question. >> and discussed that background for the maxwells, they had religious protestant parents, they were in a predominantly religious environment ithe home. there were other factors involved, even too complex for me to say, let me say this, because i talked about it a number of times to classes and groups, there are other ramifications besides the justice issue, this matter tha mode solarship is showing that we are much more driven to be the way w are than

previously assumed. for example, think of the religious system that we l know about, chrtianity, islam, which have stated it is a matter of free choice, you either choose to be follower of jesus or you go to hell, that is your choice, or with his long, you choose to be a follower of the koran or you are going to go to hell. you make a choice and you're totally responsible. really. the same scholarship is showing us that, in fact, people who are islamic are ismic for a lot of cultural and social reasons. that is why islamic people or christian, they come out of a christian culture, psychological issues that blend with christnity nicely and if tha is true, to what extent, what happens to this issue of if i

choose wrongly i get an edge forever and ever in a bad place, when in fact it is really question of course, of culture, of pressure and so forth. those religion attacks were deved long before w had a notion about those pressures on our lives, on our choes, so now it is creating an issue. no wondethe concept of heal in christianity, in terms of the number of people who buy it, every time i look at some statistics, u.s. catholic, it goes further down. >> what about dillinger? >> he was raised 8 churchgoer in indianapolis, the family moved from his midteens, he was still

attending them,he same story that we got out of prison at age 30, 1933, one of the first things he did was go with his father to services. the pastor, who was a quaker, delired a sermon titled the prodigal son and dillinger wept through this whole thing and went up to her and shook her hand and said you don't know how much good your sermon did meet and within a month he is out there. >> time for one last question. >> we are missing the robin hood quality that makes these characters so interesting. even bonnie and clyde for the same way. those of us in chicago can remember, good stories about what outapone did. >> soup kitchens. >> as partf their appeal. >> this is more true with some

lawbreakers than others. another one of my books, the or of small-town arica deals with a robin hood type figure idealized by his local community downstate during the roaring '20s, was a confirmed bootlegger and quote who beat people up and committed murder an so forth. most of the locals ntinue to idealize him precisely because of this robin hood factor, all sorts of storieq developed that he was giving money here and taking care of the for and doing other things like fat,hat is an expression of what people want to see in some figure. a figure comes before the public and the public at a particular time wants to see certain things, they invest certain things in that figure, it is true of these guys also but especially true among my books. >> i couldn't agree more.

there is a mythical pattern we plugged into, the historian talks about this in books that he wrote several years ago, bandits on social levels, the robin hood figure, the myth of the robin hood figure who comes to intervene, opposes the normal laws of the state for the community and brings a highe moral law. ople believe that some. they areot usually so naive, they believe it much more selectively. the lender is a good example. i don't think many people, just a few years later, pretty boy floyd, weaving and $1,000 bill fort for family, people believthat about dillinger, it is not that he robbed from the rich and gave to the poor, i is

that he robbed from the rich. there was anger in those guns. that is a big part of the story. >> my book is called dime novel desperadoes because my two guys also ended up being the heroes anti heroes of a dozen dime nove, the outlawed became a hero for the first time in eighteen 80 one. jesse james, billy the kid, the maxwell brothers, very few other outlaws er made it into dime novels, stories inhich they became heroes. it shows the pubc ambivalence for those figures, wanting to find resistance to authority. most people felt put upon by a for eddie and here was somebody willing to stand up and saying he were not going to shove me around and they admired that and all of a sudden they are in books that are selling like hotcakes across the united states. >> i am sor i never had the opportunity to be in one of your

classes. what a joy to have you bring these committees are two fine, fine books,? [applause] >> next, author adam lukoil wrap up coverage of the chicago tribune lit fest with a discussion on the creation of the new deal, his latest book is merriman curhan ford. merriman curhan ford fear: fdr's inner circle and the hundred days that created dern america". >> it doesn't get any better than this. i was talking with my dear friend about the origin of the new deal. it doesn't get better thanhat. we aually met as interns at

time magazine. i am a graduate of hvard law school, has gone on to be an educatiol forum where now on the editorial board on the new york times. has also -- this is his third book. the last one was about ebay and before that, american ferr a book we wre together about mayor richard dale in a certain way i have lived with this beautiful book "nothing to fear: fdr's inner circle and the hundred days that created modern arica" about fdr and his first and ys. so adam, the book has extraordinary resonance. past the hundred days for

president obama, but close to it, when you conceive of this book comedy you foresee the resonance this book would have? >> no, i didn't. but as you know, we are riding american faroe because we were looking for a book idea in chicago, there hasn't been a big book about mayor daley. you don't always think about timeliness. in this case i started writing the book in the middle of the bush administration. the reason was, if you recall, everyone was fighting over the new deal. it was the fault line american politics. president bush began his second term with a promise that he was going to work to undo social security which was the crown jel of the new deal. i like writing history that speaks to today. why not go back to the origins of the new deal, see whyt came

about, w it seemed necessary and that could inform the debate what is going on. as it turns out, very lucky timing, we ended up getti a democratic president, very charismatic like fdr, very ambitious for his first huned days, there were a lot of parallels between the fdr story and the beginning of the world story. >> as you think about the beginning of the fdr story, can you set the stage for what it was like, what was ameri like? >> one of the parallels, that times e not that great right now and keep looing to the current president to do something about that, as bad as things are, they were so much worse in 1933 when fdr was sworn in for the first time. in many ways was the absolute

death of the great depression, e stock market had fallen 85%. unemployment was -- there were red lines in the big cities, near the revolting, actually planting crops in many ses, crop prices were so low, there was no social safety net so every bank in the country had been closed under a state bank holiday, people were losing their life savings in bank failures, so things were really grim. >> you have called the new deal, in a wonderful book, a third revolution. can you explain hou that idea came to you? >> or. you uld argue there have been three great revolution in

american history, the american revolution that separated us from england, the second civil war which redefin what it meant to be an american citizen, uniform andard across the country that southern states, this was very different after fdr. the reason i say this is under herbert hoover, the federal government had been remarkably small, and believably small. the federal government made any protective the country militarily and delivered the mail. all the other things we think about the federal goverent doing, regulatinthe stock market, making sure there is a safety net in place, the litany of the regulatory statement didn't exist so fdr created that, defined a new

responsibility, this was the third revolution because americans are different. >> the subtitle of your book, a hundred days that created modern erica, i am just wondering at what point did you realize the inner circle of fdr was so critical to the new deal? to the making of the new deal? >> when we read about the new deal in hool, it is very much cold as an fdr story. there is a predispositionn american history to look to presidents and great men and occasionally when as being the moving forces. i sternly fought of fdr's inaugural address, the only thing we have to fear is fear t inaugural address, the only thing we have to fear is fear

itself, is great leadersh. h was tha master of ceremoni, it was really the pele around him, who were developing the programs, who were coming to him and saying we need this kind of agricultural plan, we needhis kind of welfare plan, and he picked and chose among them but it became clear that a group of people, men and one woman were in many ways the real story behind the hundred days. fdr was very important, we nt to bring back into history. >> they are not depicted as a monolith. there was some conflict in this group. can you talk a little bit about the leadersp invoed in managing that conflict? >> it is inevitable that when you write history it is through the prism of the time you are

living in. in the bush years, we have a president who really said that he was not oy did the cider, but he had very clear views on everything and surrounded with people who shared his ideology. what was fascinating to me and a very positive thing was to see that fdr approached gernment completely differently. he was a progressive that had the views we associate with the new deal but he at other views. he was very concerned about budget deficits, he was a fiscal conservative and he liked to have people around him who reflected the contradictions in his own life. he had three big progressive, the agriculture secretary, harry hopkins, the first federal relief administrator and frances perkins, the labor secretary, reflected his desire to help the victims of the depression but at the same time he had the budget

director, louis douglas, one of the most conservative democrats in congress, maybe the most conservative, who did not believe there was any money for the program and he was going to ght progressives to and nail and assassinating that fdr wanted douglas in the mix, elevated the budget to the cabinet level and when you look at the bills that emerge during the 100 days, solving the b@nking process that had to be done, the next thing fdr did, when he waited to choose the problem, he cut the federal budgety 25%. th is not what we associatd with the new deal but that was part of h thinking. he wanted people around him t reflect the complexities of his own mind. >> i have to talked about my favorite character in the book. she went to my alma ter. frances perkins. >> an amazing figure.

when i started the book i knew she was the first woman cabinet member i honestly thought she must not have done much of importance becauswhy is that the only thing we know about her? they also named the department of labor after her. she was probably a jackie robinson figured. what was remarkable is looking closely at the period, she was the drivi force behind so much of the new deal. later on, beyond the 1 days, she chaired the commission that created social security, and argued with fdr even when he was govdrnor, that there needed to be social security. during the00 days when you look at who was arguing, we needed a welfare program for all those people on the bread lin who were starving, who sa we needed a public-works program, that was frances perkins. she was in remarkable positn to do that because she had an amazing life, she was born into a conservative family in

massachusetts, they didn't really want her in college, her father didn't want her to take a job, she took a job as a teacher, she took good job teaching outside ccago but she also came in on weekends and vacati time and work with jane addams and she really bame a reformer in chicagond went on to new york and became an expert on factory safety and one day she was having tea at a wealthy friend's house and theutler came in and said there's a fire outside, so frances perkins personally uitnessed the fire, sama 136 when in jump to their death to escape the flames and she became the leader inw the 1t their death to escape the flames and she became the leader

she became the leader in factory reform after that. she pushed for the values we associate with the new deal. she wasn't sure she wanted to go to the cabinet, she had a complicated personal life, people thought she was unmarried. she thought she was a spinster. she was married, had a daughter, her husband was mentally ill, institutionalized. she was eager to keep that private, was excited about going to washiton. she said to fdr, i will go if you promise to sport this laundry list of ogressive values a specific proposa. he did promise, and just abou all of them became law, they are now what we associate with the new deal. she is a pivotal figure. >> another one of my favorites, terry adkins.

>>nother wonderful guy. it was sad for me to b -- working -- looking athe current cabinet, the were just not people like that. hopkins graduate from collagen in iowa at the age of 22, moves to the lower east side, the poorest part of the country, densely emigrant pact area, he becomes a social worker, helps combat tuberculosis wch was a major problem, then he heads up new york's first welfare progr which fdr put in place, a very progressive idea. when fdr creates the federal welfare program, hawkins becomes the relief administrator. his whole life was about social work and helping the poorest people. it is a model we don't associate with top positions in the

federal government. >> talk a ltle bit about that. what was that? >> the vietnamese-backed story was sort of jockeying for me to realize this was someone f not only @rought in to the cabinet t fdr loved -- said beginning, douglas s his favorite. he told people the first couple months of his administration he hoped douglas would succeed him as president. knowing that, iwas remarkable to see he was not only very conservative, he came fm a family of -- in arizona, who badly mistreated their workers, his father an uncle, responsible for something called disney bifurcation, where they rounded up all of the union organize who would come to their copper mines and all o the sympathetic workers at gunpoint, put the on railroad cars, drove them into the

desert, left to them potentially to ie of thst or starvation, saved by thearmy. it was a terrible incident in erican history. that was douglas'sackground. his father, his uncle, influences on him, very surprising to have douglas in the mix. one of the real tensions in the booknd in the 100ays is the nstant clash between douglas and franc perkins. frances perkins is saying we need public works programs and as soon as she convinces fdr, douglas sneaks in and says we don't have the money for it. in her oral history, she describes how she outmaneuvered him. the great example of this is in the big bill, tion industrial recovery ac one thing frances perkins said in all these meetings, creating crazy schemes, government business partnerships, people struck it down quickly. frances perkins said i just want to make sure there's a large

public works for unemployed people. there wasn't money for it. frances perkins convinces fdr to put $3.3 billion of public works into the national recovery act. as she tells him her oral history, about to be introduced in congress, she looks at the draft and she see that public-works provision has been taken out and she knows douglas, she call around a confirms it was douglas and she sayto fdr i need to meet with you, she sets up a meeting with him and she talks to the secretary, make sure that douglas's meeting with fdr earlier that day, she has the second meeting, she knows fdr is often open, speaks last. shea schedule the meeting with fdr after douglas has left and has a range f senator wagoner d spoored the bill, very important new deal figure, to be

waiting by the phone. perkins convinces fdr, you have to put $3.3 million back in, douglas has schemes separat out. now is the time, when she convinces him, she gets fdr to call wagoner and fdr says francis convinced me you have got to keep it in. that tension between perkins and douglas was a rich part of the 100 days story. >> which remindse of that great story, cabinet officia were really obscure, no special plans made for them. shea fudge through the mud. >> it is remarkable considering the pub and ceremony associated with the federal government, i said the book with frances perkins pointing to the cabinet

labor secretary, there are no more hotel rooms, she knows someone who runs a hotel, gets her own roof, no one tells her how to get to the inauguration, so they g to a church service, and everyone who knows how to get to the capital goes, i begin the book with this early on, her and henry wallace are waiting outside th church and no one has told them how to get to the inauguration, they have to hail a cab, the cat gets stopped in traffic at its ends up that perkins and wallace, two of the most important new deal figures have to run through the m, get to the inauguration platform, fdr is halfway through his speech, thedidn't hear him say the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. that continues theollowing

monday, the first day perkins i supposed to ta over the 0 labor department, no one has coulter where is. she gets the address. there is a gre sce of calling up, saying she is coming out and the secretary did n want to leave, he thought she would go back to new york, she was not going to start so soon, she literall has to show up and she has someone get boxes for the outgoingabor secretary, we have to start packing these boxes. it is a fun, colorful htory but it gives you thedea that they were alst kids pting on a show. they were just winging it in a little ways creating a climate about huge bills thateshape the entire governme. that was fine because it as all being me from scratch. >> henry wallace was a

fascinating character. you told us about him. >> i like the later henry walle who ran for president in 48 as a real progressive. the 100 days, a farmer, fresh off the farm from iowa, such a remarkable figure, a former journalist, third person in his family, third-generation to run the family farm, his great farm experiment, he was one of the earliest the leaders in hybridization and sold the country the importance of hybrid seeds, and very politically active. he is writin these articles, doing experiments, and one thing he did cometely on the side of, when he couldn't get companies to make hybrids seeds and he thought they were important, he proved they were bette, he and a couple of friends meet in the house and

start a little hybr seed company, that seed company for, in 1987, sold for $4 billion. his heirs got $2.7 billion from that seed company. one little thing he didn the side. he was a remarkable guy. >> criminall >> kind of lost to history. wooley was closest to fdr during the 100 days, his face of the cover of time magazine, he was a speechwriter, he was fdr's closest aide. he wasn't so ideological, it was really about getting the bills drafted, creating the statemts, as long as the bill was introduced in coress and he becomes a casualty as a number of other people do. he and fdr don't see eye to eye

on what his role should be and the ends up leaving after the 100 days. at first he helps fdr and then becomes very embittered, he moves to the right and when it came time for me to writ the book, hoover instipution, which is very ironic, he was a goldwater republican and fierce critic of the new deal. he was one of the five most important figures but not really remembered that way. >> the surprise was, what else surprised you? >> it is always -- for a historian, it is always fun to read papers, leaf through them because you never know what you're going to find. the ball was kicked in iowa. i was really ierested. i really wted to figure out --

i decided the key to this would be her daughters, she had one daughter. e dghter was at the inauguration. the daughter was there throughout her entire career. i wanted to see what she had to say. she was not alive. i talked to her son several times. i was looking for an interview. then one day i find an interview with her accomplice. it was in the file, i drive up and, very exciting, i hope she will describe the scene of the operation, subtleties of her character. fillut the form. actually bringing this folder,

th interview had been done by someone who started and gave it up. gave many interviews that she did for the book i get the interview. it is a historian's dream. it turns out she is completely crazy. her father was institutionalized and there may be some -- she did her mother, they called her the dragon lady, and she was enrolled in first grade her moer tol two women who ran her school not to teach her how to read and on and on. it was a disappointment. but it was actually helpful because we're getting to the end of herife. very conflted about the way she led her life. she was responsible for social

security, public works program, she also felt very bad about how her daughter's life, her father wasn't able to help, and regretted some of it. itive some excitement to her. >> we would love to have questions. >> thank you for your wonderful book. >> thank you f your wonderful book nixonland. >> right after t election of barack obama i happened to be iving on west branch, iowa.

i went there and asked the same question iould like to ask you, which is, is it true that fdr refused to meet sidh hoover, basically announced with his economic policies were going to be before his inauguration, with the intention of wraing the bad economy around his neck? >> there is a bit of debate among historianabout who to blame for that. there is plenty of blame on both sides. hoov proposed to cooperate and wrote a letter to republican senators saying i hope he aees because i told him we were going to cooperate on abandoned in 95% of the new deal program. hoover was trying to make cooperation on his own. that fdr did n want to cooperate becausee did not want his own adminisation to

begin such an unpopular president as the hoover was and also he rightly thought why start with a more republican congressman in place? why not waiting to inauguration day? it will be much more democratic coneress. not exactly a rubber stamp, the more enthusiastic for legislation so he did delay a lot of it, it was strategic but it was in no way personal remark by any judge. fdr's open mindedness was reflected in the fact that the first bill of 1 hundred days, fifteen major laws were passed in a flurry of legislation. the first bill was this bill at saved the banking system, largely drafted in the treasury department. fdr was happy to work with them. they were happy to work with fdr because they -- they were le to do pgressive things. i think it is true they didn't

cooperate. i don't blame fdr for that. >> i have a two part question. could you describe a little bit about the motivations of roosevelt to run f the presidency? if you talk abou the backdrop of his getting into office. talk about that first election, and the second question, what was the role of the media in shaping the new deal? >> two great qstions. i think fdr is someone who loved to lead. he was a cousin of the roosevelt. the roosevelt name was very elevated at that point. people were looking to him when he became governor, they assumed it was likely that he would becomepresident. what held him back for a lot of his political career was he had polio, he was disabled. after he got in he didn't think

-- he had to be talked into it by eleanornd lewis poll. to persuade him that he was able to do something as geling as run f governor. part of ithe was a natural born leader, very charismatic figure, likeo be in charge, i think the polio had a big effect. frances perkins talks about this in her oral history, which is 5,000 pages, it isorth rummaging through a little bit. she talks about, she knew fdr, they were social trends, traveled in the same circle, she didn't like him at all. she thought he was upper class, harvard kid who looked down his nose at people, then she got to know him again when she was lobbng the sta legisture for minimum wage and maximum our laws for women and he didn

support her and she thought put down, he did his environmental stuff, he didn't wt help the neediest peoe. she saw -- she describes in her oralistory when he first campaign for governor, talking to a union audience from the second floor of the building, watching as these men had to carry him, the only way to get there, and he was smiling all the way through and she felt terrible watching thisce, but she said the change that made him compaionate f people really contributed to him wanting to particularly during th great depression, people needed that. is a combination of all those factors that persuaded him to run. the media, it was a factor and it relied on lot -- it is

remarkab how diminish the role was to day. any channel you turn to, it wasn't like that. fdr charmed them qui effectively. he had the first real press conference where the press cld ask questions, they were all taken in. perkins heid- she hated the press, it revealed stuff about her husband, she didn't like them in general. she did hd a press conferences but her innovation was she decided there were not chairs. >> my question is keyed off of your opening remarks talking about roosevelt being the third

grt revotion. there is a threadoing through, would argue the american revolution included the movement from the articles of confederation to the constitution. based on this, if you look at each revolution there is an increasing centralization, responsibility by the central government, i am going to ask to think forward to this point in time, where do you think things are going based on what you are seeing? >> gre question. i think this centralization had its ups and downs in rect years. a down was the reagan administration, another down more recently. one thing drove hom to me that we are all new dears now. when i was finishing the book and writing the introduction, the last thing you write ishe beginning, you can be as up-to-date as anything in the

book, right as the banking crisis was starting. lehman bthers had failed. the idea that president bush, the most conservative president weave in many years, was saying no question, we have to have a federal bailout of the banks, hundreds of billions of dollars, that is such a rooseveltyen idea. hoover did not bieve in the federal government, hoover beeved the federal government, the federal budget,5 million, small role. almost no one talking about this. no question during the reagan years, we fall back on the federal gnvernment, some of that during the bush administration, the desire to win this social security. there are really know your representatives of that old view anymore the way everyone gets involved. >> anyone should step up with

further questions and in the metime -- >> we have a follow-up. >> i am also thinking about the california fiscal crisis is bad, very bad. i am wondering as well, are we going totart tking about a federal government increasingly taking over the role in space or a variety of things. any comment on that? thinking about the fourth grade revolution. >> normally we hear about states' rigs. all those bankers on wall street talked-about the free-market. we are seeing that with states too. no one -- when they are going

bankrupt. people see this backnd-forth. i don't think the states with a larger role in the federal government, they st want cash. in the crisis, they get some cash. >> if you could clarify one thing. when he contracted polio, would that make it eaier for him to work with others? or does thisring this in line? >> interesting question. it made him more compassionate and understanding of different types of people. we talk about the previous fdr and the legislature supporting legislation. the way iwhich he brought everyone in, he brought the reblican leaders in to the white house, reach out for any

good idea, great issu, it was hoovered who wrote most the banking bill and he was hoping any gooidea where he came from. it has to do with the illness, and perkins said that before th, he thought he was better than this. in some ways, better than him, they could stand up, it gave him more of an understanding -- it made him more -- >> one minute to go. what do you have to say about obama? >> he would be very pleas with how has gone so far and see his own influence but i also think he would say be really bold.

the things fdr did in a hundred days, the richest legislation was so extraordinary, the first agculture bill that encourage farmers not to grow crops, the fit federal welfare program. we haven't seen -- we have seen a lot of old news by obama but nothing that has reshaped government. fdr would say seize the moment. >> thank you so much. nothing to fear. [applause] >> this concludes book tv's to coverage from the 2009 chicago tribune printer's row. test. for more information and book deprogramming visit booktv.org. >> in 1959 in the heat of the cold war, soviet premier nikita khrushchev took an unprecedented two week tour of the u.s.. peter carlson recounts that trip

with his son, part of c-span2's book tv weekend. >> richard reyna examines the life of a prosecutor and crime scene investigator in los angeles in 1920s. the two men were invoed in several tryouts of the century, los angeles public library hosted this event, a litt more than an hour. >> we are ing to talk for a while anturn it over to you guys. we will talk about what it means for a long time. with thatn mind, nothing to do with l.a. first time we ever spoke a long time ago, we called it the british model. we wrote a couple of novels,

mayb a little more piece together, your career is an exemplar of that style of approach. is that a grt to conceptualize the crisis? >> we definitely have the first of this, a little focus ambition. getting a little deep in the newspapers. my career really began, rock and roll, pop stars and movie stars, writing a book reviews.