we're one planet, but let's live that way. let's really take that into ourselves and understand that there is no separation of any of us. we're all in this together. and by working collaboratively i don't just mean community gardens and, you know, working in your little community. there are so many people if you tapped into which want to make a change, which understand that change needs to be made. but how are we going to work collaboratively when, when we're so dispersed? and, basically, the internet, media, we start using the tools we have. there's so much against corporations, but we could take corporations and completely change them and make corporations representative of the people. in that corporations are accountable to the people that are their members. ..

we can't wait until tomorrow to do it. >> thank you. [applause] >> i have one last thing to ask you to do. most people tell you to put your cell phones away. take them out and look at them. while you're looking at them, begin to develop that muscle about thinking about where this came from. think about the kids in the congo who dropped out of school to mine that metal.

think of the people in the pvc worker who might have gotten cancer from it and think about it's loaded with heavy metals that would not be in that cell phone if you had bought it in europe because they have different legislation. and wow to work on that. and while you have it out text stuff to 88769 and then you will be automatically signed up on our list to find out when we make new films. we have a new one coming out next week about the story of bottled water which is a look at manufactured demand. you'll get updates about new films. we'll do upcoming ones on corporations on credit cards on subsidies and electronics. you're going to find out about other gatherings and events that we're having. all the a story of stuff is doing. text stuff to 88769. and then you can join our mailing list and we can stay in touch. and thank you guys very much. [applause]

>> annie leonard was one of "time" magazine's heroes of the environment. she's worked greenpeace international and the global anti-incinerator alliance. to find out more go to storyofstuff.com. >> next sunday, on booktv's in-depth, television analyst, author and columnist and three >> in his book "obama zombies," jason mattera says that the liberal media brainwashed people under the annual of 30 to vote for president obama.

he spoke on "washington journal" for about 40 minutes. >> jason mattera joins us this morning. his new book is "obama zombies: how the liberal machine brainwashed my generation." what is an obama zombie? >> guest: well, it's any individual who places president obama on a pedestal during the 2008 campaign although the election of this man meant ipods would drop down and melt away their student loans. and now they're paying the price big time. and that's why i wanted to write it to set the record straight. >> host: is it just -- you're talking about young people. what about the total of people who voted for him? do you think anybody who voted for obama is a obama zombie? >> predominantly young people because if you look at the margin of victory that he carried amongst voters 18 to 29

it was the largest age demographic shift in american history. john mccain lost the youth to obama 40 points. 40 points. in some swing states in indiana, north carolina and florida the youth vote is predominantly carried obama so the fact that obama gave them a dave matthews ticket or they were able to see lebron james in ohio in a concert and we're going to vote for obama because he hooked me with concert tickets. >> host: what about the people who voted for obama whom you describe as obama zombies. if you were to ask them today about how they feel the administration has done and have they delivered, what do you think the answer back would be? >> guest: well, i think there is two sets of camps. most normal people would say they're having buyers remorse. most of the country disapproves the president the way he handled certainly health care and a lot of his policies. unfortunately, there's a huge disconnect between younger americans who still by and large

support this president even though his policies are a fiscal disaster that are aimed at a torpedo at their futures. and more overall his promises have yet to materialized so he has going to be the great knighter. and he was supposed to be open transparency. this is what young people bought into. and that just hasn't materialized and they provide his biggest base of support. i wanted to show a behind the scenes of how team obama went out reaching to young people 'cause i think there's a lot of good things they did and also to point out how the gops had an awful outreach youth. >> host: what did you like about john mccain? >> guest: where do i start? number one he wasn't conservative. he banked his whole presidency on reaching across the aisle and playing nicy nice with the left. we can't have that anymore. but more importantly when it came to younger voters he didn't have bases on college campuses.

barack obama the more than 1,000 students for obama chapters. he was always giving campaign rallies on college campuses. he had young people behind him. his internet outreach was absolutely amazing. john mccain's internet outreach -- no joke now. his internet outreach was a game called pork invaders where you had to dodge incoming projectiles from pigs. to dodge them successfully and then earmarks would appear on the screen to let you know how many obama voted for. the graphics weren't even that good. it looked like pacman circa 1980. that was john mccain's internet outreach to young people. pork invaders. barack obama hires the cocreator of facebook to run his new media operation. he hires emmy award winner from cnn to upload videos to youtube. it was a complete domination, a digital domination. i think there's a lot the gop can learn from how team obama reached out to young people. >> host: jason mattera with us until 9:55 eastern.

now, folks may also know you from some of your -- your television appearances. you're on camera. your video for lack of a better word confrontational interviews. perhaps most notably -- most recently one and i think we have it here on your website at jasonmattera.com with al franken. what drives you to do these interviews? >> guest: well, unfortunately most of the mainstream media likes to play paddy cake with a lot of leftist politicians. they treat these politicians like pubescent girls treat the jonas brothers at a concert. they just are fawning and ogling and aweing over him. you seebamaare n the "new york times" is now running articles showing how premiums are going to increase. and how there's all these

provisions that don't line up to the promises of the obama campaign was speaking during this entire process. so these are questions i go and ask al franken about provisions that provide slush funds for jungle gyms and monkey bars he has no idea about it. if the mainstream is not going to ask questions it's my duty as a citizen to try to get some answers from him. >> host: you did one with robert gibbs. don't folks see you coming and they sort of turn and run? >> guest: well, no, 'cause i butter them up first. you got to disarm them and go into a hard hitting question. young people thought that there was going to be a difference. now in washington. and we see how obama-care was passed. it was -- it was through the reconciliation process. avoiding the filibuster, something that barack obama himself said in 2005 was unconstitutional. a power grab majoritarian rule.

and he said president bush did the same thing to pass his tax cuts. >> host: don't you think the folks you call obama zombies would say well, that's what we want to passed. we wanted something passed and he's getting something done. >> guest: the process intrical to getting legislation passed. and spoken of the process i think, unfortunately, many young people didn't shut their ipods for a second. if with you look at obama-care their premiums will go up. insurance companies can no longer vary price to a significant degree according to one's age. that affects people my age bracket. it's like inheritance in reverse. that's what i define as obama zombies. someone says barack obama he's doing a masterful job. i'm going to support him. his policies are a slap in the face to their financial futures. >> host: we've got lots of calls waiting. joe in greenville, north carolina, a democrats line. you're first up.

good morning. >> caller: yeah, i'd like to ask jason how old is he? . >> host: how old are you? >> caller: oh, 26. these young people who voted for obama have been through 8 years of bush. 8 years is nothing when you're young. i would say, you know, that's probably the influence -- the largest influence was 8 years of two wars and everything that went wrong -- i just thought i would throw that at you. >> guest: well, bill the caller is right. george w. bush -- there was a lot of fatigue with his administration. certainly the reckless spending that was happening and i'm no apologist for the republican party. i'm a conservative first. what's interesting barack obama in a year and a half has spent -- has racked up more deficits than george w. bush did in his entire eight years. office. i mean, my generation is going

to have to pay for this and that's why i wrote "obama zombies" to hopefully zoel many of these zombies from their slumber. >> host: do you have to get candidates out there -- >> guest: you have to get candidates who are going to win. we can't just -- it can't just be any one but obama. it has to be a clear juxtaposition of conservative to liberal philosophy. obama showed his cards. he believes there's a government solution to every single problem. we have to come in and say no, this country formed on free market ideas. >> host: it's early yet. if you were looking at the 2012, who is is that presidential candidate that could do that for the republicans or independents? >> guest: i don't know. at this point i'm not looking to anoint a candidate. the field is open. i'm going to take everyone at -- to see what they got to offer. >> host: let's go to virginia. michael, good morning. a republican. >> caller: yes, how are you this morning? >> host: doing fine. go ahead with your comment.

>> caller: hey, i'm very grateful for all this young man is saying. let me say this, i worked on the maybe campaign and i was over seven counties in west virginia, okay? and i understand where you're coming from about, you know, mccain not being a conservative and the ground game and everything. but we also need to place some blame on young people or whoever was working in the field that didn't take their own initiative. i had -- i started an internship and had 27 interns from james madison university. no one told me to do that. i did that on my own accord. and so, therefore, you have to -- the ground game has to be creative. and do their own thing. and know how to bring people in. so you can't totally blame it on maybe. i think a lot of it has to do with the people on the ground that you got working for you and how professional they are. >> guest: well, a lot has to be pinned on mccain. i mean, his ground game has the -- should have the resources.

obama's team was so cash flushed. they were taking advertisements out and video games like guitar hero and madden '09. they were targeting laser targeting young people. when i write in "obama zombies" your viewers their jaws will drop. i wanted to give this behind the scenes look because -- conservatives can learn from our political enemies. and adopt their tactics because some of them are, quite frankly, worth adopting. >> host: it's not surprising that young people voted democratic. it's fairly traditional. presidential elections anyway. if the money is behind obama in the 2008 campaign, the votes go behind obama, you still argue that folks who supported him are obama zombies. that were somehow duped by his campaign rhetoric, his campaign promises? >> guest: completely duped. i mean, one of the his promises -- he was going to stop glaciers from melting. i mean, here's a left wing

politician who has the audacity and they are going to stop ice from melting. the audience was cheering like flapping seals. and bush fatigue had a lot to do with it. the youth vote has not traditionally gone to democrats. ronald reagan won it in 1980 and 1984. and he won it by a pretty good margin. for me it's not just about winning and losing elections although that's important, bill. more importantly for me it's about losing entire generation who are uninformed about conservative ideas. and that can be a disaster for a long-lasting political realignment. >> host: hyde falls, new york, good morning to elaine. >> guest: good morning. >> host: you're on the air. >> caller: all right. you can hear me. i would just like to debunk this young gentleman's premise that obama zombies are going to lose out. i just feel that the rhetoric

that he is using is very objectionable. he sounds like an arch-conservative. and since 2000, this has been the rhetoric that they adopt any time we speak about a democrat. now, we had eight years of the bushies. and you're right. people turned against them. why do you think they did that? because they saw that eight years of arch-conservatism did nothing for this country. >> host: elaine, we'll get a response. >> guest: it wasn't eight years of arch-conservatism. george w. bush borrowed, spent and bailed out many companies and conservatives like myself were always against it. but obama has doubled down on those stupid policies. and we'll have a deceive and it will be repaid by my generation. i'm looking for fiscal responsibility.

elaine says i'm an arch-conservative. i'm a proud conservative because i believe in individuals and not a government empowerment. i believe in individual liberty and not the empowerment of washington. >> host: a couple of financial issues. on t.a.r.p., bailing out the banks, would you have done that? >> guest: no, absolutely not. >> host: on the economic stimulus bill? >> guest: disaster. it was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%. now we're looking at double-digit unemployment for who knows how long. >> host: how about the financial rescue of general motors? >> guest: no. we cannot -- we cannot have companies that are too big to fails. americans like you and i bailing your listeners around the country do not work to support other companies. or government schemes. as i point out in my book currently, americans -- the average american spends 103 days of their lives working to support a government scheme. almost a third of their life working to pay taxes. >> host: at what point does government have to look at the consequences of failed

institutions where it would be reasonable to intervene into private business? would you have just let banks fail? in your belief, let the banks if we're going to fail fail. >> guest: yeah, because there has to be consequences for bad decisions. we cannot -- you know, we cannot set up a system where rewards profits and then rewards failure at the same time. we have to have personal responsibility. >> host: but if you're looking at the downstream consequences of those higher unemployment et cetera, et cetera. how do you make that choice? >> guest: well, we already have high unemployment. if we looked at the flip side is let some of these -- some of these banks or some of these companies that were set up as too big to fail actually fail, we wouldn't be wasting tons of taxpayer dollars to prop up companies. >> host: let's hear from irwin in maryland. >> caller: sir, you're too young to be so -- uninformed. you all look like a bunch

puppets saying the same thing to people that don't make any kind of sense. yes, we're high up as far as the budget is concerned because we had to pay for two wars that mr. bush did not pay for. plus, that doughnut hole in d. >> host: medicare? >> caller: and medicare, absolutely. and all of you -- all of you -- you singing the same tune on fox on different. it's just a different face. >> host: we'll hear from jason mattera. >> guest: that's a obama zombie regarding of his policy she will support him. he piled up more deficits than george bush did all eight years while fighting two wars. i mean, it's crazy the amount of spending that is happening. >> host: you said you're 26. what drove your conservative policies? how did you become a conservative? >> guest: that was interesting.

i was a jock and i played basketball for --. >> host: in high school. >> guest: in high school. i got recruited by basketball and had a conservative upbringing and i saw how those ideas were attacked in college and it turned something inside for me to be an activist on the campus. and led me come to washington d.c. >> host: served as spokesman for young republicans. where can folks find human events ob. -- online. >> guest: they can go to american events.com. >> host: plano, texas. >> caller: hello, how are you? . >> host: we're fine. >> caller: that's good. i'm glad to hear it. i've been waiting a long time to air my views and first of all i don't know where to begin. let's go back to the bush election. in 2000. and the supreme court presentation that gave him the election. the whole damn thing was rigged. and that was florida. now, i'm ashamed that i'm a republican when i saw that kind

of thing happening. now, the next thing that's going on is right here. you've got man who thinks it's wrong. let me see him come up with solutions that he is criticizing. where were you at the beginning. did you have any ideas then? do you know how to save the country? let's go back to bush. he went into afghanistan -- no, iraq first. he's calling in to iraq and save the iraqi people doesn't he know the tribal system, what was he taken in by chilabi because he was looking for oil. i'm a republican and i'm ashamed to be one. >> host: the views of irene the republican caller from texas. >> guest: most of the problems that are emanating are washington, d.c. is too much overreach. their solution is to create even more overreach and government problems.

my solution is simple you got to cut back on those government programs. people know best how to spend their own money and how to govern their own lives. that has been the founding direction of this country. and the liberalism for many, many years has tried to increase the power of washington and minimize the power of the individual. those are stark contrasting philosophies. and we need our leaders right now to make the differences plain and simple. for young people it's not -- it's not -- the book is not about young people in particular. but we have to realize the obama administration uses young people as shields and sheep to promote their radical socialist agenda and that's why it's important to stand up to obama zombie. >> host: "obama zombie" is his first book. you're rica, california. -- eureka, california. >> caller: i voted for obama and i'm a little disappointed in him. if we were to put mr. mccain in

there, we'd be bombing iran right now, you know? you know, i think when you look at the lesser of two evils, i would have never put mr. mccain in there. especially with sarah palin as vice president. if he would have died and he's old enough to die >> host: one quick question you voted for president obama. what's the one area where he's disappointed you most? >> caller: i think the first thing he should have done after the banks is jobs. you know, i think -- personally i think if we start making our

solar power and wind power that we can -- we can stop this dependency on --. >> host: let's hear what jason mattera has to say. >> guest: wind and solar power is a fantasy. most of our energy is oil, coal. and we should ramp them up. i think young people in general should have most buyers remorse. unemployment is skyrocketing 25%. and black men 50%. these are policies. these are results that are caused by the failed policies of this obama administration. >> host: maggie on our democrats line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. jason, bless your young heart and your enthusiasm. i have fillings in my teeth that are older of you.÷n%

our concept of republican conservative began because it was much different the reagan administration and your views of free market and of smaller government. grover norquist started the rhetoric about the smaller government and shrink it to where it could be drowned in a bathtub. the policy that was set was when republicans were in power and they had control over congress and the white house they would spend like drunken sailors and when they were out of power they would scream deficit and it's been going on since the deficit that reagan created. and as far as the free market, it's not -- there's no such thing as a free market. and it's certainly not a fair market. it's rigged. for corporations. and it's squeezed the working class to the point where they have no power. they're working what would have been in year's past -- and i do remember 'cause i'm old enough what's the equivalent of three

jobs and getting paid less than they would be paid during those times for one job. reagan came in. busted up unions. did everything to disable the working class and weakened them to the point where he's so busy trying to make ends meet they can't be informed. and the reason that someone as young as you has the voice that you have is because we get no news. there is no news. we have corporate -- corporately owned networks that created not a news network. it used to be a time if you said you were a news network you had to by regulation supply some kind of service to the public. now it's infotainment. and they don't have the time to research. although they could pick up a newspaper. it would be good. >> host: maggie you covered lots of bases. let's see what jason mattera has to say. >> guest: information is more available than anytime in american history.

people can get their news -- i hope they're getting their news from c-span and straight shooting news outlets. and just explosion of the blogosphere. and what maggie is typical pedestrian left wing talking points. reagan did not control the congress. congress had the power of the purse and spent. reagan cut taxes. it went from 70% down to 28%. it was the biggest tax cut of american history and you look at the 25 years since america saw the biggest upward mobility swing. economic progress that we've ever seen in american history. in fact, the net worth of america as a whole -- america incorporated the net worth of america more than doubled from 1981 to 2007 25 years after the reagan tax cut. i mean, tax cuts across-the-board certainly spur investment. allow people to keep their own money. i don't like this marxist class warfare that pits -- you know,

the top employees. you know, for if it weren't for rich people bill i would be out of a job. i quite frankly, thank rich people because i don't want my paycheck to bounce every two weeks. >> host: who funds human events, excuse me? >> guest: eagle publishing. it's a for-profit company that owns regnery publishing and a bunch of geopolitical newspapers. >> host: she was talking about the media and the media outlets and you have a chapter on the new media muzzle. and in that you write about google and also about -- you write about meck. and you write that the website gawker described obama's incestuous requirement silicon valley behemoth. it's google's presidency. we're watching the executives and ceo eric schmitt donated $25,000 apiece to fund president obama's surveying-in party. the google's cash is one of the largest corporate donations to

obama's inaugural >> host: you're critical of eric schmitt and google and meck but these clearly in the last few years are successful entrepreneurial business models. do you have a problem with them supporting the candidates of their choice? >> guest: i actually point out this irony that you would have these companies that are great business models that are providing jobs and providing a service coming up with creations. employing the free market. but yet they're supporting -- they're supporting policies by this administration that are going to thwart growth so i just think it's an irony of ironies and i get it's liberals before business. eric schmitt himself -- when he was campaigning for the stimulus package, the failed stimulus

package, he was talking about how we need a balance a merger between socialism and capitalism. find a happy medium. no we don't, eric shamilitary. -- schmitt. the point in the book he's brought google to the place it's been because of capitalism. and not any merger between capitalism and socialism. >> host: dave a republican caller, good morning. >> caller: yes, jason. i'm a conservative voter. resulted of the fact of the abortion issues in politics. but i also recognize the fact that during fdr's times i believed -- i believe in his philosophy. i think it would work if carried out in the benefit of the american citizen. and i also believe your philosophy the opposite of his would work if carried out in the benefit of the american citizen. but the problem with america today is we were -- we were living under fdr policy but we

destroyed our -- that large young working tax-paying base by abortion. we got about 70 or 80 million would-be taxpayers pushing up daffodils. >> host: do you address the issue of abortion in your book? >> guest: i do not. although i'm staunchly pro-life and i think abortion is murder of innocent babies. >> host: what about social issues in general in terms of this generation, the folks that voted for obama and the votes that didn't? >> guest: well, there's a social disconnect always between younger and older americans particularly on the pro-life and issues of gay marriage. and i said predominantly because on the college campuses you don't hear -- you don't hear a wide variety of conservative ideas at all. if you're only given liberal ideas from your professor, preached to you day in and day out you're not informing -- having a forum balanced education opinion. that's one reason why there's such a disconnect. >> host: to texas, cedar park. good morning, tonya, independent. >> caller: hi.

i hope everybody is doing well. but i have to say -- i actually read a few pages of the book because of it caught my attention. i really couldn't believe some of the things that you're saying and some of the things you wrote in your book. like earlier you brought up taxes under reagan even though taxes are lower right now. and yet people are bringing up taxes all the time and how poor people aren't paying right now even though somebody had to fix the economy. and 80% of the people in america right now agree in the polls that the economy was screwed up not by obama but by bush. >> guest: well, that caller is an obama zombie and definitely hasn't read the book. the top marginal tax rate was 20%. the top marginal tax rate is

about 35% and, in fact, once the bush taxes expire that's going to jump to almost 40%. the dirty little secret is every time there's been a major tax cut either by a president, president bush, president kennedy or even president reagan, the number of -- the percentages of taxes paid by the so-called rich, their percentage has always increased. we today have nearly 50% of the country that does not pay -- does not -- just aren't paying taxes. so that's why again you're going to have a lot of obama zombies because they're reaping benefits they don't to have pay for. sooner or later it's going to cross and you're going to have a lot of people like they are frustrated today are express their outrage in tea party movements because they're tired of their tired of their taxes being taken. >> host: what's your feeling on the tea party? >> guest: i love them.

i spoke at gatherings in morristown, new jersey. these are average americans that are very -- angered by the level of government spending, government generational theft that is taking place under this obama administration. and there are people from all races, all creeds, all ages that are out there. and i think this is a great unified grassroots movement. and it's only going to increase. >> host: some people have raised issues on the health issues, some concerns that were insults and epithets that were hailed at black members of congress. a survey from the "new york times" recently came out and talked about what that makeup of the tea partiers are. from your experience and seeing -- seeing these rallies, how prevalent are these sorts of expressions of sort of racist expressions. and how prevalent really are black folks among that mix? >> guest: well, the primis of this narrative is absurd.

these congressman who had racial epithets am have not been able to verify. >> host: how would that would be verified? >> guest: well, you can't just make an accusation like that and it not go varied. these are hundreds of thousands of people around the country who are protesting the level of government spending. are there a few nut balls here and there, i'm sure there the movement is not driven by racism and not driven by a hatred for obama himself. it's driven by a disgust for his policies and the "new york times" and other media outlets are trying to paint this narrative. it's a bunch of angry nut folks. the tea party i just spoken of and i'm puerto rican and taken offense to that and the guy who spoke right after me is a black man. we conservatives don't care about racial makeup. we don't care about a person's skin color. the left is balkanizing and categorizing people or their racial makeup or their gender.

>> host: a few more minutes with jason mattera. this is atlanta, georgia, joseph. go ahead on our democrats line. >> caller: good morning. i want to say thanks so much for the programming and c-span. i do think the guest today is a little beneath the usual standards. i'll just try to make this short. i just read your book. and your analysis is severely undercut by the use of out of context quotations. you call private science an ecohoax. a shell game. and specifically you say not only is 34 the hottest year on record but 5 of the warmest years were transpired you say before world war ii. and so you say which is zombies warming cooling or warming. your data is for u.s. temperatures. again, your source for this statistic daily tech made the claim on the basis of u.s. temperature data. but because regional temperature varies greatly scientists use

global temperatures to analyze global change. and so noaa, their analysis of the last 10 year period was among the warmst 10-year periods in 130 years. so you also say the warming is largely a function of the sun. temperatures are down to where they were in the 30s which again they aren't. c02 is not a pollutant which it is. 1% of the atmosphere. you say rising levels are nothing to worry about. you even falsely suggests the "times" reporter is a global warming denier. finally you falsely state we're experiencing global cooling again everywhere from 2001 to 2009 is the top 10 warmest years in the record. they say it's the worst decade on record. >> guest: well, this caller has to get his facts straight and not take his talking points from all these leftist smear groups. >> host: and he was talking

about the noaa. you take issue with the data that comes from noaa? >> guest: well, no. the data is correct. i mean, we just have the climate-gate scandal that just happened over in britain. they were suppressing numbers and suppressing dissecting views. and the institute out at nasa was taking their lead from the university and their climate research unit. the left has set up this bogie man that only scientists believe in global warming. and i point out in my global warming ghoul's chapter that's thought true. a "new york times" reporter that caller referred to -- he misrepresented the quote. the reporter says that there are scientists on both sides with advanced degrees who disagree. senator jim inhofe himself has a list of more than 650 scientists from around the country who disagree with the premise that

man is responsible for warming the planet. in the last at the point years we have a cooling trend that is taking place. warming and cooling has always been around. it's called temperature and climate. but the fact the left will say that man in all his finiteness could actually warm this planet is the height of arrogance. and also it's the height of arrogance for the obama administration barack himself to say he's going to stop glaciers from melting. >> host: where did he say that? >> guest: in the campaign. >> host: here's virginia, vinnie a republican caller, go ahead. >> caller: hey, how is it going, good morning. i agree with a lot you say especially with the global warming. but my whole thing but i'm not singling you out and i was at the tea party on thursday in washington. you know, i agree with a lot what is being said especially about the obama policies and everything. but my own problem is just -- i would like to see the conservatives be more consistent with their views.

especially when it comes to like -- 'cause ron paul later on that night and he gave the best speech. his supporters. but when he starts up about noninterventionist for them -- i heard boos in the crowd. not a lot of them i just think that's just wrong. be consistent. be consistent because you can't say something about obama and then be in favor of wars and stuff, you know? >> host: any thoughts there? >> guest: the tea party movement is largely driven by a disgust with the level of government spending. it doesn't have to do with any wars or social policy at this point. >> host: here's staten island, new york. here's david -- excuse me, katherine an independent line. i'm sorry about that. go ahead. >> caller: good morning. >> host: good morning. >> caller: jason, you are right on the money with your book. i was calling those people in the beginning.

and they were going to be zombies because they don't see. they don't hear. nothing like it. these american people have to understand that obama is spending this money that he doesn't own. >> host: katherine we're going to let you go. and we're going to wrap up with jason. some final thoughts from our caller and our viewers. >> guest: i appreciate her support. she's from staten island, new york. i grew up in brooklyn, new york. to many americans buyers remorse have been set in. they may have been former zombies and they've been slapped back to reality because of policies or direct aim at their futures. and obama has what he promised has not materialized. and i just hope that many young people wake up or else their futures are in jeopardy. but also that the gop starts to have the concerted outreach to young people because they cannot concede the youth vote any longer.

>> host: "obama zombies," thanks for being here. >> guest: thanks for having me. >> host: >> jason mattera has written for the "washington times," human events, national review online and town hall.com. he's also a commentator on fox news on cnn. to find out more, visit jasonmattera.com. i >> david stewart, in your view, should andrew johnson have been impeached? >> i think so. sadly, though, not for what he was accused of. >> what he was he accused of? >> he was accused of violating

the tenure of office act when he fired edward stanton the secretary of war. it was a constitutionally shaky statute. and was ultimately found unconstitutional. and it might not have even applied to what he was trying to do. so that particular accusation wouldn't have moved me a lot. i think he could properly have been removed from office and it might have been a very good point if he had for undermining the congressional program of reconstruction and frankly refusing to enforce laws that were the laws of the land about the most important issue that was then facing the united states. but because high crimes and misdemeanors is such an illusive standard, there was a feeling in congress which we still have that there has to be a crime. and not enforcing the law the way you're supposed to didn't feel enough like a crime. so that's how it ended up being the tenure of office act. >> as a lawyer do you support

the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanor"? >> well, as a lawyer, you know, i'm stuck with it. >> but it can also work to your advantage as a lawyer? >> well, it can. it's quite unclear. when the framers of the constitution adopted it in 1787, they weren't quite sure what it meant. it had dates from 14th century english law. it was archaic in the 18th century. people didn't have a real understanding of it and we don't now. the senate has been very dedicated to never saying what it means. it's whatever any senator thinks it means. so it is an unfortunate phrase in some respects but then again it gives different senators a certain amount of freedom when they are approaching an impeachment. you see, impeachment is a combination of a political process and a judicial process particularly with a president.

high crimes and misdemeanors feels like it has to be a court case. it has to be, you know, a crime. and there's the word. but, in fact, you're decapitating the government. it's a big deal. and that's a political decision. 54 senators voted on andrew johnson's case and some were on political reasons. high crimes and misdemeanors is a bit of a blind. it's sort of a distraction at some level. but it's what we have. so we do the best we can with it. >> how did the charges against andrew johnson originate? who pushed them and how did they get to an actual vote in the senate? >> they really came out of a tremendous discontent among the northern republicans who dominated congress at the time, the south was not represented in congress at the time. who wanted effective reconstruction, wanted real aid

to the freed slaves and wanted to keep the confederates -- former confederates out of power in the south. johnson didn't share any of those goals. he was indifferent to the freed slaves. he thought the states could have whoever they wanted who was in charge of them. and really undermine the congressional policy every chance he had. the result was you had a tremendous face-off. a lot of legislation, vetos legislation vetos. and also it broke down into this impeachment crisis. in many ways you can see this as sort of a tremendous aftershock of the civil war. i mean, it really was still fighting over those same issues. and, you know, who's going to have power in the south, you know, did this -- did winning the war mean anything? the northerners were asking this. why did we win the war if these people are still going to run their governments? if they're still going to treat black people the way they always have?

and those were tough questions. it didn't bother andrew johnson at all and that's the conflict and that was over the secretary of war stanton. >> who were his political allies and his political enemies? >> well, he had a real problem that he had been elected on a republican ticket as abraham lincoln's running mate from tennessee. and lincoln wanted him as a war democrat. as somebody who would appeal to southern democrats. but he was a southern democrat. so he had this republican sponsorship but he didn't agree with any of the people whose team he was supposedly on. and then congress excluded all the southern democrats from congress. so his natural allies were not there by and large. so his adversaries were the former abolitionist, thaddeus

stevens who was a wonderful figure. a congressman from pennsylvania. and his allies were the democrats who weren't there. one thing you have to understand this period and you have to do a mind shift that the republicans were the liberals and the democrats were the conservatives. and it's changed since then. but in the 1860s that's the way it was. >> why did you write "impeached" why another book on andrew johnson and his impeachment? >> one reason, frankly, there's not that many. i didn't think they told the story in a way -- it ought to be told. in its full context. and i was attracted to the story a lot personally because i defended an impeachment case myself. a judge who got impeached. i always found it a fascinating story. it's a bit of a train wreck in history. i mean, everybody is unhappy at the end of the story. he's acquitted by a single vote. there's a lot of evidence that

historians have ignored that there was bribery in the final vote. and that senators were bribed to vote for johnson's acquittal? >> by whom? >> by johnson's cabinet members. they raised a bribery fund of $150,000 and entered into negotiations with a variety of senators and their agents. >> that's a huge amount of money back then wasn't it? >> it was a lot of money. and there were people walking around washington just wads of greenbacks. we didn't have electronic controls and antimoney laundrying rules then. people just had cash. and they passed it around. it was a very corrupt time to be blunt. and the corruption affected the impeachment. there's a lot in this story that was compelling. >> how did you do your research? >> i spent a lot of time at the library of congress. it's a tremendous resource. of course, the trial itself is of -- you know, the transcripts are all available. but, you know, you have to get a feel for what people were saying to each other about it.

you want to go to correspondents and original sources. and the newspapers. which were very partisan at that time so you again get some insight into what people were saying about the figures, the issues of the time. >> was the american public at that time engaged in this impeachment process? >> totally. there was a tremendous fear that went across the country when he was impeached that we were on the verge of a single second war. and the congress was usurping the presidency. and there were headlines in the paper, 20,000 kentuckians going to march on washington. 10,000 pennsylvanian soldiers, boys in blue was ready to march tomorrow. so there was a real feeling that there would be bloodshed. and, you know, we'd been killing each other just three years before. in the bloodiest war we've ever had. these were people who didn't shy away from extreme solutions.

so it was -- it was a galvanizing experience. and one of the things about the impeachment process that i think was very positive was it slowed everybody down. and the lawyers got in and, you know, lawyers slowed things down and it allowed people to step back and say, you know, johnson's term is ending. that was one of the reasons they acquitted him. this is a big thing to do with a guy who we can vote out of office anyway. so some parts of the process i think were pretty positive. >> how long was johnson the president? how long did this process take? and could he have gotten elected in his own right? >> oh, that's a great question. he served almost the full term. lincoln was assassinated five weeks into his second term so he was very close to a full term. he very much wanted to run for re-election.

and he wanted, of course, to be at the democratic candidate. he couldn't be the republican candidate and when the democrats met in their convention in new york city in the summer of 1868, on the first ballot he came in second. so he was a serious contender. they ultimately went off on a dark horse. and johnson was an effective political campaigner. 8 of the 11 southern states were able to participate in that presidential election so there was a base for his appeal. he might have been a better candidate than seymour was. he might also have been a more polarizing candidate. and that may have been a good reason not to choose him. in the final vote, ulysses grant with a small vote.

>> the subtitle of your book "and the fight for lincoln's legacy." >> lincoln said toward the end of the war when you beat a man you let him up easy. and he intended to leave the south with a lot of freedom to reconstitute itself. to reconstruct itself. that's why the term "reconstruction" became popular. and johnson implemented those initial plans. and what happened then was the southerners restored the confederates to power. it's not a startling event. and johnson took a totally hands-off approach to that. he just believed states could do what they wanted. and he took the position, i'm just doing what president lincoln wanted to do. and his opponent said well, wait a second. lincoln would have started down the road that way but he never

would have put up with this sort of denying of rights to black people that are happening. to the oppression that's going on. and would never have allowed these former confederate leaders to get back into power. and in many ways this was the fight for who would win the war. and, you know, it's a truism about the civil war that the north won the war and the south won the peace. reconstruction is a stuff time in our country's history. we had troops occupying the south for 11 years. and ultimately the south won a good bit of the piece. and andrew johnson was an important part of that. >> david stewart, tell us about your law practice and your impeachment trial that you worked on. >> well, i did a lot of constitutional work over the years. >> are you still a practicing lawyer? >> i still practice a bit. >> a bit.

>> mostly i write. my law firm would want me to say that. but i do a few matters still. and, you know, the impeachment case was just fascinating. it was a tough case -- my case was tough because my client had been convicted in a court. and he was -- >> who was it? >> his name is walter nixon, jr., from mississippi and he was actually in jail at the time. of the trial. so you're sort of starting on the low ground. and we knew that. but we thought it was a bad conviction. and that he really should not be convicted. he was looking for vindication. i thought it was a solid case. we really, i think, persuaded some people that we did have a good case. we actually -- you know, they do this -- these days judges don't get tried before the full senate. they get tried before the committee.

and before the committee that heard our evidence, we made some headway. and we actually would defeat two of the articles -- there were three. and on the third one it was 9-3. in the full senate we did much worse because those senators didn't know the facts. they're just voting on the politics. i actually challenged that procedure case that went up to the supreme court. so it was a fascinating exercise in trying to use all the levers of government. ultimately we didn't do too well but it was a real inside into the process which i hoped i could bring to this book. >> well, you've written 1787, you've written about 1868. why -- do you pick events? >> it has been events for the first two. and the project i'm working on now which i hope will come out on the spring -- next spring, 2011, will be -- is on the western conspiracy of aaron burr

when he attempted to essentially overthrow the government out west. and invade mexico. it's an extraordinary story. and i generally find -- you know, if you have to write a whole biography of somebody you have to write about their dull years, too. so i'd much rather pick a period when something terrific happened that's really fascinating and dig in at that. >> david stewart is the author of "impeached: the trial of andrew johnson and the fight for lincoln's legacy" simon & schuster publisher.

♪ >> coming up next booktv presents "after words," an hour-long discussion with the author of a new book. this week financial fraud investigator harry markopolos author of "no one would listen" talks about the ponzi scheme of bernard madoff 10 years before it became widely known and to get the scc and the fed to know. he's interviewed with nicole gelinas and author of "after the fall: saving capitalism from wall street and washington." >> host: hello. i have the honor to be here thi