on tv on sammy davis j.r. was a figure who was. my mother and my grandmother who raised me they would call me in the house and say, sammy davis j.r. is on tv, and so that -- he meant something to them, and so i just sort of told myself it would be interesting to write a book about sammy davis j.r some day. these are figures who happened to have a lot of scan dpal in -- scale dale in their lives and they were burdened with scandal and sugar ray robinson, i told you at the beginning about the punch that i took that i'm still feeling, so i wrote this book to figure out where that punch came from. thank you very much.

[applause] political science professor at city college contends that numerous progressives have assisted america's adversaries.

he profiles high-ranking government officials as he says we are duped by foreign governments. then at 9 p.m., republican governor of texas argues against national government intervention in what the governor contends are issues that can be better solved by individual states. he presents his argument from his recently published book our fight to save america from washington. and finally at 10 p.m., it is "after words" on the life and legal careers up next, paul kengor, science

professor at pennsylvania contends that numerous progressives have assisted america's adversaries. the author profiles high-ranking government officials that he argues for duped by foreign governments including fdr, jimmy carter and ted kennedy. this takes place at the heritage foundation in washington. >> good afternoon. thank you for joining it heritage foundation as the director of lectures and seminars it's my privilege to welcome everyone to the auditorium. of course we welcome those who joined on the heritage of or website as well as those who will be seeing us on a future occasion on c-span book tv. we would ask everyone in house to check telephones have been turned off and for those viewing online, questions or comments can be submitted at any time simply e-mail in asset speaker@heritage doherty. hosting the discussion this afternoon is heather sextron,

director of the young leaders program. she oversees the heritage youth outreach efforts to the next generation of political activists, grassroots leaders and public policy professionals. among the programs under her oversight or the internship program campus outreach activities, a student group briefings and young leaders program virtual think tank with casts. before serving as director of this program, she was our interim coordinator as well as having served as a heritage in turn herself. a graduate of the university of michigan, to get that clear, the university of michigan, she earned her bachelor's degree in english and political science. please join me in welcoming have their sexton. [applause] >> thank you, john. i'm delighted to introduce dr. paul kengor today. professor of political science at grove city college and executive director of the center

for values. eighth city think tank policy center which focuses on advancing freedom with christian scholarship. paul is also a visiting fellow with the hoover institution on war, revolution and peace at stanford university. he's a frequent contributor to msnbc, c-span and fox news. in addition he's written for "the new york times," wall street journal, political science quarterly and many other publications. among the numerous books he has offered are the crusader, ronald reagan and the fall of communism, god and of ronald reagan, god and george w. bush and william p. clark, ronald reagan's top hand. today i am excited paul will be focusing on his newly released book, "dupes however service have been manipulated progressives for centuries. we are looking forward to hearing your discussion on this aspect of history the prominent role of the duped.

please help me welcome dr. paul kengor. [applause] >> thank you, heather. john and everybody here heritage, everybody for coming. lee edwards. i really struggled with how to organize this talk because i turned in a manuscript of 250,000 words and about a thousand pages, and i think the book called and ronald reagan was around 100,000 words, it gives you an idea of just how enormous the task was and probably as well how many dupes are out there. i'm not joking when i say this could be volume one and a multivolume set. i didn't know where to stop coming and there were a number of people at different points that i thought i would have full chapters on and so much information that would fill an entire box and mark for the simple henry wallace and then at

some point i make it into a whole book on this guy so i'm going to focus a little bit first and going to give you an overview why did this and why i chose this subject. my goal hopefully the importance of the issue and then work up towards chronologically through three cases that i feel are very telling and represent different types of officials, academics, somebody involved in education, a writer and politician and specifically i talk about john dewey, frank marshall davis and ted kennedy, and during the q&a there's a lot of other people we could talk about as well, including a actors, all kind of people in hollywood, humphrey bogart for example, why talk about in the book, but there was also as you will note in the appendix in the communist party usa archives the soviet

commentator and a look of the very carefully as to whether that could possibly be humphrey bogart said that is something we can talk about during the q&a. but first, on why i did this, three components, scholarship, partisanship and the issue of redemption. scholarship i notice that nobody had ever done a book on the role of dupes in american history, and in fact they google search on the term and maybe two or three books in the library of congress even have the word in the title, and yet it is a word that goes back to the founding of the republic itself. probably surprised to know george washington used the word dupes in his farewell address. so they had been warning about it since the founding of the republic. adam smith was around the time of the founding, adam smith in the 1776 book the wealth of nations talks dealt dupes but

then suddenly it took an ugly upsurge with the founding of the bolshevik revolution in russia and the launching of the bolshevik revolution in russia in october, 1917, and then after that, even more specifically with the founding of the communist international and moscow in march of 1919. if you're following this chronology, then it gets really bad but the founding of the communist party in america in chicago in september of 1919, and as i was looking at one particular document, the archives on cp usa which are over here the library of congress. i mean, there's hundreds of microfilm, and by the way, when i would go there in the summertime and the professors and academics are off, not like we work a lot to begin with during the school year, but i never once even one time was told by an artist you can't have

the real because someone else has it out. hardly anyone else is even looking at this stuff, and that's because most academic historians are on the left and when you see what the final say, they are a real indictment of many things the left has believed. among them by circling through and spinning the different films. one of the first ones, one of the first documents you come to is the september 1919 document from the communist party of america and its founding on blue island avenue in chicago illinois. i have a bunch of different documents, i could have done a power plant but as my former students know i am technically computer aliterate so i didn't bother to reply will hold these up and the are in the book. i will try to describe them. this one right here, a communist party of america, it looks like this on microfilm, these are 100-year-old documents but this

is from charles rothenberg the executive secretary, and it's very brief. she's sending it to the folks of the communist international in moscow and the name of the communist workers of the united states organizing the communist party of america extend greetings to the communist party of russia. hill to the dictatorship, hailed the russian socialist soviet republic. along with the communist international commodores, executive secretary, charles rosenberg. who today is buried in wall of the kremlin. as you see these write off you learn what the american government love and with anti-communist said through the 20th century that the american communist party was not just another political party. i mean, they were loyal patriots. they were dedicated -- the materials in the death in the communist international finals in moscow. we only have none now because

there were declassified by the yeltsin government in the early 1990's. so you see right off this is why i think scholars on the left are ignoring this stuff. with the anti-communist said all along was right. there was this tight bond, this inseparable bond between the american party and the soviet party. another document, the system again, chicago, the party. this is from november 24, 1919. and it says to the bureau of the communist international, a, as international secretary again, charles rothenberg of the american party, i make applications for admission of the communist party of america to the bureau of the communist international. they are filing their formal membership application. is a3 page document and you get to the very end last page just a few lines, and it says here the final struggle of the

libertarian will be waged at the united states. our conquests of power alone assuring the world soviet republics realizing all this the communist party prepares for the struggle. wall with the communist international, the revolution, he truly yours international secretary charles rothenberg. once again, you see the connection. why are dupes so important? dupes are critical because they are people on the progress of left, liberal left who were not communists themselves. but sometimes ran on the same circles, had some of the same ideas, shared some of the same sympathies, the redistribution of wealth, workers' rights, nationalization, different issues. they were not as far to the left us communists, but over a little bit. i started finding throughout the schogol squier evidence letter after letter, a document after document where the police in moscow and of the cp usa had

headquarters in chicago and wherever very closely leading out plans and campaigns to try to deliberately dupe the progressives and liberals. go to this rally. do this, don't let them know that you were a communist. you are charged with being a communist say that it is red baiting perino yet. later on in the 1950's, it mccarthyism. denied that your actual communist. the progressives would do this and say we are not communists, they aren't communists, and they would say yes we are we know they are and the anti-communist slav be the bad guy. they would be their reprobates, the paranoia of anti-communist trauner plights and caveman. so the dupes were critical. the american communist party at its peak membership in the 1930's only got to be about

100,000 members. so they could never really get any popular support. to try to get larger popular support for the cause, they had to enlist progressives and liberals. so that's why i will get this. the target the progressive liberal left, but this gets to an important point i want to make on partisanship. they didn't always have success and i appreciate the chance to see this to the conservative audience in particular. there were a lot of good anti-communist liberals and anti-communist democrats who were not duped. and i have got dozens and dozens of examples. arthur schlesinger, jr., wrote a piece for life magazine in 1946, which at that point was along with time probably the largest circulation and all of america, and center said communists have succeeded in hiding their true face from american liberals.

the reds are posing a most serious danger to liberals, engaged in a massive attack on the moral fabric of the american left, end of quote. george f. kennan said the same kind of thing, trying to warn people on the left don't be duped by these guys. don't be taken in. the list of onetime liberals who change who learn once boy was i do it and we are duped again, humphrey, roosevelt, paul douglas, john dewey come from hollywood lucille ball, jimmy cagney, olivia de havilland played melanie on gone with the wind, jimmy, edward g. robinson, melvyn douglas, and also later anti-communist crusader conservative republican president named ronald reagan, who admitted in 1946 that he had been misled, that he had been duped as well. democrats, on the other hand,

there were anti-communist democrats and liberals from the very beginning who live think whenever duped and right away recognize the danger the communists posed to the plans and policies, and i am going to surprise you here. the first president who had to deal with this at the founding of the party, the founding of the american communist party was 1919 and woodrow wilson. what rules and may have been dhaka man of the left but he was an anticommunist and he was stridently antibolshevik. described it as barbarians, tyrants and terrorists. exact words that willson used. harry truman, same kind of thing. jfk warned us about our atheistic gough list communist conspiracy. right? they realize, these guys did, that the communists were not

their friends and they went after the causes they held to year. they held willson's league of nations. the attack fdr's new deal. the documents in the archives on this or stunning. almost as if the boys at the ct usa wanted to report that moscow the work that they were doing attacking liberal causes. and here's one. the 1920 presidential election. this is from the united communist party. don't vote, strike. a boycott of the selection. overthrow the capitalist government. establish the soviet government. not just another political party. not just another political party. when you strike the police beat you, the soldiers shoot you. that is the capitol of government is for. the united communist party is the only party that put up candidates for this purpose. boycott the election, don't

vote, strike. an official proclamation from the united communist party, stand by soviet russia. another, boycott the election. here's communist labor without by the communist labor party of america. this is february, 1920. guess who is on the front, what woodrow wilson has the upper train carrying a scalp. that is all the fault of the progressives. liberals, communists are not your friends. quit defending these guys. the anti-communist or write. here they are in 1933, mayday, protesting the roosevelt at ministration. putting together a march demonstrated against hunger, fascism, war to read the new deal is a blow against the workers and increases profits

for wall street. all this was done as a capitalist we ought crisis and shows how the american government -- this is the roosevelt administration -- is moving headlong toward fascism and war. roosevelt, fascist. that's the american communist party. here's another one. mayday, same period. they did this all over the country in 1933, condemning the roosevelt program of, quote, forced labor for the unemployed, in the of quote. and who had the answer? linen. linen shows the way. he shows the self the only way to jobs, land and freedom. so that's what they were sending around. that's the kind of thing that they were doing. and while they are doing all of that, they are also a very contentious bleak, very carefully, very strategically trying to get progressives and

liberals to join their cause. so i will give you three cases, three examples. john dewey. john dewey come on the include another group i called the tympan progresses and these were people in the 1920's and 30's, american progressives, western progressives, british as well as american, who were taken to the soviet union in the 1920's and 1930's and very carefully manipulated by soviet handlers. it's extraordinary to see how they did this. it's shocking. and it's shocking to see how many took the bait as well. and because the woodrow wilson administration wouldn't recognize the bolsheviks, because the early british government wouldn't recognize the bolsheviks, winston churchill told boy george you might as well recognize sodomy before you recognize the bolsheviks. the progressives were upset by that in the 20's. so stalin and the late 1920's

started bringing american western progressives to the soviet union to take a carefully managed to work to try to get them to come back to the united states and write articles about how great the soviet union is and they are finding this new world and by the way, the united states government ought to recognize the government. as of these are the progressives. one of them, h. g. wells three h. g. wells. after a meeting with stalin in 1934, i never met a man more candid, fair and honest. everyone trusts him. everyone trusts him. it is the start of a great era, 1934. maybe there is a stalin. likewise he had been impressed by vladimir huji called, quote, refreshing and amazing little man. amazing little man. his fellow socialists, bernard shaw, met with stalin and you're going to think this is sarcastic. it's not. it's completely serious.

george bernard shaw. we cannot afford to give ourselves morrill errors. our most enterprising a perk of the soviet union, unanimously judiciously liquidates the handful of the exploiters to make the world safer honest men. if you see the actual original notes from the meeting which other people recorded a that was precisely, precisely what stalin told bernard shaw. he parroted the exact line stalin wanted them to say. somebody who wasn't taken by this book was a witness was the great malcolm, and margaret mugredge commented on what he saw, talking of the american presence. unquestionably they are one of the wonders of the age i shall chair risch until i die as a memory, the spectacle of them traveling with optimism through a sam ash countryside, wondering

about squall with overcrowded soviet towns, listening with unshakable faith to the patterns as carefully a indoctrinated guide is repeating like schoolchildren a multiplication table the bogus statistics and slogans and field to them. to continue there were honest advocates of the killing of cattle who looked at the headquarters of the ogpu with tears of gratitude in their august. the proportional representation is eagerly with the necessity of the dictatorship of the proletarian was explained to them. get this one, there were ernest clergymen who walked through soviet antigod museums and turned the pages of the neediest literature. ernest passus' watched them across the square and bombing planes darken the sky. earnest planning specialists who stood aside the overcrowded and

muttered if only we had something like this in england. not only was mugredge mystified, by the naivete that he saw among these progressives, but so were the soviets. mugredge said the almost unbelievable we credulity of the mostly university educated tourists, astonished even the soviet officials there used to handling foreign visitors. in the book, why quote a romanian and intelligence chief during the cold war, and one who died a few years ago that talk about handling western visitors like senator ted kennedy. and he worked with the soviet press agency said among the my duties was to get the western progressives from the moment they got off the plane at the moscow international airport, among the chief tasks was to keep them permanently

intoxicated the entire time they were in the soviet union. a lot of these guys came to see the rot of the soviet system and it disturbed them and eat at their conscience because they thought here's what i'm working for but what do i do, how do i get out of here? how do i take care of my family. and they were depressed held the progressives would come to the country and no matter how outrageous the line of exaggeration and propaganda the fed then they swallowed it again and again and again to read these fellow passengers provided my first experience with the progress of elite from all over the world to attach themselves to the soviet regime. the results to believe anything that they were told by a spokesman. resolve to believe anything that they were told. one of them was john dewey, a

founder of american public education. and probably the single greatest influence on american public schools to this day. whose books have been used a hundred years now to train generation after generation of public-school teachers. columbia teachers college, department of education, teachers all over the country, the sky's looks like sacred scripture. in some departments of education dewey, did you know this? i didn't notice until i started reading this. i never learned any of this when i had to learn about dewey. dewey's books were being rapidly translated into washington by the bolsheviks as early as 1918. the bolsheviks had taken over october, 1917 immediately get a vicious civil war in russia from the 1921. don't you bruce lincoln and

russian historian said 7 million man, woman and children died, the bolsheviks were completely broke or preoccupied but they realized how important john dewey's works were to the soviet collective communist state that they were trying to put in place. so they immediately started translating them. 1918, dewey's schools of tomorrow published. 1919, dewey's how we think published in russia. 1920, dewey, the school and society, published in russian. dewey's preeminent classic. what is it? 1921 democracy in education. democracy and education. 1921, publishes a 62 page pamphlet. that book as the dewey biographers it became the bible of columbia teachers college and the soviets love it and adore

it. dewey perhaps once he got wind of this and these others probably felt bad that the architects of this collectivist totalitarian society adore his books. no, he was flattered. he was flattered. sort of mutual admiration society started developing between dewey and the bolshevik hierarchy, and so in the summer of 1928, john dewey along with 25 american educators in various universities made a trip to the soviet union where they were given the full village treatment. ..

>> i have a long chapter on this in the book, so i won't read all the quotes, but it is astonishing to read these articles. it is really astonishing. duey, my mind was in a whirl. readjustment was difficult. i lived somewhat dazed. the libber ration of the people that i saw. the outstanding fact is that russia is in a revolution involving the release of human powers that is of incalculateble form. he writes about how impressed he

was with the restoration of russian churches taking place under lennonand stalin. he inserts a footnote that says apparently professor duey didn't know about the demolishing of churches going on at the time. how? he didn't know that? that's what they were doing, they were blowing them up. there's 46 churches left by the 1940s. how could he not know this? duey, this one, i'm not making it up. how they are doing things. well, in spite of secret police,

businessmen and industrialists and farmers, aside frommics hyling party opponents, life for the masses goes on with regularity, safety, and decorum aside from the other things. the external retune of life is more settled and secure in russia than any other country in all of europe, and this is not what i'm being told, he said, but what i'm saying. the revolution, he pronounced, was a great success, a great success. i think the schools are a factor in the evolution of russian communism. his very last article for the "new republic" duey wrote this. political recognition for russia in the united states is a step bringing about the kind of relations in the interest of both countries and the world. i went to world with no conviction on that subject, but

now here i am telling you i think our government should recognize russia which was precisely, precisely the number one priority of what sal lin wanted in bringing these progressives over, that they would go back home and call for recognition. that's duey. i'll give you a few more examples here. frank marshall davis. i spent about four years on this one, and i won't take you through the entire four years, i promise you, but he is relevant right now because he was, using my words carefully, a mentor to the current president of the united states, barak obama. now, that was in obama's years in the latter 1970s in hawaii, and i first started reading about frank mar shall davis in

2008. i heard conservatives on talk radios saying he was a communist party member. take it to the bank, he influenced obama. while hearing all of this stuff, i have spread all over my desk all these committee reports, senate judiciary committee, run by democrats, house committee on americans also run by democrats. chris dodd's father, thomas dodd, representative eye court, jack kennedy was an anticommunist on some of these committees. i'm hearing this and thinking what does davis really believe, and how close was he to obama? august 2, 2008, "ap" piece. davis was a constant figure in

obama's early life. he was an important influence who obama looked to like a father, a mentor for advice on living other things. obama in "dreams by my father," i was intrigued by his hard earned knowledge behind the hooded eyes, all right, behind the hooded eyes. he gave me advice on women, on life, all these examples. i started looking into different documents, and among the things i found, he was called to testify before the senate in 1956 for communist associations. he pleaded the 5th amendment. these are in the book, and i think it's page 256 or 257. next year in 1957, a senate report actually listed frank marshall davis as an identified member of the communist party of

the usa. that's -- congress just didn't go and say that somebody was a member of a communist party. they would say this person has associations with groups, and here they said he was a member of the communist party, usa. i looked at different biographers. most of these guys are on the left. university of massachusetts professors, harvard ph.d.. they said he was a party member. i read from a kansas professor, and that book, he said davis actually joined the communist party and produces a letter he dates around 1943 where davis says in his own writing that he joined the communist party. okay. finally, after looking at all of those things, not long before

the book went to press, i found -- i got davis' actual fbi filed that was disclassified through requests by a fellow researcher. it's 600 pages long, and as soon as you read frank marshall davis' fbi file, you can see clearly it takes a half hour of reading to see the guy was a communist. very, very, very clear. in the book i give 10-12 pages from that fbi file, including on page 507, this page which among other information lists frank's communist party card number, 47344 which is, i mean, that's hard evidence. i recently read some of the stuff out there accusing howard zyn being a communist, but i

read his file, and there's not things like communist party numbers in his file. when you find cp numbers, you really got something, and by the way, those numbers are fully consistent with other people who joined the party at the time including hollywood ten members who you are told at your universities were all innocent lams, you know, liberals and progressives practicing their civil liberties dragged before joe mccarthy. october 1947 called to washington, d.c. to testify. john howard lawson was one of the ten. albert mulz, albert bessi. i got some of frank marshall's weekly come lums he wrote from

1949-1950 which was the communist party usa organ in hawaii. i got it through the help of two tremendous groups of college students. one found them online, and the other who is actually in hawaii, and i'm amazed is here today. i'll keep it secret, i promise. she went into a library of the university of hawaii and got the columns, hard copies. who you see -- what you see here reading davis' columns is just how anti-american the communist party was in the united states in the latter 40s. who is president in the united states after world war ii? harry truman. what party? democrat. he was the enemy. they mercilessly salve rajed truman. davis took him apart and turned

him into a demon in these articles. colonialists, impure yal lists, ray cyst monsters were tru truman. february 9, 1950 piece. he shows the line of portraying harry tru man as a butcher. harry truman dropped the bomb to avoid a land invasion that would have been joined by not just american and british troops, but russian troops. stalin supported this, but once the war is over, truth doesn't matter. the only truth that matters is there is no truth and want only morality that matters is that that further class interest. truman who did what we wanted on august 1945 is the butcher of

hiroshima. he's pictures of him on page 256-257. this is from february 9, 1950. when we dropped the bomb on hiroshima, we believed the world was ours. having defeated the access powers on the battle front, we were ready to show the russians who was the boss of the world. harry truman's goal was to rule russia, was to rule russia. in addition to that, the accused truman and democrats in particular of wanting to turn west germany back to the nazis. wanting to turn west germany back to the nazis.

it was a sham. as davis put it, reenslave the colonial peoples around the world, the black and yellow peoples around the world as he wrote in this piece. it was to reenslave the world. if you studied this period, the only people making that argument was stalin and cpusa. quotes davis, "the big industrialists who financed hitler have been handed back their factories and old-school ties with wall street are strong. america's policy of denaziification is a sham. what kind of west germany is america helping back to its feet? it is the germany of the master race theory. the fascists we sought to exterminate is the greatest threat to mankind are now our

partners. what do you say we kiss and make up?" as i was reading that column at the time, senator obama had gone to berlin, he was still senator, and made this speech about how americans and germans stood together in the days of the berlin blockade and days after world war ii to resist the soviet union. frank marshall davis was on the other side of that. another piece that haunts me, january 26, 1950 column, called free enterprise or socialism, and in this piece, davis' demon is not harry truman, not the democrats, but general motors, gm. davis is furious that this gigantic corporation called gm made a profit last year of $600

million, and he's trying to frame gm as an aggressive monopoly. davis concludes in the face that's still rising unemployment and mounting depression, the time draws nearer when we have to oust the monopolies, and restore a system of competing free enterprise or let the government own and operate our major industries. if davis could have, if he could have, he would have nationalized gm in 1950. no question. how relevant is all of this today with president obama? i mean, we can go into that and talk about that in the q and a, but i read the columns, went a little bit not exactly in the order of my discovery of the things, i read the columns first and then found the fbi files and the other things, but at first i thought with davis that i was

dealing with possibly a progressive liberal duped by communists, and then i realized this was progressives and liberals, and so i realized i had to have this character in the book. now, how exactly relevant is it to today in what's going on in washington and how does it apply to today? i mean, we could talk about that and debate that and you can make those con conclusions. i doamentd go into -- i don't go into that, but i cover davis in length. one last example, and i'll wrap up and take your questions. senator ted kennedy, the late senator, ted kennedy, who is hard to get a handle on, and i've been asked if i consider kennedy a dupe or something else all together. i found things from kennedy in the vietnam war in the 1960s that he said about our troops that are almost io identical to things he said about the troops

in 2003, 2004, and 2005 in the middle east. it was really startling. i didn't realize all the things kennedy said about our troops in vietnam, for example, in the 1960s, but the major revelation that i have on kennedy, which i know a lot of you are familiar with, is in may 1983 document that is in the central committee archives in the soviet union, and my understanding is that the archives have sense been resealed, and so you can't go in now and get that document, but that's okay because it's in the book and you can read it. i've one-upped the russians and i'm excited about that. [laughter] it's in the appendix in the book, five pages in russian -- by the way, i've been told that the transligs that's in the book -- translation in the book is actually pretty kind to kennedy. it's charitable that if you actually read it in russian,

it's worse. it's both in russian. it's in english also, and on the very back of the book, the very top of page 1, translated in english is listed there, but here's what the document says. does this not grab you right away? special importance, committee on state security of the ussr, kgb, may 14, 1983, and then this subject head is bound to peak your curiosity. regarding senator kennedy's request to the general secretary of the communist party. okay. opening line, on 9/10 of this year, this is 1983, president reagan, right? reagan is president. fdi's speech, 1983, evil empire speech, reelection campaign coming up in 1984.

on 9/10 of this year, senator edward kennedy's close friend and they know who this was, was in moscow. the senator charged him to convey the following message through confidential contacts to the general secretary of the communist party in the soviet union. senator kennedy like other rational people is troubled by the current state of the soviet american relations. this relationship coupled with a general state of global affairs will make the situation even more dangerous. here we go. the main reason for this is reagans belig rains, and his firm commitment to deploy middle range weapons within western europe. he goes through the document and lists different reasons why reagan is gaining in popularity. this is fascinating.

you have an admission from the soviet head of the kgb, victor who is really interpreting the author from senator kennedy. the ragen nomics is working and reagan is cruising to easy reelection. oh, no, what are we going to do about this? well, they go through there, and then it says begin this, given the current state of affairs, basically, reagan's reelection coming up, what can we do? what can we do to stop this? to reverse reagan's dangerous defense policies? well, then they get to the core of the offer. kennedy proposes the following, and they give one, two, three different steps here. basically what kennedy believed according to this document, what kennedy believed is that the

soviets wanted peace, and this increasing cold war tensions was the fault of reagan, and the soviets needed help in better communicating their peaceful intentions to the american media and americans generally. as this letter says, reagan was good at propaganda. you need to find a way to get around reagan's smoke screen of propaganda. how do you better communicate directly to the american people? kennedy is very impressed with this, not impressed with reagan. so, they argue here, kennedy would go to moscow and be with the soviet leadership, even talks about bringing senator mark, hatfield, a liberal republican with him. they talk to them, help arrange for a soviet media tour in the united states. basically, a kind of a public relations tour in the united

states, a kind of a pr campaign. those are my words, pr campaign, to communicate peaceful intentions so high-level soviet officials would also come to the united states to talk directly to the american media and even mentioned by name walter cronkite and barbara walters to do interviews with those folks, and they could directly communicate to the american people. now, what happened with all of this? by the way, then it winds up in 1984 where it talks about the election campaign is coming up, and then there's a discussion as to senator kennedy's president prospects in the 1984 race, and so it finishes up with that. whatever became of this? this is may 1983.

well, he got sick at the end of that year, died in february of 1984. they talked about this happening in september of 1983. anybody remember your chronology of cold war history? what happened over the alaska territory in 1983? the soviets shot down the korean airliner including americans, 007, and initially denied doing it, so that kind of put an end to this apparently, not very impressive was all of that. now, for people who are listening or watching on c-span and who are democrats and angry about this and don't want to believe it because they like kennedy and don't like reagan. i got news for you, kennedy did a very, very similar thing to jimmy carter in march of 1980s,

and we know this from the archives that came into the united states with vastly defect or in 1992. recently, president carter when promoting his diaries talked about how he believed senator kennedy tried to undermind him on health care; right? because of kennedy was challenging carter for the democratic primary in 1980. he didn't mention anything about this, but on march 5, 1980, kennedy, again, through the same contact, the same liaison in moscow had a message delivered to the soviet leadership. as the archives characterize this, here's what kennedy was arguing. the carter administration is trying to distort the peace-loving ideas behind the russian proposals. the atmosphere of tension is

being fueled by carter. the carter white house is feeding public opinion with nonsense about the soviet military threat and soviet ambitions for military expansion in the persian gulf. what's so jaw-dropping about this is according to this, kennedy again is concerned about rising soviet tensions, cold war tensions, and he's blaming it not on the soviets, but again the president in the white house. who is jimmy carter? we have a picture of carter kissing him and he was anything but hard on the soviets. he was very accommodating to them. june 1979, he kisses the russian leader in the the submit, and track about the trade with a kiss, carter is celebrating christmas and gets news that the red army just invaded

afghanistan, and then here just three months after the soviets invade afghanistan and kennedy is concerned about the rising cold war tensions which according to the or rifes are the fault of carter, wow, wow. put it in context. what was going on on march 5, 1980? presidential primaries where the democratic president was being challenged by senator ted kennedy for that so what happened in 1980 with carter seems to also have happened to some extent in 1983 with ronald reagan as well in both cases. well, i could give other examples of this, but i'm watching the clock, and i should probably stop, and i want to take your questions, but that's a look at duey, frank marshall davis, and ted kennedy. there's other people as well,

but i'll stop there and take some of your questions. thank you. [applause] >> what bt for the growing support that the communist party gives the democrats and people's weekly world and so forth? i mean, for crying out loud in 2003, they had a moveon.org thing on the front home page of the website, and more recently they are constantly raving about president obama's policies. >> yeah, it's a really remarkable thing. the one nation rally held down here not that long ago here in dc, i was shocked to see that when you went to the website that listed all the different endorsing groups, communist party usa was there out in the open as an endorser. that is -- what's interesting to me about

that having written a book on duping and how the public duping them for 100 years, going back to the 1910s is in the past in the those rallies, the liberals like the plague would -- they would avoid the communists, and the only way to get them at those groups was secretly, so vertly, and here, in this case, it was arm's wide hope, come on in, no problem. one of the most troubling examples i give in the book, one i had to look at again and again and again, and i still look at the documents, and just can't believe it was an april 1941 group called the american peace mobilization. okay. this group was a communist front group, and by the way, people who are listening who hate who-ac, the house and senator

committee, this group was exposed by them which called on one of the most seditious, conversive groups in the united states. they accommodated hitler. the house committee did far more good things than you guys are willing to acknowledge, but the american peace mobilization, their job was to toe the soviet line, represent moscow's position, bring representatives to the rally. they were created, think about this, august 1939 hitler and stalin sign a nonaggression pact to not fight each other, so because of that, the american communist movement in 1940 and 1941 protested american lend lease to britain, aiding britain. basically, accommodated hitler because he was in an alliance with stalin. that group, the american peace

mobilization took that position. we have in the book the actual documents where they are ordering the making thf group in chicago in 1940. they went and protested. fdr is a fascist trying to start another war; right? the soviets -- don't send aid to britain, and meanwhile britain is dying because of hitler. that's the position they took. they picketed outside the white house. "washington post" covered it. one of the leaders was fred field of the vanderbilt fortune interviewed in an article. congress never mentioned it once of the he was a communist and picketing outside of the white house, and this is so incredible. on june 22nd, 1941, june 22, 1941 -- and i have the "new york times"

article that describes this. they put down the pickets and chanted a pro-war chant and went home. anybody know what happened then? the soviet union was invaded by hitler's germany. they betrayed the pact on a dime overnight. the people in the american peace mobilization became prowar, and they changed so cynical. they changed it from american peace mobilization to the american people's mobilization. they didn't even change the accommodated hitler cro anymore. they kept that apm and pushed for lend lease, united states to enter the war, fdr was no longer a fascist. now they could be cp-usa could be pro-american because they are allied with stalin so it was really a great day for them.

the "new york times" article on the subject is titled "clergymen group opposes war aide" that's the group duped progressives. the communists showed up at the rallies saying blessed are the peacemakers; right? turn the other cheek. of course, not knowing they are communists blowing up churches and jailing priests, and far too many people especially on the religious left, herb, the great excommunist himself, i asked him when i started the book if there was a particular group that was duped more than any other, and he said, yes, progressive pastors were the biggest suckers of them all, and american peace mobilization is a good example of that. yeah, go ahead. oh, you need a microphone.

>> al from medium. in your analysis, how this started historically and how effective as propaganda do you see the way hollywood through films have depicted the communist influence in particular in the u.s.? >> yeah, great question. it's scandalous and horrible. it's absolutely horrible. i would say that hollywood are still dupes for the communists because in the grave, the communists are in the grave now, and hollywood is still protecting them. protecting them as if they were never communists to begin with. you have these hollywood ten figures who are almost all party members we now know are called to washington to testify, and they get a group of liberal hollywood actors and actresses who they lied to and told them, we're liberals and progressives

like you. we're not communist. humphrey bogart said they checked every member in the group. they were careful about this, and there's no sympathy among rt left for the fact that the communists lied to the liberals on the left and tarnish the their reputations. no problem whatsoever with that. the created the group called the committee for the 1st amendment, these hollywood liberals did, and they flew to washington. humphrey bogart, danny cay, jean kelly, katharine help burn. they were duped bad. the cover of the daily worker on every issue. people for the 1st amendment, and here they are. they get to washington and some of these other people are called

on the stand, and boy, big surprise, congress has evidence. they just don't, you know, they are not just a bunch of red-baiters. they bring them up there and lawson hears about it, here's the article you wrote for this and that. he's your communist card number, five digits, and they present this evidence, and lawson, you know what they did? they stood up, fascist, nazi, american concentration camp, they would be let out. they did what the left always does when they are nailed or caught and when these guys are caught as communist, they called their accusers nazi and fascists, and then bogart knew they had been duped. wow, were we lied to. by the way, the airplane that

they got on in los angeles was called the red star. [laughter] they said, right away, i should have just thought, oh no, but no concerns at all. now, this whole era is portrayed as joe mccarthy on a wild rampage prosecuting these poor people. he wasn't on the house committee then. he was a senator. he had nothing to do with this, but every new anticommunist was portrayed as a joe mccarthy. i quote one of the cofounders of the aclu. by the way, reed roger baldwin 1928 book "liberty under the soviets," but one of the founders was harry ward, a methodist minister. i quote a piece he wrote for "

protis tent digest". he's warning about the next red scare. by the way, both democrats, then it was martin of texas, a democrat; right? now it's this guy and that guy. they would have found their joe in any of that, and that's not to defend any of mccay thy, please, but we now have the evidence of how much of these people were guilty and the way they lied and misled people. it's very disturbing. other questions? right there, question. >> i wonder if you have any comment on the role of american corporations as dupes for america's foes such as henry ford and the ford corporation, and also arm and hammer, and also now that the flow of

corporate money into elections has become the flood gates have been opened, if you have concern about american companies that want to do business with communist countries like china either selling them products or buying materials from them, user their influence on american politicians which is only going to grow to force american policy in a direction that is more sympathetic to china and less sympathetic to the american worker. >> well, yeah. i'll cut you off because i haven't really looked into it. i didn't find much -- although arm and hammer was originally on my list. i'm serious, this is going to be a multivolume set. it's an extraordinary thing. i mean, so many different people were manipulated, but no, i didn't look into any particular

corporations. yes? go ahead. >> yes, i was just wondering what the, -- where the american socialist party plays into the narrative with politicians like al smith, where they duped too or sympathetic to the communist party? >> that's an interesting question. i have an archive from the 1932 presidential campaign where communist party-usa was just torching everybody. they hated the republicans. they hated fdr. they hated the socialists. i mean, you know, so they were going after everybody. i mean, it's amazing too, the anger that was there among

american communists. i was surprised by that. when you would see these documents, the fights that they had among each other and so and so fraud, exposing daily workers as a stool pigeon. that would be the orders from the latest meeting minutes, but e, yeah, that, and also i would update this. in fact, to connect this to john's earlier question about modern day progressive is one of the groups i looked at is sisters are obama that is clouding this whole thing. i understood progressivings and liberals to be on the left, but not on the communist left; right? there's variations, a full spectrum of beliefs. you have the very far left, and you move over to democratic

socialism, but this group progressives for obama, one of the four initiators was the founder of the nch and one of the founders the jane fonda. mark rudd who was -- [no audio] they were followers of faye and in the book they said michael was a sal linnist. it's amazing how many of these people are now in academics for one thing, but they are now out calling themselves progressives for obama, and so what do they really believe? are they now just lifting the progressive label? have they changed their views? it's hard to say.

i quote in the book a fascinating assessment from mark rudd of the 2008 election where rudd says, you know, obama, he did it. he did it. he didn't blow it. he said just the right things and took the right policy positions to be able to attract just enough moderates and independents and crossover voters. he didn't blow it. he did it, and i agree with his strategy. ?i other strategy in this environment invites sure defeat. obama did it, and it's fascinating that for rudd and some of these folks, obama is a democrat that they ever supported. they hated jack kennedy. they hated lbj. they dismissed carter as a born-again baphoon.

that's the language they use. they see an obama who is far enough to the left for them. it's interesting. it's very telling, and rudd's point -- after the november 4, 2008 elections, i do what i always do on a wednesday morning before i go to class. i got the print out of the latest exit poll da to punish da to to see how they voted and self-identify, and every single one of these for 20 years now, the american public described themselves as conservative over liberal by 40%. gallop did a huge poll and it was 40-20. academics is 90-10, liberal to conservative, and they preach diversity. it's been 40-20, and the national journal called it in 2007, the most liberal member of the senate to left the barbara

boxer, hillary clinton, you name it. when i woke up on the morning of wednesday, 2008, okay, i'm going to see a change. 40% liberal. it's got to be. 40/20 again. so you had this incredible situation where a self-identifying and self-professing conservative goes in and decisively volts for a president, the man who was ranked the most liberal senator in 2007. how did that happen? go into the reasons why bush lost, why people didn't like bush, or why john mccain lost, and voting against mccain was a vote against bush. people were taking by this concept of change, what does change mean? the progressives for obama were thrilled with this. the american public finally voted the way that tom hayden

and mark mud and these folks had wanted them to vote. the same people who by the way, in 1968 targeted the democratic national convention, not the republican, the democratic convention in chicago. democrats, liberals, the communists are not your friends. quit defending them, but as james said, for the left, the preferred enemy is always to the right, so it's the anticommunist that consume their outrage more than the procommunist. some are procommunist, but anticommunist are meander thals. i don't like them. >> time for one more? >> one more, sure. in their lectures, they complain

about joe mccarthy and not joe stalin. >> i'm coming from a country that overcame soviets. nobody has any communist sentimentses except the communist themselves, so for me, it's stunning. i found interesting material. for me it's not just stunning, but shocking to see a young person in the united states hauled into this socialism that's an alternative, but on the other hand, i can see angela davis who with the kgb is still teaching. i'm stunned. how can that be possible and tell that russia today, you know, the russia propaganda channel in english. they have like 500 people right now working in dc.

they do 12 minute interviews with the american communist party chairman. 12 minutes on the prime time, so they are still doing. i'm grateful for you, and i hope you can rebrainwash those young people -- debrainwash the young people who are with that. >> thank you, and lee edwards is here, victims of communists foundation. it's a great website. they are helping to educate people on this as well, but the problem is that we're not learning this past. i mean, that's what it comes down to. i did a review of about 20 high school civil techs a few years back, and basically the main 20 that are used across the united states, it is for the state of wisconsin, but it's incredible. in fact, this was right about the time -- this was three or four years

after the seminal book by harvard university press, the black book of communist came out documenting 100 million dead under communist government. i couldn't find that in a textbook. not one. no figures whatsoever. the black book of communism only, only has about 25 million dead for the soviet union. when, in fact, it's probably 60-70 million. the yale university press book, he was one of gosh chef's principle reformers on taxes him victims, how many people were actually killed by the communists. he said 60-70 million were killed under stalin alone. we know that now probably killed about 70 million, so really numbers are probably not 100

million, but 140 million when you really go up there, but as a conservative figure, it's 100 million. those numbers start to run together. think about this. take all the dead in world war i which was the most destructive war in history up to that point. take all the dead in world war ii, combine them, world war i and ii, double them, and only them are you approaching the number of dead victims in communism. everybody here has an uncle who died in world war ii, 3,000 americans died in world war ii. the communists killed over 100 million people, and it's something that we don't know about, and if you read the communist manifesto, go to marksist doirgt. i shouldn't have given a word

for that, but i'm asked to give talking on why communism is bad because they don't know. well, stalin and these guys were an aberration. i mean, they did -- communism is really a good idea if you read it in theory. no. read the communist manifesto. it's 50 pages long. it's a horrible book. read the ten-point plan. read the one little paragraph that says marx the entire theory is summed up in one sentence, abolition of private property. my 3-year-old daughter can tell you that you're going to have to kill people if you do that. okay? abolition of private property? that's a good idea? i mean, that's, that's craziness. i could look at that in 1850 and say you know how many people are going to have to die?

you're going to have to kill to pull that off. not a good idea in theory which is almost everywhere it's been tried, anywhere on the planet whether in asia, africa, latin america or eastern europe, widespread bloodshed. one says in each of the cases, in each of the countries where communism has been tried. s massive annihilation of human beings and repression and basic crimes in carnage far outdid anything in the previous experience or nationallalty or history of -- nationality of any of these countries. this was a new thing. whether it's in cambodia or the soviet union, china, cuba, you name it, again and again and again, and we're not learning any of it, and the reason why is because the wretched, wretched state of our university that are

not teaching this stuff that are horriblebly biased that don't believe in this at all, and by the way, are way over priced while we're at it. [laughter] i'll stop there. how's that? [applause] >> this was hosted by the heritage foundation here in washington, d.c.. to find out more visit heritage.org. at number one, "decision points by george w. bush. america by heart, is number two. the awe to biography -- autobiography of mark twain is number three on the list. fourth is unbroken which tells the story of a world war ii prisoner who became an olympic

runner. life is number five, and hip hop artist, jay-z is 6th with decoded. in the book, broke, they plan to refair the country's fiscal situation. the book is number 7. jon stuart is number 8 with earth, the book. cleopatra is 9th, and colonel roosevelt is number 10. >> we're at the national press club talking about the book, the presumption of guilt. can you tell me what made you decide to write about the incidents? a lot of people e-mailed me, text messages, and calls after his arrest saying this happened to my grandmother, niece, uncle,

brother, and it was an amazing reaction, and it create the news because it was professor gates. it became even more of an issue because my former student, barak obama came to his defense that led to a national issue. since a lot a lot about race and justice, it was a natural thing to do, and i wanted people to say if professor gates get arrested in this with two forms of id in his house and his crime is just arguing the police officer in his house, what happens to those who don't have power? this books explores that case and the broader issue of racial profiling happening throughout our history. >> did you american anything that surprised you? >> the first thing was very interesting. everyone thought that the woman who originally caught, lou seal was the noisy neighbor. in fact, what do we learn?

she is the hero. she says i see people. i'm calling, but i don't know if they live there or work there. the statute said are they white, black, or hispanic. she said, i don't know. the police officer says she said they were black. she never said that. all of those things we thought in july of 2009, research shows that's not the real story, and that's why the book is so important. the last chapter is called 100 ways to look at at black man because the clauses and factions and other material that are received, most of the people who got in contact with me about racial profiling were professional black men. i started research on that on thurgood marshall, john franklin, spike lee, our attorney general, erik holder,

doctors, it just amazed me how many people had encounters with racial profiling, and most of them did nothing. what do they want? they didn't want a million dollars or satisfaction of a lawsuit. they simplimented an apology, and i -- they simply wanted an apology. i tell the stories because people who find themselves victimized can tell their story and get others to respond to it. >> thank you for your time. >> secret historian is nominated for a finalist in the nonfiction category. it is the life an times of sam mule -- samuel steward. that's a subtitle. who was that? >> it's a secret life i brought to life for the first time. he was a university professor

who dropped out of being an academic to become a researcher, a tattoo artist in boston, and later on wrote pornography. >> how do you find this guy? >> it took a lot of searching, and when i came among these papers, i knew i had an amazing life story that nobody had touched before. i put his life back together and put it in a biography. >> when did you hear about him? >> 1987. i came across works he had done published by a small press in san fransisco. i was excited about that, but i didn't know who wrote them because they were published under a pseudonym. it took me 13 years to get the rest of the story. >> how many names did he use in his life? >> i'd say 20. he was known as phil, the famous tattoo art i, and most people

knew him as phil. sam or samuel, but he wrote for them in the 50s and 60s. a big part of putting this life back together was stitching together the names and publications. >> when you took this book to a publisher, and said, i'd like to publish a bioon this man, what was the response? >> it was rejected by 10 publishing houses and it was only because a friend told me to sell it as a magazine article first. i got sent to the new yorker and ended up after a whole bunch of tap dancing, i caught the hear of the president of the publishing house, and he said, yeah, let's do it. >> when did he live? >> 1909 and died in 1993. he had a long life. what i was able to do is chart the progress of what we now call

gay awareness over the course of many, many decades in the 20th century. >> is he well known today in the gay community? >> no, but now that the book is coming out, here's known more and more and among people who care about things like the history of sex research or pornography or gay literary publishing, he is known, but only to a small handful of people. this brings it out to a wider audience. >> what was his relationship to al fred? >> they became an inform mall associate of the institute of sex research connecting ken sigh to north material and he was a sexual record keeper, and a record keeper about sexuality in general. >> he was he out during his lifetime? >> he had to live as a closeted man as a professor, but when he was 30, that was more and more

difficult. rather than not be out, he decided to leave academics. >> justin spring, the newest book, the secret historian. a finalist for the national book award nonfiction category. >> next, texas governor, rick perry talks about the power of the federal government and offers that many of the problems currently managed by washington would be better handled by individual states. governor perry presents his argument at the heritage foundation in washington, d.c.. ..