i don't want to say protest. i never used the word protest. >> yup. in other words, civil rights activism or caring about the issue can take many, many forms. >> teaching people how to write is good. [inaudible comment] >> okay. [inaudible comment. >> thank you all. i appreciate it. >> charles euchner is the founder and executive director at the institute for greater boston at harvard university and is currently a lecturer in writing at yale university. for more information visit his web site at euchner.us. >> book tv on twitter. follow us for regular updates on the programming and newing on nonfiction books and authoring. twitter.com/booktv. >> up next, bruce fleming, a

columnist from military.com discusses the recently published book. what each side need to know about the other and about himself. mr. fleming explored the misunderstanding between civilians and the military, the roles and missions, and what the military and civilian communities need to do to narrow the divide. bruce fleming appeared on c-span's washington journal where he takes fewer phone calls, e-mails and tweets. the program is 40 minutes. >> professor bruce fleming is a professor of english at the u.s. naval academy. he joins us for the last 45 minutes on the memorial day as we turn our attention to the military categories. we asked professor fleming to be with us for a piece that he wrote about the academies in the new york time "the academies march towards mediocrity."

how anapolis and others lost their way. why do you think that? >> guest: i've had constant contact with my students, organization, approaching 3,000 students. i've had time to test the waters, call it that way. the problem with the military academy, they burn out their students. for me, that's the thing that's most hurtful. the military academy is to produce effective officers to lead the enlisted people. so what i've seen is that we actually have what to me seems a clear negative effect on our students. and because the lives of young men and women are going to be in the hands of my students who will graduate to become officers in the navy and marine corps, that's a huge thing. that's a major problem that we have here.

the academies were created in the 19th century when the assumption was that you had to make officers the way we make them still at the academies. but the world has changed since the 19th century. specifically the rotc has happened. the academies now produce one officer in five in any one of the given services. so we're a tiny minority, 20%, one in five as i say. rotc programs produce twice as many as we do at 1/4 of the overall cost. then the question becomes, well, are our officers any better? >> host: right. >> guest: this is all and the -- anecdotal. i've read studies and never been an conclusion that says the academy officers are better. they will tell you that. but it doesn't play well with the rotc and the enlisted people.

they call them ring knockers. they are knocking with their rings on the table. >> host: do graduates of the academy are more protective of their own alumna? >> guest: seems to -- yes. i would say yes. in the '60s and '70s, the preponderance on the naval officers were huge. >> host: yeah. >> guest: it was absolutely huge. now with rotc that's diminishing. there's some suggestion they feel bonded, band of brothers as it was back then. you are going to hire your own. there are a lot of other sources now. and that's -- that's diminishing to the point where it doesn't seem that that advantage is going to be held in the future. >> host: we have opened up our phone lines for viewers. we are talking about the service academies. bruce fleming doesn't come from this as an outsider.

202-737-0002. almost 0001. independents and others 0205. i believe we are keeping up the line for the military in particular, folks who have attended the service academies at 202-628-0184. i wanted to give folks a flavor of what you wrote in the long piece in "the new york times" a week or so ago. you wrote instead of better officers they produced burned out shipment, and they find a maze of petty rules with no future application. they are applied by the administration. that would be the academy administration. they tend to change when a new superintendent is attended every few years. the students quickly see through assurances like quote that people die if you do x. like leave mold on your shower curtain. a favor claim of one recent administrator where military

disneyland, loved by young tourist but disallusioning the people that came to make a difference. more on the military land, what did you mean? >> guest: we are fit and polish. it's not what we do has any fleet. i would argue it does not. when you go to disneyland, you don't go to paris. we put on super parades. they look great. they can proport themselves. they can't walk and talk on the cell phone. because the tourist won't like it. a lot of what we do is faking it. it really burns the students. these are great kids. >> what about academically, do they come out well rounded in terms of both their military skills, engineering or science and liberal arts and education? >> guest: one the things we do correctly, we have a strong core curriculum.

two semesters of english, calculus, engineering, a little bit unclear for that for marine officers but we do it. quite a broad variety. you check out of civilian colleges, a lot them have given up on the core curriculum. the academics are compromised there's so much mickey mouse stuff. >> host: you also raise concern about the recruiting, a common sort of -- something you have in common with other major colleges is the recruiting of athletes. >> guest: that's right. >> host: the academies former pursuit of excellence seems to be pushed aside by the desire to beat notre dame as navy did last year to keep our teams in the top athletic association, we fill officer candidate spots for students recruited for big time sports. how is that different for ten to fifteen years ago? >> guest: it's getting worse and worse. everybody agrees that college

sports are professionalized. colleges ought let to be colleges. be that as it may, a private university can do what it wants. state university as long as the taxpayers of the state go along with it, they can do what they want. this is federal money, folks. the military belongs to all of the citizens of the united states of america. and the taxpayers are the ones who are paying for it. the question becomes -- how is it mission effective to have a football team that can beat notre dame. how does it help produce better officers? i argue it does not. what it does is takes a lot of the time and energy of the kids that we recruit for that. and the fact of the matter is we do have much lower standards for recruited athletes than for competitive students. >> host: bruce fleming is our guest talking about the service academy. kings point founded in 1942, u.s. military academy, west point founded in 1802; naval

academy in 1872; and coast guard academy was founded in 1954. jack in manhattan, go ahead. >> caller: yeah, i'm a naval academy graduate, 1969. i just wanted to comment on where it cost more to put somebody through naval academy than rotc. that's one factor in an equation. if it cost more but more academy graduates stay in for a career and rotc guys essentially are going through to get their education paid for, it cost less to put them through rotc and they stay in a shorter time. if you repeatedly spend less money but more often, they go through the service and get out, doesn't the sum total -- does that make the academies cost effective? >> guest: yeah, i like your argument. it's a very interesting one, jack. the fact is that i've read

studies that do acknowledge that the guys and gals who go to the service academies, there's some greater tendency to stay in longer. the study which was put out by the navy supply school says that it's not at all clear whether it is the effective of the academies themselves or whether it's the type of person that they attract. so my point is that -- let's just position cue late that we send everybody, and turn the academies into what the british have turned their centers into, like a military finishes school, graduate. we get out of the business of undergraduate education. with those guys and gals who do have the intention of staying in longer, would they not if they went to vanderbilt which have a navy program? this study comes to the conclusion we have no evidence that's true. it is true that right now they do tend stay in longer. it's not clear that's the affect

of being an academy. >> host: another call from new york city. jim, go ahead, on the democrats line. >> caller: yes, good morning, sir. >> host: good morning. >> caller: one question about the military academies, do they get a decent education in conjunction with history such as what you had on your reading list, howard zinn's book, "the popular history of the united states." would they ever have any books in there that question some of the more idiotic wars that we've got involved in our lifetime, and i've always thought that -- that's what bothers me the most about the military academies. give me your impression. > guest: the naval academy is different. we've always had civilian phd professors. we are left alone to teach in the classroom what we want to teach. of course, i don't know that i talk about them as idiotic war. but i do call in questions wars of choice.

we talk about vietnam, obviously, the good parts, bad parts. i personally do that. i'm sure that people in the history department do as well. it is absolutely true the administration keeps hands off to that. that said, the administration is very displeased for writing the kind of things that i write. is there an attempt at censorship? yes, i've been disciplined twice. >> host: what for? >> guest: first one was newly arrived dean said he was not going to reward me for merit pay steps voted by the department, in my case, the english department. i published in the indianapolis capital. because it was hours before the end of the fiscal year that the pay steps were voted for. he moved me from two which is the maximum possible to zero. he was very open about the fact that was the reason why he was punishing me.

i filed a whistleblower complaint. my allegation that some of the things we do is illegal. >> host: you have a book "bridging the military-civilian divide." it'll be out later this summer. he teaches english at naval academy. you write in your opinion piece that i've taught english classes and low track english classes. the pace is slower and the papers shorter than in my usual seminars. but the students who complete them get the same credit. when i complained about it, they argued that academics are irrelevant to being an officer. really, thinking and articulating are irrelevant to an officer? the low-track english classes, these are -- these are mid shipman who are not meeting the standard of admission? >> guest: that's right. that's right. what you have to understand is that basically we have a couple of groups of students that we --

[no audio] >> guest: qualified and them come to anapolis. we have english and calculus and so on. you would say -- you might say we need extra help. what's wrong with that?

what we've done is rejected the applicants. we claim we get 10 applications for every slot. i'm not sure it's true. that's what we claim. we rejected many, many fine gals and gals who could have been made it over the bar. didn't need the remedial school or courses and could have been flown much higher. so that's something that i think taxpayers need to be aware of and frankly fairly appalled by. >> you raise concern, obviously, specifically on the naval academy from others in your position at other services academies. >> guest: yes, i am. i'm hearing most of it is because the two largest ones because of the air force and army. nada -- not 100% positive. things aren't as bad here at the academy and o -- and so on. i do think that they are willing problem.

everybody recruits the same football players. they play against each other. i think the affirm action thing might have taken off in indianapolis. >> host: good morning. rob. >> caller: good morning. >> host: go ahead. >> caller: i called to disagree with the gentleman about the football because i think football builds moral and camaraderie. i'm actually agreeing with him now about the admission affirmative action. i agree with him. he's absolutely right about that. we shouldn't lower the bar to let other people in and keep more qualified people out. so while i initially called to disagree with him, i'm actually agreeing with you now. >> guest: i appreciate that. remember i'm a professor. whatever you say, as i tell my students, whatever you say, my job is is to take the opposites. on football, i'm 100% pro football and 100% any sport that

you can name. i'm against recruits people who have only that specialty. we're a jockey school. just by walk ons we could field a decent football team. the issue, sir, is not football or no football. the issue is how far down do we go in recruits athletes. the thing about affirmative action, let me show you the other side. the issue is in an age of no draft and completely volunteer force we have about a 40% nonwhite enlisted corps. the brass are not wrong to say we can't have an all white officer corps. that's going to pose problems. where they go way to far is to create a problem where if -- to create a problem by the way they are addressing it. right now we have about a 20% nonwhite officer corps. no one that i've had any contact with says it's a problem. we do need officers of color. we need qualified officers. what i hear over and over is

what the guys and gals in the enlisted ranks don't get them killed. i'm fully behind equal opportunity for everybody. and look i'm a registered democrat. i'm going to let you even maybe bend things a little bit. as you create a qualified pool of applicants. all right, you take the african-american guy rather than the white guy if they are all qualified. what we do is create a whole pool of people who don't need the standard and take them instead of the ones that are qualified. >> host: call from florida. john -- go ahead. >> yes, this is wonderful hearing the professor today because i attended the naval academy on a presidential appointment by president eisenhower in 1958, 52 years ago. exactly the same problems that he's talking about today were occurring then. and i objected to them. and even my father the marine

colonel, my cousin the marine colonel forced me to go there. like john mccain's father forced him to go there. we were stationed together. the academy after i left honorably resigned, attended maryland university with steny hoyer. we were in the student government together. and then the university of washington law school, my classmate and roommate is norm dicks. chairman of the appropriations committee. it was admiral rickover who said in testimony before the u.s. senate armed services committee where scoop jackson was a friend of mine. he was admiral rickover, political angel, father of the nuclear navy, it was admiral rickover that testified a year after i left having identified the youngest man out of the

4,000 that there were the bad things the professor was saying about the academy that the naval academy was producing the worst of all of the officer programs, the worst officers. >> host: thank you, john, for the call. john's call would suggest nothing has changed. >> guest: i have only been there 23 years. not back to the eisenhower. buff i think -- we've had football since forever. football wasn't as professorrized in the '50s. if the gentleman who called thought it was bad in the '50s, it's worse now. all of the other colleges are going further with their recruiting. we feel we have to as well. the larger question of is it appropriate to produce officers with this what i call the situation of micro control that is -- that we do have at the academies and we don't have at

roxy. there's no evidence that it produces better officers. it's much more expensive. why have them at all? i'm supposed to be the big picture guy. that's what professors do. it's the reason we get tenure. why have them at all? >> host: washington, michael. go ahead. >> caller: good morning. i'm very familiar with the affirmative action on the naval academy. i'm wondering if there's any legal remedy on the horizon. the michigan cases of a couple of years ago absolutely forbid a second track. the school could consider diversity, but could not have a second track of lower standard for minority. as dr. fleming described and other people on the missions board have described, it's a second track for minorities. that's my first point. very quickly, i'll tell you the naval academy prep school was originally envisioned to take fleet sailors,off -- often in

combat, and make them ready for the naval academy. it's not that case at all. it takes just regular civilians, have them enlist almost a sham enlistment and then go to the naval academy to the detriment of the fleet force? i'll hang up and take my line off of the line. thank you. >> guest: i agree with everything that the caller said. the naval academy kicked like a sphere whenever i use the phrase two-track admissions. if they can be found to do that, they know they have lost the case. there's a lot of blowback. fine, you don't want to call it two-track. i can show you that the prep school, for example, that we were talking about, and the gentleman is absolutely right is now almost exactly 50% unqualified, unprepared, racial majorities and 50% recruited athletes. >> host: well, you have a

little bit of blowback about your piece. there was a letter to the editor on "the new york times". it's short. i thought i'd read it to get your reaction. it says i disagree that mediocrity is the norm. they are designed to graduate leaders immersed in the traditions and values of their respective services and motivate and share and sustain the positions in values throughout the armed forces. united states naval academy standards remain high, but the ultimate measure of the academy's value is the performance of or graduates. across the board, we receive feedback the young leaders are ready and reporting superbly. recently they have been called on in haiti, and fight in afghanistan and iraq, i am confident that our young leaders prove their metal every day in defense of our nation. that's from vice admiral fowler. your response to his critique of

your piece? >> guest: right. i'd be surprised if he wrote that. he has the public staff. minor issue of who actually penned the words. who is he supposed to say? it says nothing. i don't really have to respond. it's true that we graduate many fine young men and women. the issue on the table is not whether he believes we fulfill our mission, it's looking at the competition, for example, which is rocky. everything that he said about the officers comes from the naval academy is equally true from roxy. of course, he's going to say everything is shipshape. ship fine on course and so on. what tenured professor do because we are off of the firing line expect to the blowback in terms of disciplinary actions, we are supposed to ask the big questions. i don't fault admiral fowler for having somebody write that for

him. that's why in the "new york times" i said the change will not come from within. that letter exemplified exactly what i'm talk abouting. they stay for three years,, -- >> host: the superintendents? >> guest: the superintendents stay for three years. they calm, make some mistakes, and leave. >> host: is that a plum assignment to be superintendent of the naval academy? >> guest: this is. a few years ago -- a few, i'm dating myself. mid '90s, early '90s, they added the star. we've heard of superintendent who passed over cno. it's kind of a consolation prize after the cno post. >> host: russ in lose is next. carolyn, good morning. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> host: i'm fine, thanks. >> caller: because you say the

academy is worthless, people in there or ignorant to that measure is what i have gotten out of you. if they are, then i want to know why they are not used on our border in our border security, and, you know, maybe they'll learn something as border patrol and keeping thesoeverty -- keeping the sovereignty of the state. i know democrats are against. >> host: to be fair, i don't think he said they were worthless. >> guest: no, that's what i do need to respond to. i've spent my like. wonderful gals and guys. many of them are extremely talented. superintendent, given his due, is absolutely right. they make fabulous officers. we are not worthless. what you have to understand we are very expensive and we're taxpayer money. when taxpayer money went into aig, all of the sudden people said we ought to have a say in this. this is our money. folks, it's always been your money in the academies. this is -- we live in a

democracy. thank god. the military works for civilians. the purpose of the military is to defend the civilians. civilians need to take an academyive interest in how that's produced. in the word that's the subject of the upcoming book. there are images on web site which is my name, brucefleming.net. one m in fleming. the civilian word has to understand how the military works for them and reverse. >> host: bruce, 10:00 eastern, 15 minutes of your phone calls. we go to houston, texas. steve on the independent line. that's not steve. steve, go ahead. >> caller: yes, thank you, gentleman. this is the best conference that i've heard in some time. you both are scholars and i want to know a couple of things. first of all, how do we win the war against our enemies? and then i want to know what

about the gay and the military issue? i think gays in the military is fine with me. i'm not gay. but, hey, if somebody wants to fight for me, go ahead. and the other thing is how do we protect our borders? because i thought after 9-1-1 we should have protected our borders first? >> host: a little off topic. in terms of the gays in the military, more broadly on policy with mid shipment. last week on capital hill, this was the key defense moll -- defense policies. in your classes are your mid shipment able to be critical not only of broad policies but of what you are talking about in terms of the academy policies. is there a form for them to be able to express their concern, displeasure, over academy policy? >> guest: in so far as

professors choose to make time. i have to go slow. these are skills courses that i teach. analytical. i can't spend all of the time talking about the naval academy. when it's possible, i do make time. i do have an opinion about the gays in the military. i wrote an editorial for the "baltimore sun" that came out six weeks ago. two sentences of the back up here, i sometimes ask people in to spend 15 to 20 minutes with my fleets called freshman on topics of interest. then they write about them. so it's, of course, related to the course. a couple of years ago, i got a gentleman named dr. aaron belkman at the university of california. what is going to ask when "don't ask, don't tell" is lifted. students wrote the vows, and why don't we have discussions like this more often.

why don't we have them at an academy wide level. professor fleming can invite somebody. okay, the short version is i think that as always i'm the guy in the middle. i wrote a book about "why liberals and conservatives clash". for decades, i got tired of not having a primary to vote in, but i was an independent. like i said, i'm the guy in the middle. i respect conservatives and liberals. i try to get the edge of both of those extreme positions just a little bit off. short version is it looks as if lifting "don't ask, don't tell" is going to happen. i think it's going to cause problems. no way they are not going to cause problems. are they problems to deal with? probably. we'll deal with them better by talking about them. that's exactly what's not happening. >> host: yeah. >> guest: that's exactly what's not happening. i see no effort to have a forum

where students can talk about them. i mean think about it. a bunch of back marines. are they going to -- who are they going to want to follow up the hill? another -- are they going to follow a gay guy? maybe. if he's earned their respect. maybe not. there are going to be issue. are they deal breaker issues? i would say not. i have to say i have some experience with this. i have a gay brother. he died in the early '90s of aids, i'm sorry to say. i loved him. and he had a very difficult life. so i'm very sympathetic to gays and lesbians who want to serve in the military. but i also try to take the other side. you take a bunch of straight boys from places where they don't -- they are not comfortable with gays and lesbians. and you don't talk about it. you pretend it's not an issue. you make it worse than it needs to be. >> host: i think we have a person on the line from the service academy, whitman, massachusetts. is this j.b.?

>> caller: yes. >> host: where did you go to the school? >> caller: i didn't go to the academy. world war ii veteran. >> host: go ahead with your comment. >> caller: we had a camp called camp robert smalls at great lakes. it's one of the first camped that admitted blacks at seamens, not just as attendants. and i'd like to ask mr. fleming, did he ever read the book "the goldman 13"? >> guest: no, sir. >> caller: that's a book you should read. it was the first black naval officers in world war ii. one of them happened to be my commanding officers on okinawa during the war. i like very much for you and other people that's listening to seek this book out. it was written at the academy.

and colin powell prefaced it. >> host: thanks for bringing that up. >> guest: thanks, sir. >> host: john republican line. go ahead. >> caller: i think your pending all of the athletes a little too broadly. 1967, i got my appointment from the secretary of the navy as a qualified alternate. i spent most of my youth trying to get into the academy. coming from a state as large as new york, i had three options. i had to tell you the test i took for the entrance examine back then was the hardest that i took bar none. it was the hardest test. better than the s.a.t., maybe the students are getting a pass. there's a lot of people that want to go who are as qualified and anybody else and happen to live in the wrong place at the wrong time in terms of getting a political appointment. >> host: is there a separate

test? >> guest: there's not. it's changed since the '60s. there's not a separate test. my point is the number of people who are qualified who are rejected is much, much higher because we have the political agenda or the athletic agenda that we are going with. obviously we can't take everybody that's qualified. we could make three harvards out of the people to whom we have to say no. we can't let everybody in. that's not the issue. the issue is to get the most qualified people coming out at the other end. >> guest: i have sympathy for the people that were rejected, but as a taxpayer, that's not my baby. >> host: your opinion piece in the "new york times" we have two choices, shut down the academies and rely on rotc, or embrace the level of excellence we once had and have largely abandoned. this means a single set of high standards for all students in

admissions, discipline, and academics, it means downgrading our football team to so be it. we also need a renaissance in our culture. we need to get the students on board with the program by explaining the goals and asking for feedback from cadets, graduates, and the armed forces at large. now we are frustrating the students and misleading the taxpayers. bruce fleming with us. here's kim on the independence line. go ahead with your comment. >> caller: yes, i'd like to get back got naval academy students and my agenda. can i ask you a question, i did miss part of the program? >> guest: yes. >> caller: have you been in the rotc, or attended one the academies? or you are an independent college professor at the academy? >> guest: the latter. >> caller: okay. sports. have you ever participated on

the sports team in your lifetime? >> guest: no. i feel there's an agenda. >> caller: no. i think that nothing has been touched here on the fact that you can go and -- you can go to school and get straight as. and have a lot of knowledge. but i don't believe that makes you necessarily a wise person. >> caller: i don't know how to respond to that. i was on the naval academy admission board. i'm here to tell you the students we reject are all around great guys and gals. they have to do well in athletics, leadership, and in academics. so i feel that you are trying to go in the direction of saying that i'm just a pointy headed intellectual who doesn't have a sense of the needs of the navy. you are wrong. that's not true. >> host: democrats line. >> caller: good morning. thanks for the c-span.

i really like the idea that you want to actually much more powerful people in the academies. i think, frankly, we should stop recruiting in underprivileged neighborhoods, stop recruiting minorities, and just go to m.i.t. let's go to harvard and see how many of those kids who could make it through the academies. then you got the grunts. who's going to follow them up the hill? >> host: well, earlier, you mentioned that the british use sanhurst, as a postgraduate. in the uk, you would go to undergraduate, get a college degree, then go to the military academy. how does that work? >> guest: well, that's the way it works. i'd have to look into chapter and verse exactly. i did do some research recently. both at sanhurst, and dartmouth, their naval academy, you can go

one year to several years. they have just gotten out of the business of combining undergraduate education with the military. that would be, frankly, one option for us. it's beautiful. i love it there. sure, keep the plant. but the issue would be maybe it makes more sense to do a kind of level thing where they don't have all of the other military mickey mouse stuff. it's not military. it's not fleet effective. let them concentrate on the academics. let me go out and get drunk in real colleges. let them grow up among other things. and then send them to the equivalent of the commander school. that would be one option. > host: have you seen many veterans of iraq and afghanistan come through and then get enlisted into the academy? >> guest: yes. my heart goes pitter pat for guys and gals. i've had combat veterans.

one of our college professor talked about -- he was on the money. he knows the deal. most of the people that we say are prior enlisted are, some form, we do get combat veterans. i had the great joy of watching the graduation last friday, watching a prior enlisted marine who was an arabic major. he went to damascus on an exchange program. he's going back in. >> host: into the marines? >> guest: absolutely. it makes me so happy. >> host: go ahead for professor fleming. >> caller: good morning, professor. one thing that you haven't touched on that i know a little bit about because my brother went to rotc at villanova. it's the negative culture of called the ring knock knocker

syndrome. >> guest: i did touch on that. >> caller: sorry. >> guest: if you say are you better officers, most of them will say, nah. but some of them will say yes because of what we went through. ring knockers, it's one the strikes against the academies for sure. >> host: eric, you still there? >> caller: yeah. also as i said, i'm getting the bias side from a academic person. but from what they say is a lot of people who are academy grads are fantastic. but there's always guys who come from the states where the political appointments were the athletes. they are not high quality.

>> host: are all of the folks that go to academy appointed politically? >> guest: no. that's a misperception. everybody has to get what's called a nomination. there's several pots of nominations. now, ever since i've known anything ab the process, the nomination has been an add on. you can't get through without an nomination from the congress person, or president. that comes after the rest of the admissions process. and if the academy wants you because you are racial minority that they are interested in or recruited athlete, they will give you a nomination. they have a pot -- the superintendent has i think 50 that he can just hand out. so it is still part of the process. compared to the '20s end '30s i got in because -- that's not the way we work anymore. >> host: rochester, new york. martin, go ahead.

>> caller: good morning. my name is marti. i'm a combat veteran of three wars. i'm enlisted. e7. i got out after the gulf, got back in 9/11. if you are talking about the football and team player, if there's a critique that you have to get into the academy, which i've been to. my nephew graduated as a marine. america was built on competition. wouldn't we stick by the score. it doesn't matter black, white, you know, yellow, red whatever difference does it make? i don't get it. that's my opinion there. i agree and sympathize. you are answering all kind of yo-yo questions. staying in the middle is the way to be. the civilians have to change it. that's not going to happen nowadays. >> host: thank for the call.

any last thoughts? >> guest: you have to remember the military and civilian words have to get along. it's your military, folks. you got to love them and understand them. the reason that you do is for civilian world. that's the reason why being in the center is a fun place to be. it's necessary. >> host: bruce fleming book later, bridging the military civilian bride. read more at brucefleming.net. thanks for being with us this morning. >> bruce fleming is a columnist at military.com and has taught as the naval academy since 1987. visit his web site for more information brucefleming.net. >> "made for goodness" well known author desmond tutu, along with mpho tutu.

what is the book about? >> i think most of the book is about the essential quality of human beings is that we are good. our essential quality is our goodness. our behavior does not always bear out that essential quality. but it is my belief and my father's belief that our essential quality is goodness, and everybody else is aberration. we relate stories from both of our lives. both of us are clergy and priest and pastors. we've been in all kinds of places and seen all kinds of grief and horror. i have seen the same kinds of grief and horror, but on a more domestic scale in my role as the pastor. so i have a veryc