think about, where we need to move for our next generation of conservatism. he talks about that as judge not that we be not judged. you can tell in this address that he has become a man who truly understands that he is an instrument in the hand of god. he conceded in his speeches, as writing, how faithful he has become as a leader. he talks about that as judge not that we not be judged. he then goes on and closes with that great line, with malice toward none, a charity for all, firmness in the right and if god gives us to see the right. let us strive to finish the work reran. now, you may think what does this have to do with me? a college student, in turn, work in an office, and business. what does that have to do with me? i am a writer, mother, i do a lot of laundry, it was this weekend.

you wonder what that has to do with us. it has a lot. first of all we need to understand that we are in mission about moving toward an before. we are a nation that wants to reach out to others and include others. .. the truth is told the truth. it doesn't make the truth away. it makes it -- creative solutions. vs looking at the past and figuring out how to fix the past. let me tell you you can try all you want but you can't fix the

past. doesn't change. there's nothing there for a test. and solve problems for the future, and make it attractive, and the majority of the country with it. it is about absorption instead. how do we do that. we can talk about abraham lincoln and why ronald reagan -- what words are important to talk about jfk. has -- ask not what your country can do for you. but what you can do for your country. are we really doing what we should? that is the hardest thing i do

every day. if you really understand what that means, they see everything we did. when you asked to do things and see how you react to people around you and to them. we all need to understand that every one of us has an incredible network in that we can be a good example. how do we do this? it is to learn every day. i don't know if you learn every day. i try to learn most days. i learn about failing and getting better at learning from failing. one of the things we have to learn is what resonates. and build a movement began of -- -- what does resonate? you can hear the notes they play. we were at lunch last fall, what

i was talking about and telling a story about the greatest problems in the world. the story was, the response of the greatest filing in the world was to correct the notes. what they did was went back and listened to the tape and realized you slow the tape down, you can hear his flaws. you can hear when the notes were off. his hearing was so good that he could correct it before the human ear could hear it. he was correcting as he played. we have to have that ability to figure out if we are going to wrong way. if it is not resonating. we're not resonating optimism we have to rethink what we're doing. in is like a violin. in the end has to be fabulous

and fantastic. we have to figure out how to do that.me.

i am very focused on how jimmy, what is this the eggs. got to love those eggs. you have to know what you are doing. that has become our code for no matter what it is you have to love eggs. have to love the committee meetings urine and the press releases you're getting out and the calls you're dealing with. doesn't matter what it is. you have to love your eggs and jimmy does love is a glued not any more. he got a doctor's record and we are off the heads for a while.

we need to remind ourselves that we as the conservative movement, for women, my mother talked about how she was the first math major in a worldwide understand. i grew up in an age with an undergraduate in finance, i did whatever i wanted. we have choices. we can do that or we can do this. everyone is different and will change a couple times during her life. i worked in corporate finance for a couple years. a big corporate group with $4 billion under me and i had two children and i am a writer. nowadays you can reinvent yourself and change and grow. you have to be authentic which

means, standing in front of you at the end of the morning, you have to be clear about who you are or will or won't do. and you have to understand that it is important that no matter what you do you do have to do in this end of all the eggs you are involved with. we have a really big job in front of us. i mean that collectively. but together we are up to the task. our task is to be truthful without judgment illegal to be creative in solutions, to let all americans come in and join the movement. to understand that everyone can pursue the american dream. i would like to thank you for your time, your commitment, your passion, preserving what i think is an interval part before our history and our incredible future. we are the link of the great

american story. praise be to god on this side of the washington monument. may god bless you and god bless america. [applause] >> we will take any questions. in a ask about how the eggs are cooked. >> what is your favorite speech in the book? >> lincoln's second inaugural address because it is--it moved me because we pray to the same data and read the same bible and this is where we are as an asian. you can almost feel his heart

breaking. but in the end without judgment and we work together and reaching for a bright future. >> in your interactions with people's liberal persuasion what is some common ground you can connect and particularly with the material in this book? >> great question. what common ground talking to liberals and we have a couple of -- it is an american book, not a conservative, we have martin luther king in the book and his speech is an incredible >> we need to look at people who reach out to others and include them in the movement has will models. jfk is in there and fdr. the idea was and is american stories. all of those that i mentioned. all of those authors ask us to be more and do more. none say stay where you are or

let governments all your problems. that wasn't their idea. how do we figure out together. another example. this is an area where we have a lot of opportunity. i have been involved for over a decade in the republic bland. organizations such as that, and conservation minded, publicly for people to use. we got a bad rap in terms of being environmentally aware. i love the environment. god created the environment. we should be steward of the earth and take care of it but we have to figure out how to do it in such a way that makes sense because if we just have rules and regulations weekend control what the rest of the world does. we have to build in solutions that actually work not just for

us but makes sense fiscally and others are adopted as well. we have to be proactive. >> what is the best way to take in the speeches? when i am reading a book my eyes glaze over. i don't really absorber it completely. did you listen to a lot of the speeches on tape? did you read them aloud to yourself? what process did you absorbent? >> that is a great question. a couple for in the. we do have an introduction for each one. who is involved and when did it happen and why it is important and what is the outcome, that helps. for those that are are spent friday night listening to ronald reagan's speech -- his goldwater speech. also worked the brandenburg gate's speech on tv. the one that are on video are the best way to see it. not all of them are.

even when we looked at the book itself, patrick henry, the first entry it is interesting that not only is there no written transcript of that speech but what there is is someone else's recollections of the speech and that is all record there is and that is where we get the phrase give me liberty or give me death. i know tower couple of them, the northwest ordinance is pretty long and not that exciting. look at the parts that are interesting. introduction are always about 700,000 words. be easy to get through. figure out what other parts -- this really is. to you can read one or two. >> how did you pick the 25

documents? >> great question. we do have 25. the original goal was 21. we have 25. it was really hard. clearly you have to have the declaration of independence and the constitution. something you know you have to have. and the first fifteen and figure out based on that what works. we want to make sure we cover our history. you start with patrick henry and go to george w. bush. good coverage in terms of what happened. if we did want to have things that were not only clearly to be in there but things that are a little less well known. the alamosa speech is in there. we tried a little bit of everything to make it interesting.

[applause] >> for more information visit the author's website, jackie gingrich cushman.com. >> visit booktv.org to watch any of the programs you see your online. fight the offer or book title in the search bar on the upper left side of the page and click search. you can share anything you see on booktv.org by clicking share on the upper left side of the page and selecting the format. booktv streams live on-line for 48 hours every weekend with top nonfiction books and authors. booktv.org. >> up next christopher strain looks at why american society is so violent. he talked about his book at the west palm beach public library in florida for 40 minutes. >> i am glad to be here at the west palm beach public library.

appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all. about my latest book. at like to think are the rizzo for coordinating this and making it happen. i would like to talk about the genesis of this book. how i came to write it. i have some selections that i will take you through in the book and leave a little time for questions and answers in this end. but this book grew directly out of my work in the classroom. often times with professors, research and teaching are two different things compartmentalized without much to do with one another. this book derived from a course that i talked originally at the university of california and

florida atlantic university on violence. the class began as a class dealing with violence in american history. it dealt with war, racial strife, labor unrest and a familiar topic. it seemed as if every time i taught this course it wound up being every year for the past 12 years. something horrible happened in the news. some sort of school shooting, some sort of mass shooting. we wound out talking more in this history class about current events. we try to place these advance -- events in some context and make sense of what is happening. when i taught the class in 1997

there were schools and ins in kentucky, mississippi. when i taught in 1999 the shootings at columbine high school in littleton, colorado happened. two years later in 2001 there was a school shooting in california. in 2003 in cold spring, minnesota, in 2005 in red lake, minnesota. i was teaching this course in the spring semester of 2007 when the shooting in virginia occurred at virginia tech. my students were getting ready for their final exam. it became imperative to share what i had learned in prepping for this course. to deal with these current events, students kept dragging

me into the present and forcing me to deal with these issues that are happening in present time. in the wake of the virginia tech shooting, i felt that need to write about what happened. i had a sabbatical in the fall semester of 2007 and i sat down and began to write up my research findings and to write up discussions i had which were in lightning with my students. pull me into this new place and new ways of wrestling with these questions of violence in our society. seems to be something we couldn't get away from. i sat down to write. i was working on a project for about a year. i was wrapping up in fall of 2008 when my phone rain at florida atlantic university. the phone in my office rain. my father was calling to let me

know i shouldn't be alarmed about what was on cnn and i didn't know what he was talking about. he told me there had been a bonnet and at his place of work in a small town in georgia where i grew up. the details of what happened materialized over the next few hours. very chaotic at first. i flew from florida to georgia. a disgruntled client had packed and suv full of explosives and rammed it repeatedly into my father's office building to blow it up. it didn't work quite as the man had planned but he did kill himself in the process and he destroyed the building and a number of people were hurt.

that prompted a retrospective look at violence in my own life and it personalized this violence that i had been studying in a very abstract way, in an academic setting in an academic context. as i was writing -- wrapping up the writing for this book i began to fit about my own life as it relates to the violence and began a different kind of writing and had never done before. more personal kind of writing which is reflected in the preface to the production of this book. i began to think about my own life. how much violence i had experience in various ways and various places as a boy in georgia growing up. has a student at various universities and just as a citizen in various places in different towns and the united

states. had the incidents added up, the crime added up. thing that i had seen, fistfights and altercations with delight in consider myself a violent person. i didn't consider myself someone who courted violence. it seemed omnipresent. if it is something i am dealing with each, has a history professor and someone who leads a fairly quiet existence it must be something that other people deal with in a much more present way. this incident prompted a new moment of thinking about this and contextualize in this

violence. i thought about this in georgia in 2008. i was turning in my head how to fake about violence. a lot of scholars and a lot of writers and thinkers and intellectuals in american life talked about violence in various ways and tended to focus on particular incidents, particular topics, one that captured the imagination at different points, the 1960s it was assassinations, race riots in the 1970s, gay warfare in the 1980s, drive-by shootings. in the 1990s, carjackings. school shootings. there was always some aspect of

violence being considered by academics. there were very few larger studies that talked about violence in general and that is what interested me because it seems that in the wake of these mass shootings and school shooting that had been happening over a previous decade that there was no discussion about how to make things better. sort of short-term small solutions. there is no attempt to discuss violence in american life. that is really where this book comes from. i would like to read a few statistics that may help illustrate the scope of what i see as a major problem. in american life.

passage from the introduction. shocking discrepancies between the united states and other nations revealing how violent a place the united states really is. according to the justice department, the homicide rate declined from a spike of 10.5 per 1 hundred thousand in 1991 to 6.1 in 2000. both of those in 1967. by comparison according to the who homicide rate in france, germany and great britain the word 0.6, zero.six and zero.9 respectively. children in the united states are far more likely to be shot and killed by their counterparts in other industrial nations. the firearm homicide rate is 16 times higher for american children. united states homicide rate in evolving -- it is the united

states homicide rate involving handguns that makes the united states stand apart internationally. in 1996 handguns were used to monitor--murder 30 people in great britain, 106 in canada. fifteen in japan and 9,390 in the united states. the center for disease control reports the rate of firearm deaths, the number of americans shot to death as hovering between 8.8 and 9.2 for white americans from 2000 to 2005. between 7.5, and seven.8 for hispanic or latino americans and between 18.4, and nineteen.3 for african-americans. such statistics suggest there is something unique and frightening happening in the united states. the homicide rate is only one

measure of violence. talk about all kinds of different things in this book. the undercurrent of violence in american life to look at what i call b ecoterrorists of violence in american culture and american society. accordingly i spend time in the book in the first chapter looking at violence as a male phenomena. it is predominantly something done by men to other men the additional to women to children as well. i want to look at the violence of american masculinity, how masculinity is constructed in the united states, to look at how boys are socializing to becoming men in this nation and

in part, there are ways in which violence is built into that process. talk about that in the first chapter. the second chapter is dealing with violence in the media and on television and in movies. hollywood violence. it is no surprise to you to hear that there's a lot of violence in all of these media. i looked in particular at entertainment. and how we entertain ourselves. interested in this and whether or not there is a causal relation between media violence and, quote, real-world violence

that is happening in the world. if i may, again, the discussion of the problem by different groups beginning with the surgeon general. in 1972 the surgeon general report, television and growing up and impact killed by violence provided an authority of warning as did the national institute of mental health in 1982 and the psychological association in 1992. health care providers agree on the dangers of. on july 26, 2000, the american medical association and american academy of pediatrics and american psychiatric association, american psychological association, american academy of family physicians and the american academy of child and adolescent psychiatry issued a joint statement on the impact -- i am sorry. on the impact of entertainment

violence on children. an excerpt of the statement which was subsequently endorsed by both houses of the united states congress reach the conclusion of public health community, based on 30 years of research, entertainment violence to pursue increase aggressive attitude, violence and behavior particularly in children. in addressing whether or not media violence causes real life violence skeptics have been quick to observe some studies on the effect of media violence have been flawed and the correlation did not approve causation. millions of people who use televised violence every day without subsequently acting in an overtly violent fashion. they correctly point out and the many studies that were disproved by causal link certainly warrant a degree of skepticism. there was some evidence that

media violence makes people more violent, that is that it directly translates into post viewing violent behavior but the evidence is largely anecdotal and limited to certain individuals. few knowledgeable individuals would argue that a sustained, relationship has been proven between media violence and violence in society. a professor of communication for oncology in northwestern university and former chairman of the federal communications commission has observed social science is not in the proof business but in the business of identifying relationships and measuring their significant, strength and direction. the relationship between media

violence measure early strong and undeniably significant. those put over by empirical studies indicating causality. lots of research showing prolong pharma imagery can increase aggression toward others, desensitized viewers to real life violence and increase fear of becoming a victim of violence. such were the findings of the 1994 national television violence study at three year effort by researchers from four university overseen by several national policy organization. others confirmed the findings. there is evidence that prolonged viewing of violent imagery can prolong what psychologists call this inhibition. the viewing of violent media can remove or reduce reservations that people may have with regard to perform the aggressive acts that they already know. in theory seeing bugs bunny blow

up while the coyote was the case of acme dynamite or sea and arnold schwarzenegger goes through fields of nameless enemy soldiers can dissident and related acts of aggression like pushing and shoving on a playground. or hitting regardless of age. future studies may confirm this as one of the more onerous effects of watching violent imagery. i talk about this relationship, correlation and causality and the relationship between media violence and real life violence. there is a chapter in the book on the gun culture in the united states. i would be happy to talk more about that. let me read a brief package. what i tried to do was not

rehash the tired argument regarding the second amendment and the constitutionality of gun ownership in the united states because that discussion has reached an impasse. it is a debate and dialogue controlled by those at the extremes. i tried to reconstitute the discussion about guns and the gun culture which is a really important part of american life. the arguments about guns and gun control in the united states heath are as tired as those regarding media violence. studio executives have succeeded in maintaining the debate about an issue that should have been resolved years ago. the gun nuts and got grabbers alike have perpetuated and even

longer argument work in it that tours in. is a debate control that the fringes. one extreme are those who would ban all guns and that the other are those who would increase the armament of our already heavily armed nation. barry glick, prof. of criminal all the best criminology at florida state university characterize this debate and dialogue of death. it needed fresh perspectives and ways of avoiding talking points that inevitably lead to retrenchment and stalemate. a couple more things and i did like to maintain any questions you might have. one of the more dangerous aspects of the manifestation of violence in american society or

the way that it is normalized and mainstream, the kind of extreme violence become more and more routine and more and more regular and this is a phenomenon in media violence but in other things as well. there's a chapter in the book that deals with the combat culture, new interest in fighting sports and martial arts and ultimate fighting championship air on spike television. i should point out in this discussion. these are all elements of our popular culture in which i really part take. i watch violent movies, violent television, martial arts, i have

participated in a shooting sports, i have 0 guns at various points. i could talk more about that. and i will. let me read something quickly about this issue of normalization and mainstreaming. is possible to ignore the worst of the raw. the most acute kinds of violence. so long as they exist on the periphery and social mores the fund them as extreme but what happens when the extreme become ordinary? mainstreaming is problematic because that violent speaker is normalized -- making it part of everyday life. the bigger concern is his expanding as depiction of

violence becomes more pervasive it important we the majority of people have become insulated to humanity's violence. at an end of this book a talk about ideas of solving these problems and addressing this problem of seemingly random violence. there's no such thing. no such thing as random violence and violence directed at no one specifically is in fact violence directed at all of us collectively. until we wrap our minds around that, the incidents such as what happened in tucson a few weeks ago, incidents like what happened in blacksburg in 2007

and what happened in littleton, colorado in 1999 will continue. i find hope ultimately in the ability of us to collectively address these issues and to make our world a better place. let me read this passage. this is the beginning of the conclusion. it discusses what i call bio spend. at this moment it is possible to fix the problem of deadly interpersonal violence in the united states. we have not only the knowledge to curb the mayhem in our streets peterson will schools, work places and homes but the means to shake the society relatively free of danger and fear. we can create a peaceful nation in which the taking of human life is a shocking aberration instead of a common occurrence.

this new were better nation would require minimal sacrifice in terms of liberty hash and could easily exist in the current framework of laws and social mores. would entail a shift in attitudes and adjustments in how we accommodate violence in our families, social relations, entertainment and public spaces and government and dealings with other sovereign nations. it is not utopian fantasy. it is in the realm of possibility. the bad news is we have to deal with some unpleasantries that most of us do not want to think about. we have to take a long hard look at how the violence that tests itself in our society. we have to face up to the ugly record of assault, rape and killings happening around us. but how?

how do we deal with limitations imposed by our own limited vantage point? the biggest impediment to positive change may be a personal one. our own inescapable sense that things must be the way they are. we wonder what we can do already convinced that the answer is nothing. when reviewing the overall pattern of societal violence we find it difficult to make sense of the chaos. the pattern is obscure. those searching for answers in black and white seal we tumbled blocks. a checkerboard of squares in no discernible order but by holding pixilated image at arm's length a pattern emerges. in mind shift occurs. it becomes a matter of parallax. gain in depth perception and focus. with change and positioning

comes change in perspective. i am hopeful that there are ways to address the problem of random violence, to address the problems of mass shootings, it requires the creation of a national conversation, public dialogue about all these issues and how they interlock. we have been good at addressing particular problems like drive-by shootings in the 1980s. we need to figure out how to address the issue of violence writ large. i hope this book is a step in that direction and i hope it can contribute to make kind of

dialogue. i said that i would talk a little bit about myself. has an academic i don't usually but this is a part of the book, let me just address this by way of conclusion and then open it up to questions and hope for answers too. let me read this passage. this is from the preface. a large part of this deals with guns as instruments of violence. i should note i don't find ben detestable. i have gotten a great deal of enjoyment from them. nor do i think violent video game the, movies or tv shows are morally reprehensible, at least not fully because of content. i find reprehensible in their ability to suck time and eat up the entire afternoon. i gleefully and unapologetically play such games as grand theft auto, max pain of the personal and real tour they but the gift will first person shooter that

rewards head shots. for hours on end. i watched pulp fiction more time than i care to admit. watching the ultimate fighting championship is usually faded after the first flurry of bareknuckle blows. does all of this make me a bad person? a hypocrite? perhaps. or maybe it just makes me american. on any given day like most of us i am aware of the cognitive dissonance. on other days i am defiant. you can have my joy stick with you private from my cold dead fingers. while i remain comparatively untroubled about guns or video games or fog and films on their own right do confess a growing unease about how these elements freely combine in our society and tour what end? are there in affect cumulative

or do they actually catalyzed into something different? a new and dangerous toxin border of other chemicals in the environment? i appreciate how they may potentially at one another like a bad combination of drugs. create unlikely held -- levels of violence. aiken concerned about how these ingredients interact with american notions of masculinity in a way that is exacerbated by a violent outcome. i talk about degraded detail in book. in part why i am here today at west palm beach public library to encourage conversation, have a dialogue. to answer questions and maybe we could talk together about ways to address these issues. thank you so much. [applause] >> are there any questions?

[inaudible] >> the question is have i studied suicide at all in the book. the answer is yes. i can provide a few statistics about suicide. i haven't studied youth suicide in particular. i address it at a couple points

in the book. maybe read a little bit again from the tax. accidents, gun accidents attack two are three firearm deaths every day in the united states. most are self-inflicted. most are caused by hand guns which are easy to point in an unsafe direction and most occurred during routine gun handling this such as a lid -- loading and unloading. every firearm fatalities, 30 victims are injured seriously enough to be treated by a hospital emergency rooms. 30 americans are unintentionally and none fatally shot by themselves or by someone else. this addresses your question. these account for deliberately self-inflicted gunshot which are even higher. making 65 more than half a million americans have committed firearms -- committed suicide with firearms. nearly ten times as many as died from gun related accidents.

almost 50 people each they kill themselves with guns in the united states. more than all other methods of suicide combined. the thing about guns is guns facilitate suicide the same way they facilitate killing others. that is among the methods of suicide that is to the pre most lethal. that makes gun that important part of the discussion. suicide is a huge part of the problem that i discuss in the book. very glad you asked that. >> i am always interested in the contrast in violence between the united states and canada because there are different assumptions

in the country. the gun shows, even when you go, you hear from the outside a kind of carnival atmosphere. just as we have shows for everything else, it is probably has focused on the market as a boat show will be next week right here. i am told they don't have gun shows in canada. it is a different set of assumptions. a very high percentage of gun owners in canada as well. i know your concentration is -- pay much attention to the contrast with canada? >> a great question. two points i would like to address. the comparison between the united states and canada. in order to make sense of violence in the united states we have to treat it comparatively and look at what is happening at

other nations. in other nations. he -- one of the misconceptions about canada is canada has fewer firearms than the united states. they have numerically fewer firearms. they're quite prevalent and it is a hunting society and there are a lot of guns. >> ownership is a iron. >> percentage of voters is quite high. not sure if it is fire but i trust you if you know. that to the makes it more important to understand the cultural differences and underlying currents of violence. if there are similar numbers of firearms in canada then why is there comparatively more violence in the united states? it is a difficult question. there are other societies with high proportions of gun ownership.

scandinavian nations for example. sweden, every household has a long gun and it is because men serve in the militia. very high numbers of guns in the society and very few incidents of interpersonal violence. then there are places like japan. we have been focused on japan in the news over the last week. japan has high levels of cultural violence. when you watch japanese cinema and familiar with maine and japanese animation, incredibly violent and low levels of interpersonal violence of japan. these are all things that we should know and study more closely and try to figure out what is happening in the united states.

she -- the other point i want to address about gun shows. there's a wonderful relatively new book out by joan burbank called doug shoen nation. she tries to look at this climate of violence in the united states. but understand the gun culture on its own terms. i think is easy for a number of gun control advocates and anti daughters to write off gun in physicists as irrational or to write off their interest in firearms and that is a mistake. for make makes a conscientious effort to get inside the dun -- after visiting a number of gun shows and evaluating their ideas on politics, their ideas about

firearms and their place in american history and society. that is a step in the right direction. creating a new sort of dialogue between those who are interested in firearms. let me say again i appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all. i hope we can treat this as a beginning of a conversation and beginning of a dialogue and not an end. we are at the end of our

authors and books every weekend >> a former senior government staff member. we are -- we have been very involved in contributing in various ways to washington community. we see this move to politics and prose as part of the same sort of fame. it is another way to continue to contribute to the community.

beyond that we really believe in what the mission has been. it is much more than a bookstore. it is a community institution. it is a forum for debate and discussion. i believe in the need for such forums. >> host: you are referring to your wife who also is the new co owner of politics and prose. mr. gray and, what changes do you think politics and prose needs to make in order to stay competitive? >> guest: there's a lot that is very strong. sales are very strong and a very loyal customer base. at a time when the industry has been facing threats from the books and a declining readership the sales have continued to

rise. we want to preserve everything that has made politics and prose a success. in order for these tour to remain relevant and influential and technologically up to date, there are going to have to be some changes. we recognize that over the years. the store has evolve under their leadership. just what additional direction we hope to movies tour in we are still formulating. getting the staff ideas and survey opinion among politics and prose's customers. this will be an evolving process in terms of deciding what new directions and initiatives to

undertake. >> when you were researching whether or not to purchase the story you visited a lot of independent bookstores around the country. the fine that independent bookstores? >> i did. for all the disappearance of the number of tours in the industry in recent years, what is impressive about the business is a number of bookstores have survived and remain strong and i am interested in seeing what that is. so i visited a number around the country. i found those who are continuing to succeed with strong community roots, very dedicated odor and operators who have been trying a number of different initiatives. i did not find that anybody

anywhere has hit on a home run solution to keeping their store successful. it is more a matter to borrow a baseball analogy of hitting a singles and getting on base. looking at politics and prose i came away reassured that this sort has many of the attributes for success that other stores around the country have, particularly that loyal customer base, large number of avid readers, great reputation that still has a lot of unrealized value. >> barbara meade and carla cohen were well known for working the floor. if booktv viewers who have come

to politics and prose because they have seen it off and on our channel come to visit politics and prose in washington will they be able to meet you and will you be on the floor? >> sure. i intend to be at a store full time. one of the great strengths of politics and prose is its staff. we are in the heritage a tremendously talented, deep bench of experts about books of all kinds. they participated in introducing a number of authors and the recent summit customers come to the store seeking their advice. we are counting on many of them. it is not all of them. original to remain and carry on. >> host: dc a need for politics and prose to move into the