this only cautions us to separate the potential economic effects and dynamism that can come from urbanization from the political fact which may result in a slightly more islamic nationalistic tone and these parties are also more critical of the united states as well. to the issue of drones, there's a lot to be said about this, but i think i will just say this. there's a couple things that we know. one is that the drones have a measure of tactical value for the united states and taking out problematic miscreance as they say in pakistan and when they follow this, they know that most of the people who aren't killed are in fact problematic. we also know that on a national level the drones are deeply unpopular and they are used as a political tool not just by the opposition but by the government and the army itself in order to present a certain

optic of american interference in the affairs of the state. that's another couple of things we don't know. we don't know whether the drones are popular, where they actually hit. presumably where they hit we know they are not free popular. laughter could the area's proximity to where they hit their some data that suggests they may be more popular in the areas where they hit because people know who they are hitting. this is all very difficult to come by because dillinger -- during high-quality social science survey work in the tribal areas is not something that i would want to have to do so with a number of scientists do is they will try to do the randomized survey of the bus stations in the settled parts of pakistan, people coming to and from the tribal area so it's difficult to get this information but it's not unreasonable to think that these may be more popular in the areas near to the strikes than the guardian islam a lot

or the political pakistan. the other thing we fundamentally don't know is the strategic value of the strikes. it would seem to me that the strategic value is probably a rather low aside from the few people who are killed by these strikes, a few top militants, but it seems to me and many others of the tactical value whatever strategic value there is especially the political danger. one of the things i'm really glad he highlighted throughout his book is that a more aggressive, more aggressive action by the united states especially boots on the ground in the tribal areas or perhaps expanding the drone strikes to areas of pakistan proper would be one of the game changer's not only in the u.s. pakistan relationship, but also ripple effects to pakistan's macroeconomic environment and

the stability of the system such as it is and that is one of the large things which can change the scenario pretty significantly. >> thank you very much. i sit in the beginning i was excited about this going in because of the book and the speakers and i was vindicated indeed feeling that way. thank you very much, anatol kimmage roskam it was really fascinating and quite illuminating not that we have too many solutions but we have very rich discussions. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] you are watching book tv on c-span2.

48 hours of nonfiction authors and bouck sifry weekend. from the 2011 "los angeles times" festival of books, larry flynt and david eisenbauch how g their lovers changed the course of american history discussed the book and took the book tv viewer phone calls.ome >> host: how does partnership come together? .. did this get started? >> i wanted to find out what our founding fathers and other presidents. what they have today in the political landscape. once i decided high wanted to do the book, my friend david is a

professor at columbia, and fantastic -- we have a great product and soaring -- so history has been written like this. publishers of history books, to be conservative, they're not interested. what we have done is a great deal of research. we follow the lives -- not just

about sex lives but the relationships actually affected a surprising number of cases -- >> an active part of the day so we like to have your questions by phone or send us a tweet at booktv. 202-585-3886. 3886. what is the history in this book? >> all the way to bill clinton, putting the monica lewinsky scandal in historical conquest. the political party throwing dirt at each other, turns out

not to be true. >> to be included in this book, over the course of nation's history. >> we were asked to show, what we consider personal and important in the grand scheme of the political story. >> we talk about a couple of them. american society which are loosely translated as grow up. can i tell you what you are going to say about the way few sex scandals and politicians? >> i have been in the -- a huge effect on our live and we use

this to communicate -- and recommendation to our own age. a much different reaction than we do. we have a very knee-jerk reaction. and politicians have a message -- and don't mean to sound facetious but it is true. and -- career as are destroyed, i don't think fat will happen. it is very dangerous.

it would indicate the president was good or bad because he had an active libido or not. to fight two wars and be able to sleep with everyone to. >> in the last 20 years or so would it be fair to say there has been some level of acceptance? when you look at recent scandals and correct me if my thesis is wrong, and some other wrongdoing that takes people out of office and politicians can survive sex scandals. >> david vitter -- senator from louisiana, won his last election in a landslide victory. it is possible right now because americans have gotten more and

more use to sex scandals involving politicians ultimately that is a good thing because it will enable us to stop talking and obsessing about sex lives of presidents and politicians at focusing on what really matters. >> not just the positives of new orleans but -- when you have somebody that hypocritical, getting caught up in a sexual escapades it just makes it even worse. >> instead of talking about the conceptualism and our lines are already busy let's just give a for instance. what is your favorite story in the book? >> my favorite chapter turned out to be the eleanor roosevelt and franklin roosevelt. it was complicated. he had his girlfriend living in a bedroom next to him.

she had her girlfriend living next to her in the white house together. the american public did not know any of this. franklin's girlfriend turned out to be essential to helping these two figures become the great heroes of american history who led us through the great depression and the second world war. a central piece of their story is the extramarital relationship and important piece that had long ignored. >> host: let me hear your favorite chapter. let's hear from a caller in alabama. you presidents, first ladies and their lovers changed the course of american history". >> caller: thank you for your work. one of your buddies we harrelson, in that movie, online:plays a big part in his life. how much does it play in yours?

>> guest: you say online:? >> host: that was his questions. >> guest: we have a web site but i never go on it. it plays no role in my life at all. much more material is available now because of the internet. it was never available before technology came into use. >> host: is that good or bad for society? >> guest: you don't draw the line but, our reading habits -- little red riding hood -- parents have to police what their children are exposed to but we can't restrict the

viewing habits for adults. >> host: this book covers this week from benjamin franklin and bill clinton and beyond and sex lives for politicians and american reaction to it. let's hear from providence, road island. >> caller: how is the book received so far? are you surprised at its reception? >> guest: so far we had great reviews. everyone who has read it has had nothing -- something positive to say. there are people who resent that we are telling these stories about the heroes of america but the important thing, neither of us are trying to tear down the heroes or make them seem like they weren't important figures or good figures, does that their lives were more complicated than what we were taught in high school. >> host: you worry member of the academy, professor at columbia. what is the reaction to your

project? >> guest: supportive. i teach at columbia and we have a long history of being very supportive of culture and they understand these are huge opportunities with a different perspective on history than an academic historian but also an important figure in the bill clinton chapter. >> host: we talked about -- did your relationship predate the book? >> guest: we became good friends. >> host: when it first came in -- >> guest: doing a little work and i get a phone call from larry flynt saying i have a business proposition for you. we can tell you come to l.a. and i will be in the next place and flowing when he had in mind and when he proposed this collaboration for this book i

for the history o do it. channel. hy was very intrigued so i knew with the i knew he was quite familiar with the subject matter and that it would be sensitive i ht think david is very bright and i felt he was the right person to do the book with.ther] g >> let's hear your favorite book chapter or story in the book. d franklin. i was fascinated with woodrow wilson mainly because of him having a stroke and his wife --

for three months. it was fascinating but the one that really ripped me more than anyone else was warren harding. i couldn't believe that somebody who was such a philanthropist and such a doofus, he was not bright at all. and elected to the warehouse, at the understand anything about taxes. don't talk to me about taxes. the difference between harding and wilson is wilson -- there is a lot of truth about that.

he was picked to run for the senate, handsome looking man in the center and ran into the senate and the presidency. we got elected. one of the first things to do is change the national emblem from the eagle to the chicken because he said there were more chickens than eagles. >> host: telephone call for our 2 co-authors from las vegas. you're still on. >> caller: i just want to say that this was an attempt by larry flynt to normalize bill clinton. his deviance has nothing to do

with sex. engaging in perjury and obstruction of justice. evidence of this, lose his law license because of his perjury and obstruction of justice. this would be a way of normalizing and self. >> guest: that is not accurate. we're doing is telling an important story. in the case of bill clinton in which this national saga over sex captivated the public mind and distracted us from serious threats to america one of which was al qaeda. in the 9/11 commission report the commissioners lay it out that the monaco luann ski scandal directed -- distracted the administration and kept us from what we should have been doing which was protecting the

american public rather than focusing on a sex scandal. >> guest: you will never convince everyone. everyone will have the pros and huns while he was a great president or why he was a deviant. people are going to be arguing that for centuries to come. >> host: a tweet from larry flynt. were there any political escapades' you left out because they couldn't be substantiated? >> guest: we had some important tapes, especially audio tapes including high-ranking politicians. that we wanted to use because it was recorded in one state. and both parties to use tapes. we were definitely sued for it.

>> host: any others? >> guest: there are plenty of rabaul all presidents. we go back to some of the gossip. our focus is on going and unsubstantiated story and how they shaped american politics. >> host: what is the instance of all of this debunking? >> guest: j. edgar hoover wearing a dress and being a transvestite. that was invented to tar j. edgar hoover by his enemies and has been promoted ever since. the problem with that story is that it distracted from the true scandal of j. edgar hoover which is that he used sex files on every senator and supreme court justice, to basically control the federal government over the

47 years he served as fbi director. it undermined the constitution. >> two days of the los angeles festival of books. we are live with our nonfiction authors featuring larry flynt and david eisenbach. >> caller: calling from the other end of america. the film that you appeared in and the rental affair which i think would be one of the very early american sex scandals would you say alexander hamilton? >> guest: right along with the father and children and slave girls and those two were the first news scandals in the beginning with the founding

fathers. >> guest: in the case of alexander hamilton, stephenson, and they discovered -- and james reynolds for the race to sleep with his wife, maria reynolds. the democrat republicans found out about this and then proceeded to defame hamilton and derail his plan to create a national bank with a sex scandal. opening up the boomeranged on jefferson, draft of the story of fathering his own flavor children. what we see here is the filing fathers were not above using sex scandals for political points, part of a long tradition of american politics.

>> host: if we were not focused on this we would spend more time on the important issues. we have important issues throughout our country's history and yet people do like to talk about this. >> in the 8 -- early nineteenth century the sex lives of president andrew jackson and thomas jefferson was fair game. it is the 20th century with the professional is asian of journalism. journalists began to see themselves as part of the establishment and the sec's discussion, well known that washington had a lot of sex and franklin roosevelt and john kennedy had their affairs but it did not make the press and in that time period we don't have the sex scandals to distract us from the true problems at hand. >> host: you talked about a sea change in the 1970s regarding politician than sex. what happened and the 1970s?

you suggest another area where americans attitudes with politicians and sex change once again? >> guest: the reason it changed and david can elaborate more on this is after the cold war, they no longer protected roosevelt or eisenhower or whoever and maybe they weren't doing anything but as far as their private lives they protected him and after the cold war it was not that way anymore. that changed the lot. the political landscape as far as how it would personalize -- >> guest: in the 1970s you have the sexual resolution which is comfortable with the rise of feminism. in kennedy's they what would have been a pass became after the 1970s a sexual harassment as we saw with paula jones and bill

clinton. we had a huge change in american social mores, politics of journalism, kept secret so long and became part of the national dialogue. >> host: how did the rise of the conservative movement change things? >> guest: the conservative movement off of sexual liberation of the 1970s introduces gay-rights, abortion and social sexual issues into the political discussion. jack kennedy never had to talk publicly about gay rights. suddenly everybody has to in politics. this also leads the republicans or conservatives who are leading this charge vulnerable because if you are going to say you are against gays getting married you better make sure your own marriage is on the up and up. >> host: five minutes left. next is california. >> caller: i would like to say

that i have been a big fan of larry flynt for long time and thank you for everything you have written. i am so excited about your book. my oldest son -- my question was i have a 14-year-old son sitting in church with aids and if he thought his book would be appropriate but he is an avid historian and very mature and after listening to your stories it is so historical that i believe it is a perfect book for a budding historian. >> guest: as far as the book goes, it is very much proper for of 15-year-olds. i'd like sue and i was publishing house where for 15 years and with a lot of teenagers in puberty. not that they were illegally supposed to read the magazine but that is the way it happened.

>> host: last call from hollywood, florida. >> caller: two quick comment. are complement larry flynt back to the clinton/of monaco lewinsky thing and offered a million dollars to flush out some republicans and a lot of information came forward on a congressman and livingston's wife approached mr. flint and said she would try to get back together with her husband and appreciates the published material and the second thing was the whole clinton/lewinsky thing was not perjury because it was completely immaterial to the -- was a consensual affair. how is having a consensual affair would influence a criminal case, you just can't ask that. kenneth starr's behavior was much more inappropriate than bill clinton's ever was. >> guest: obviously they felt very much about clinton the way

they do about president obama and wanted to get rid of him and they would willing to do it that way they possibly could. from the time efforts were started to prosecute clinton, they were totally out of control. of a set earlier in the show i think people are going to be discussing this decades to come about the pros and cons of how bill clinton was treated. >> host: you are on quaid tour with this book unusual in "1 nation under sex: how the private lives of presidents, first ladies and their lovers changed the course of american history" is available in your book store or online bookseller is. why spend so much time talking about this? >> one of my main goals is to introduce history to the audience. if it takes something a little

fallacious, it is great and this is a great primer for anyone to discuss the history because you're going to learn a lot more about sex lives and politics in foreign relations. >> host: we are -- you have a civil war chapter. >> guest: the key one is james buchanan, who had a 32 year public affair. the slave owner and defender of slavery, and james buchanan in the course of the relationship of a romantic notion of slave owners being good. james buchanan brings that into the presidency in 1856 and nothing in the southern states