so, facebook and twitter, all the social media has had its potential for benefits, but at the same time it can be accelerating media for its psychosocial epidemics. >> great. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> up next adam goodheart answer viewers' questions and discuss his book, "1861: the civil war awakening" on the national mall of the 2011 national booker festival. this is about 25 minutes. >> host: "1861: the civil war awakening." mr. goodheart joins us now live at the national book festival. what is the photograph on the lv front of this book? >> guest: that is actually a photograph i regret to say was o taken in 1862. i tried hard to find one takenn in 1861 i tried hard to find one and 1861, but it's one of union soldiers in virginia sitting up on top of a hill and looking out

over a mysterious landscape, we see 10-cent or and ships in the background and it reminded me that it seemed like a moment of people looking into the future somehow are on the other hand of the reader looking in the past, a mystical sensation i wanted to create. i asked my publisher to make this look more like a contemporary model than a typical history book as i try to write this book almost more like a novel than a conventional history. >> host: what was january 1, 1861 mike? one of the newspapers saying, was the economy late? >> guest: well, this is a very dark moment in american history. if you have been just a few hundred yards from here at the white house that morning, you would have gone in and president james buchanan was holding a reception. it is tradition in those states

that the president to hold a reception every new year's day and any citizen who is sober and washed with the allowed in to make the president and partake of some federally funded refreshments. so this reception is going on and unfortunately it's a very sad occasion. the marine band was playing dolefully, but people were circling around each other on opposite sides of the room with pro-secession people on one side and prounion people on the other side and went stooping white hair stooping white-haired buchanan knowing who to talk to at all. so this is a kind of nadir of american history and fortunately enough and just a couple months time, a very different man from springfield, illinois, would come and take the presidency in history would begin to change. >> host: adam adam goodheart, january 110-1861, was secession inevitable? >> guest: that's one of those great what-if questions that simultaneously attempt a

historian and also in the way we have to resist. i do think by that point, they january 11861, wherewith inevitable. secession was inevitable and the sun south carolina already had seceded 10 days before. the union was already breaking out. there were a lot of americans in the north who are ready to try to lure this out back in with all kinds of compromise. this had happened in american history where the south had threatened to secede and then the union had been sorted stitch together again with a series of different compromises over slavery. but you know, as it turned out almost any compromise the north offered the south wasn't ready to take. they had in mind that they were going to be not just an independent nation, but a great and mighty nation of the world. today we often aimed at the southerners simply wanted to be let go in peace and go often to developing, but thing, but actually a lot of southerners

southerners were talking and expanding slavery, this confederate nation until it stretched all the way across the caribbean and south america and formed an empire slavery like no other country in the history of the world. >> host: were events in april 1861 a complete shock, expected? >> guest: people for some time had known that something might be coming to charleston harbor. and yet, i think it was still an incredible moment of shock. i found myself thinking a lot a couple weeks ago on the anniversary of 9/11 about the assorted eerie similarities. i wrote in my book about thousands of people standing around the rooftops of charleston, south carolina, watching smoke rising from fort sumter as if a volcano had erupted in the center of the harbor, looking at this eerie sight and wondering what it

would mean for the future of the cells in the country. i couldn't help but think of september 11th almost 140 years earlier when i stood not far from here on 15th street in washington with neighbors and friends and strangers looking at the in the smoke rising from the burning pentagon and wondering what it meant. it was a shot of the country in the sense that when the nation comes under attack whether it's 2001 or 1861, it's something changing politics overnight to which people have a strong emotional reaction and can erase differences quickly. >> host: psalm one if you live in the east or central time zone. 202-737-0002 for those of you in the mountain or pacific time zones. send an e-mail to tv@c-span.org or twitter.com/booktv. adam goodhart is our guest. this is his first book 1861 --

"1861: the civil war awakening" he works for "the new york times" cellblock. los angeles, you are the first column today. >> caller: and really enjoyed your book, considering you said it was the first book you did. i wanted to elaborate on the point you made in a c-span lecture that you were surprised to learn when lincoln journeyed from springfield illinois to his inauguration in d.c. that he stumbled, that he was not as politically savvy as other historians. he pointed out evidence of his speech he made on his journey. i wanted you to elaborate on that. was there other evidence besides the one speech to give you evidence to your conclusion and you might elaborate on the process about how you actually wrote the book. >> guest: i did. thank you for your question.

link and i think we tend to looking back cms a giant, cms a saint in american history. it's a very different figure. to me and some days more appealing, more immediate human figure who was sort of stumbling and bumbling into the presidency. let's remember he was coming to the white house from farther away geographically than anyone had ever come before. he hadn't been to the nation's capital and over a decade. he hadn't been in national politics in over a decade. he was in many respects unprepared. so he set out and decided to take a long whistle stop tour from springfield, illinois to washington d.c. people didn't know who the stranger from illinois was. leaving springfield he gave a simple powerful speech saying farewell to his friends and neighbors at the railway station but almost immediately he started to give speeches that

were widely ridiculed. there is a speech in indianapolis where he made that it aureus and off-color kind of reference in present-day politics. he said clearly the southerners seem to view the union and as just a convenient for you to arrangement, which meant it was only a temporary liaison that they would give up as soon as they found something better. people thought that was completely inappropriate for a man who had just been raised to the dignity of the presidency. in columbus, ohio, the speech i talked about a lot in my book, he if anything was even worse. he said everyone is talking about the terrible crisis we are written, but no one has really suffered any name. no one is hurting at all. it's really a question of what people think right now. it's not such a terrible crisis. meanwhile the country was falling apart. troops on both sides were joined for a word and lincoln was to

send the key justly ridiculed. he did very bad cold that day, so that may partly explain it. postal baton rouge, louisiana, we are talking about the civil war era. >> caller: yes, my name is susan. >> host: we are listening if you could go ahead and ask your question. >> caller: my question as as did mr. goodhart calm across any reference to fort sumter that lincoln's decision about fort sumter in the civil war? the two men didn't cross paths, but does it support have any paperwork where they said, you know, john would've liked this guy in this type of person. so is there any linkage there? >> guest: you know, i didn't find any evidence.

i know john quincy adams had been dead for 12 years. he died -- he was a member of congress at the same time and admire john quincy adams. certainly john quincy adams had become a fervent abolitionist. it was argument relationship with slavery. it is true that lincoln center's president-elect did an impact in his immaculate dress he did not want to interfere with slavery anywhere it was then in existence. i think there was no mistake in 1861 and 1860 when he was elected that lincoln was the slavery. he was a candidate of the republican party created specifically to oppose slavery. he had been elected because millions of millions of americans are ready to draw a line in the sand and say no more compromise with the south. no more protection of this terrible and dictation.

yes, i do think lincoln was a president who represent the feelings of people like john quincy adams. host to wind you first get interested in war? >> guest: like anybody who loves american history, i became fascinated even when i was a kid going on the eighth grade class trip to gettysburg. but then i had to say, i moved away from it in later years because the way the civil war is portrayed so often is a 19th century super bowl between the blue and gray teams. stories of battles that there is moving across the map. that's not kind to the history i love nor the more suicide of academic is where you get the drive hard drives and pie charts and historians trying to say well, we have to categorize people as the blacks, whites,

north, south, democrats or republicans. we know people don't march in ideological and socioeconomic status. i like actual human minds can experience is in so many what the letters people wrote, servants and so i came back into this history as a grown up as a whirl though i still have to acknowledge may grade history teacher mrs. respa first on the civil war and took me on the class trip to gettysburg. i came back more interested in some of the nuance. >> host: what were the major battles of 1861? gusto i stuck my book just before the first major battle. really only the big military conflict i have is the battle of fort sumter itself, which is hardly matches 60 soldiers and a brass band, but i stopped it because they didn't want to tell the civil war story that goes for run schiavo antietam, second

analysis and goes although they do the battles. i wanted to bring people back into the moment of uncertainty, crisis and change when the only thing people knew for sure was on the brink of some new. >> host: long island, good afternoon. author of 1861. >> caller: good afternoon. i'm interested in what happened on the international scene during this time if there is a chance at secession for the south, did any of the european nations feel that this was an opportunity for them to have some attendants and the political system here in the united states were to have be able to come back into the united states but there are fears of intolerance? a >> guest: yes, this conflict i think we tend to give it just a sub and the tenor of borderers. it was a great event in world history of being watched from

all over the globe and particularly european powers. the southerners come the rebels were really counting on england or france stepping in on their site, perhaps even militarily, but at least granting undiplomatic revolution of the regime. especially elites in this country saw this as a chance to take down this country that stood for democracy in the face of these imperial powers and had actually already become a threat politically and economically and relatively few short decades of its existence. there were also many people who recognize this is a struggle about slavery and who themselves were strongly anti-slavery. in england there were thousands or millions of evangelical christians who had been very active in england bold abolitionist through meant.

through tour through thought through really don't think the people of europe would have allowed their governments to take that kind of a stand on behalf of the south. i think the degree to which that was a problem has been overestimated. i do think people were watching this conflict and mccain himself recognized this was a struggle over whether democracy shall perish on the earth, not just america but the whole world. >> host: durum, north >> calna, u.n. put .. durham. i was just asking the question, where any slaves got to lurk over any southern chips? the second was -- i forget what it was. or maybe six years old.

>> guest: thank you for asking your question. slavery was something that was incredibly entangled world system and i think there were southerners who say rightly enough that slavery was not sent them simply we were responsible for. it's not like the south was all evil in the north is located on this issue is slavery and race. as you suggest, the international slave trade involves people in the south and involve people in the north and people in africa. as many hands around the world. on the other hand, it's not true that no southern chips are involved in the slave trade. writer mathilde civil war there were southerners who were actually smuggling slaves then. the slave trade had been illegal. international slave trade had been illegal for decades at this point.

much more, there were many southerners and very few northerners involved in the just as terrible internal slave trade that tore apart families that send people especially from the upper south slaves to the lower south and also disrupt millions of lives much as the crossing of the atlantic to. i do think that looking at the records, you know, many people say because the south of the north were both involved in slavery, this means the south was not the cause of slavery. reading the documents and i've read many, many documents, he was the southerners themselves set in 1861, it's abundantly clear that they were fighting for slavery, that the civil war was about slavery, not about terrorists, not high taxes, not internal improvements. this is a war they were fighting in order to preserve the institution of slavery. jefferson davis had it in a

speech called the cornerstone speech, where he said the very cornerstone of the news that their nation is the institution of slavery. though it's complicated. neither north nor south. but the southern cause with that of slavery. >> host: adam goodheart, walk us through jefferson davis' 1861. with a headache that of this year? he had been a very respected statesman in washington d.c. he had been actually fermenter for quite some time. he'd been a hero to mexican war in secretary of war also had a somewhat controversial term as secretary of war. one of the things he is most known for is trying to introduce camels in the u.s. army in the southwest, which was not wholly successful. in early 1861, even before they get was elected president, he had really recognized secession was coming. he had gone around giving

speeches. he had spoken even before lincoln was elected about how if the north tried to send troops down, their men would be slaughtered in terribly bloody terms. like many southerners, he was using terms to talk about americans that are appalling to us today. one newspaper article i found were southerners and let those northerners come down to the south. we will strengthen our stable with her carrying crews upon their rotting carcasses. so davis was a part of that rhetoric very much at the time. >> host: did he spend most of your richmond? >> guest: he started here in washington d.c. just on from where we are sitting, speaking in the u.s. capitol and giving a speech in which inmate january 8th 1861, he spoke about why it was his state was leaving the union. he didn't mention terrorists, didn't mention taxes. he said we are leaving the union

because the preservation not simply a slavery is at stake, but also preservation of the supremacy of the white man itself. so he gave a speech, left washington d.c. and went down to actually he first was in montgomery, alabama, the first confederate capital was moved to richmond, virginia. jefferson davis was there in july 1861. he went to the battlefield of all run while the battle was still unfolding. he almost couldn't hold himself back. perhaps he thought that george washington in the american revolution he was going to be a commander in a commander-in-chief as well as the first president. >> host: adam goodheart is the author of "1861". he's joining us here at the book festival. san jose, california, thanks for holding. you're on booktv. >> caller: yeah, it's hard understanding that allan tinker 10 handled abraham lincoln security during his travel from

springfield to washington d.c., leading up to his first inauguration. it's my understanding their they are assassination plots against abrahamlincoln. >> guest: you're absolutely right. there were assassination plots. it's debated how close to fruition they swear, but most famously applied in baltimore to assassinate lincoln. it's unclear how they plan to do it, possibly by derailing his train, most likely he was going to be stabbed on his way passing through baltimore. in those days when you come to baltimore, they actually had to unhook the train from attention and draw the streets of baltimore by horses and transferred to another engine at another station across town. of all people in italian driver and baltimore his name is carandini who is going to leap out of the shadows and splashed into the start of the word of

this got to lincoln security detail and in fact he had been supposed to take a trip to harrisburg at the end of the day. instead of doing that coming he doubled back, got on the train were no wonder that he was boarding and incognito stole into washington d.c. by darkness, slipped to baltimore at 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning when no one knew he was coming through. everyone thought it was coming to some hours later. he may have well saved his life but nearly lost his dignity as president he could see was immediately lampooned across the country. cartoons depicted them in women's clothes and ace shawl and bonnet. he was making into washington d.c. come us that this is something that is deeply shameful at the time. probably it was per game. >> host: adam goodheart, which cited north or south during civil war made great effort to

use technology to gain advantage? >> guest: i think those sites are trained to use the greatest technology. where there was a moment of great technological change when warfare was sort of on the cusp between the middle ages and modern times in very direct ways. on one hand you had project has been developed, hitting a target from five miles away and on the other hand of the same can, men trained to go into combat with swords. that's a very strange moment of utter history. both sides have their own truth in a sense, technological crews. in the end the north is better able in a sustained way to mobilize technology on its side. >> host: next call comes from writer in washington d.c. good afternoon. >> caller: hello.

i was going to ask a general recruiting was begun and whether in fact some people were organizing units even before lincoln was select it. >> guest: very much so. people were organizing. people were organizing. southern militias have enjoyed for years to do things like hunting down fugitive slaves to try to abolitionists after the raid in 1859 the warlike culture of the south ramped up by the time lincoln was select good, there were military units openly drilling in cities and towns throughout the south and talking about fighting the northern minions. but we forget some of this is in the north as well. a group called the wide awakes a read of my book is a paramilitary group who supported lincoln's candidacy there were usually carrying guns and knives

with lincoln's election in some of these same groups actually arm themselves for war and in some places begin to strike first blow. there's all kinds of dramatic stories that are very little known about this no one in history. one that i talk about with st. louis between blue coated in great coder jumps in and on the battlefield in the south was literally a street outfought in the streets of, missouri between armed games, programs out there and processor. it's a rich and complicated story that i think much of the drama has gone unnoticed for a hundred 50 years. >> host: adam goodheart. ellsworth, north dakota please go ahead with your question. >> caller: south dakota actually. my question kind of relates to the technology issue. one of the things i've noticed about the civil war and they

seldom seen anyone write about is all of a sudden we have a need for hundreds of thousands of pieces of uniform, rifle barrels, billions of caps, percussion caps. >> guest: that's right. >> caller: has anyone ever done anything about the way that this revolution for manufacturing came in at this point in time? >> guest: it is something that has been talked about a lot. when you look at turning points in the civil war, it was the first time standard sizes in men's clothing were introduced. small, large, medium, extra large. a turning point in many ways large and small. >> host: is your next book 1862. >> guest: no, it's about 800 history, but i sent off my sign contract last week and reader

should stay tuned. >> host: what part of american history is he talking about? >> guest: i like to let it brew while before we start telling the story. i will say it's got an answer that, andrew jackson, george washington >> it's a fact-based story on a topic of your choosing. every good story appearance good beginning, a solid middle and a strong ending. >> what do you think we should do for the studentcam competition? ♪

>> you don't need the best video equipment to have a winning project. today cell phones and flip cams do a good job of capturing video. if you won't have access to better video equipment, don't let that stop you. and if you need a little bit more help go to studentcam.org. >> it can be confusing but studentcam will help you. read the rules very carefully and make a checklist what you need to do. don't worry, the process becomes clear once you get started. >> another great thing about the c-span documentary you can work alone on the project and work on teams. if you're a good writer but not very handy with a camera then get a friend to help out. not only will you both learn something but you'll increases your chances of winning. >> you don't need to be an expert at video production or interviewing to make this work. you can use your parents, other students, teachers and c-span as resources for you along the way.

you'll find it extremely rewarding. anyone can do this. ♪ >> all eight of your books about liberals is that fair to say? >> yeah. i mean, the first book was on was on the impeachment for bill clinton and the and the column book how to talk to a liberal if you must, that covers everything under the sun including dating tips in washington. >> slander, treason, godless, guilty, demonic, those fight words. >> gripping titles aren't they. demonic i was thinking of

calling it legion or my name is legion but a small slice of christians would understand what i was talking about. and, yeah, i want people to read my books. i put a lot of work in them. i think they're using and i think you'll learn things and see things in a different way and understand things in a different way. so, yeah, we give them zippy titles. we put me on the governor. in the black cocktail dress normally because it annoys liberals smiling it drives them crazy. >> if democrats had any brains they would be republicans which could be recovered as the best of ann coulter in your view. >> it would be more of a quote book. >> environmentalist energy plan is the repudiation of america and christian deathney which is jet skis, bake on the electric grill, hot showers and night skiing. steven, north jordan utah you're on in depth, good morning. >> hi, ann, i'd like to thank you for all you've done. i don't really have a question but i have some comments about

religion between a conservative and the liberals. there are conservatives previns that have been acted upon with the social, spiritual and economic well-being of individuals as well as nations. and these principles came from god himself to moses and they formed a foundation of civilized society. and every time i refer to the ten commandments and what the liberals have done since probably the last 50 years have been turning these ten commandments into the ten inconvenient truths and you can go back to lyndon johnson as great society, his welfare program he turned honor thigh father and mother to honor the big government and mother. and have you ever read the cause to the keynote address given by obama? >> no, but i think you need to read my book god where this

point is made pithily. not "an inconvenient truth." the platform of the democratic party is breaking each one of the ten commandments one by one. thal shalt not murder. what is the most important issue to the democratic party? yes, that's right, abortion. sticking a fork in the head of little babies sleeping peacefully in their mother's womb. thou shalt not steal taxpayer money and certainly put no gods before me. they put every god before the real god. i don't think there's a living liberal who wouldn't give up his eternal soul to attend a "vanity fair" party to be cited favorably in the "new york times." have a letter published in the "new york times." the worshipping of idols it's the religion of the left. their religion is breaking each one of the ten commandments one by one.

>> and from godless, you write orwellian dishonesty about abortion begins with the left's utter refusal to use the word abortion. these pro-choicers treat abortion the way muslims treat mohammed. it's so sacred it must not be mentioned. the only other practice that was both defended and unspeakable in america like this was slavery. >> uh-huh. that's true. and interestingly, even in places where slavery was accepted and it wasn't in many parts of the world, people did not let their children play with slave traders the way i imagined people wouldn't today let their kids -- it's one thing to say, oh, i'm pro-choice and let a woman decide. there's different things to let your kids play with the children of the local abortionist. it's not very many. it's a repellant practice but it is peculiar that they'd elevate this and pretend it's a constitutional right and yet we could we can't use the word. you have gun rights guys

refusing to use the word gun it shows what you a hideous thing it is and what a hideous thing you know it is. a recent tweet from ann culturer. why doesn't obama tape this same speech and run it every night. i didn't von from new berlin, wisconsin. >> good morning. it's wonderful to talk with you. i have just finished your book. >> thank you. >> and basically i'm here from the home of joe mccarthy, scott walker, paul ryan and also bastille days. and we had a lot of fun 'cause i just read your book at that time. i ask people, why are we celebrating bastille days? we had a lot of fun with that. but i want to know -- one of my main questions because i do watch all this back and forth, so many times that -- if we would just follow our constitution we wouldn't be in this mess. and one of these main things of

the constitution, other politicians are invested in congress. they are not invested in the bureaucrats. they are not vesticated. to get the power back from we the people -- >> i'm so glad you asked. no, this is a very important point. democrats' propose so unpopular that democrats have had to stop promoting them themselves. releasing violent and, you know, child molesting murdering criminals, for example, so instead they just nominate judges and it assures that the judges are very moderate and centrist and they get up to the supreme court and suddenly discover, look in this 200-year-old document there's -- we found one. there's a right to gay marriage and abortion and we must release 36,000 criminals from the california prisons a united states supreme court ruling by the way and now they get the courts to do the dirty work for

them and tell them it's a constitutional right and i think the only way to rein this in -- i mean, obviously we have the method we've been trying for the last 20 years, electric a republican president. wait for vacancies on the supreme court, get a supreme court nominee who doesn't hallucinate when reading the constitution. that religion didn't work out so well. we had three republican appointees, sandra day o'connor. hacket souter, justice kennedy who voted to uphold the heart of roe v. wade though not the precise holding of roe v. wade. scalia, i don't know how that's following precedent. in the event, i think what we need to do is get 5 of our supreme court justices -- this is one of my plans just for laughs to start engaging in

conservative so we have a right to a flat tax. we'll have a right to own a rocket-propelled grenade. we'll have a right to free champagne for blondes all kinds of fantastic rights i can think of. oh, i think we'll declare the withholding tax unconstitutional they know our justices can admit it was a joke because liberals can never understand how heinous their policies are until it's done to them and the alternative plan to -- i can say it much more quickly we need a conservative and republican executive who say in response to an insane supreme court ruling, for example, some of the guantanamo rulings under president bush -- i wish he just said thank you for your opinion. the constitution makes me the commander in chief. i am not giving, you know, special constitutional rights to terrorists grabbed on a battlefield as what happened to guantanamo.

thanks, supreme court. >> first a tweet and then an email. tweet by scott wagner. i like she flings her hair can she sell a dvd when i will selling a mondayic. ms. koehlerer lays it on the line and all who disagree are stupid and demonic. >> no. some are misguided. mostly i think it is the worshipping of false idols, however. i think it is this desire to be considered cool and in and not have to think about anything. >> public appearances are avalanche of snarl work and if serious conservatives want to be taken seriously, the first thing they have to do is distance themselves from the likes of glenn beck, rush limbaugh, grover norquist or ann coulter.

>> i don't know about the other guys but i would say no. like joe mccarthy, what's your point. what are you disagreeing with. what's the snarl word because that was not all sweetness and nice in that email. but this is how liberals avoid talking about the issues. i mean, that was the theme of slander that they talk sexist, racist, mean, don't listen to this person. don't lead this person, danger danger. if you could argue with us on our ideas i think you do so and if we were despicable and snarling, i don't think we'd have so many fans. >> i think it was in treason that you also wrote about -- how you cannot attack certain people such as cindy sheehan's mother. is that in treason or guilty?

>> i remember the theme of it. i think that is godless. it's the liberal saints and how they -- it's sort of the reverse of what i just said. the democrats' new techniques so that it drives them crazy that conservatives have their own media now talk radio and the internet and fox news where you can occasionally see a conservative and so their approach is to send out sobbing hysterical women to make their points and you can't respond to them. from cindy sheehan to the jersey girls to joe wilson. oh, but they had a relative die, you can't respond. they're allowed to foist the entire left wing agenda on us. >> next call for ann coulter comes from jordan in lexington, kentucky. hi, jordan. >> hi, ann. i'm such a huge, huge fan. i'm a former college republicans president at murray state university. and a former reagan scholarship recipient also from the phillips

foundation. >> oh, that's great. congratulations. nice to meet you. >> thank you. thank you so much. that was, of course, in 2007. but really i have two questions for you. and i am reading demonic right now by the way. i think it's my favorite of your books. i've read literally every one since high crimes and misdemeanors. read it i think when i was in the eighth grade. [laughter] >> you are a fine american and will go far. [laughter] >> but two questions. number 1, is it true that your mother is actually from paducah, kentucky? >> why, yes she is. i was almost down there a couple of weeks ago. we had the family reunion. but i was kind of busy with the book. [laughter] >> that's great. well, when i heard that i was so excited. of course, i live in lexington, now, but went to murray state and so, yeah, very conservative in paducah. second question, i haven't been able to make it to any of your book tours. and you really made a huge impression on me just in terms

of your christian faith and just kind of telling things like it is but really i've been wanting an autograph of my book demonic i can't figure out how to send it to you. >> i'm sure you can get it to me through the phillips foundation? >> what's the phillips foundation? >> tom phillips has bought out regnery book, my newspaper, human events, conservative book club, various other publications but he gives out these -- and it's very impressive that you won this award for a young journalist to get -- i guess it's called the reagan award. and there's submission judges, i haven't been a judge. i've just been aware of the various winners and tom phillips and he oversees this whole complex of which i'm a small part. so you can definitely get the book to me through the phillips foundation. >> next call for ann coulter comes from new york city. hi, mike. >> hello, good afternoon to all of you. i wanted to talk about the

recent act of white terrorism in norway. initially, this is described by people on the right a terrorism which is incorrect. then it was described by people on the left as christian terrorism, which is also incorrect. the only way that it could have been described that the shooter was a white racist terrorism who created terrorism in the worldwide system of white supremacy. forget christianity, forget right wing, forget left wing, and to do so and the other way is incorrect. >> i agree with part of that. [laughter] >> and as luck would have it, i

read his manifesto. not all of it. it gets a little repetitive so you can skim right through some parts. but i don't think i'm unaware of any conservatives who blamed it on islamic terrorism. we didn't know what it was by the time we heard that it had happened he was already being described in the "new york times" headlines as a christian fundamentalist, gun-totting fox news-viewing, i believe, and his manifesto makes clear as the caller said -- he isn't a christian. he uses the word "christian" to mean non-islamic. and it's not specifically -- i don't know, blacks, hispanics, brown people. no, it is muslim he does not like. that's it. and, yes, it was very anti-muslim. but he talks about how he wants jews and buddhists and all the people of europe to join with him in the fight against the islamization of europe. that's what his big