[applause] >> good evening everyone. i am president of the man -- mount holyoke college. i welcome you to what i will be engaging evening. rachel maddow is known to all of us as the host of the rachel maddow show, so critically acclaimed msnbc program where creatural takes on issues of the forefront of the public discussion and private debate every day. she's an author, scholar and one of the finest examples i know of the commission of using literal burning for purposeful indeed china in the world. ..

>> the odyssey bookshop is happy to pay cosponsoring the event with mount holyoke

and the gender studies department. [applause] this fall we will celebrate the 49th anniversary. since you're such a captive audience have to tell you about our defense our one club has 255 members the around the country and the selection committee with an amazing record that wins major prizes including tigers wife and open city that one the hemingway award. once a month it is the sign defers addition. a great graduation and mother's day present.

also the gift of reading program. great for grandparents and we have three girls now. we will handpick one book for your child. for age groups, there gift wrapped and it is so much fun. visit our web site now you can purchase e-books from us. the ipad or tablet or android your sony readers, ed desktop or laptop everything except the amazon can go. now we are full-service bookstore. new books, sale books and e-book we will expand our

used book department to support your locally owned independent bookstore. [applause] thank you. the host over 125 the vince per year. thursday april 5th 7:00 p.m. the biking thank when it editor who champions women's writing and her book is french. i cannot say it very well. [laughter] said in paris a different time but it is resonant with the issues of today with regard to with men. we're delighted to co-sponsor that event with a

college women's research center. april 10, we are posting a launch for mount holyoke professors. [applause] the new memoir reflections on art, family, and survival co-sponsor with english department. quickly. april 19 arab spring, living winter. and the race for what is left. on march 24 of. on april 25th national priorities project an organization we love dearly printing their first book

the people side to the federal budget at 7:00. we share -- . [applause] we share a staff with them and that is part of the social media. also the mount holyoke class of 96 alumni is speaking upstairs april 18 at 415 pm. we have local wonderful organizer named john. [applause] okay. i am married to him. [laughter] there are over 400 people and there is a dance and here at 11:00. no photos or inscriptions.

we will call you up by your signing groups to move along. this is hearse second to the event of the day. please join me to give the odyssey staff a warm round of applause. [applause] now is my pleasure to introduce another amaze same woman, from gender studies at mount holyoke-- holyoke, karen has worked tirelessly to bring us together today to hear rachel matter how -- rachel maddow. [applause] >> good evening. i want to give generous

thinks from jones dedication to hurt community we have celebrated authors who come here who come here every week. [applause] many people were card to make this happen. i want to think many people by name. the assistant director of the college win research center. project, a senior administrative assistant at gender studies mount holyoke , chris who is working up their. [cheers and applause] people have coordinated people and space and technology to sit here

comfortably in anticipation and of rachel maddow. also a campus police to keep the peace. thank you so much. and heartfelt thinks to represent she is modest amount also frequent commentator parker she is out there. and have the privilege to do send those celebrating the anniversary millar and international discipline 10 based disciplinary center working with the mess and practitioners around the world and in the pioneer valley. it is probably the largest concentration of feminist in

the world. [cheers and applause] i will not go through the whole list of events but i invite you to pick up a flier over the next couple of weeks. we are especially pleased to welcome rachel maddow. of the center's planning to launch a new initiative on with been common etfs and hoping to brain rachel maddow back at some point* along with other women who have worked tirelessly around the world to bring the news to you to comment on the of politics of the day to become commentators.

i have to say one word of organization. rachel maddow has generously agreed to answer questions she has been working tirelessly with a bird -- david letterman, jon stewart, she is very, very busy. we have four microphones. i will moderate to question-and-answer and we will take turns. we prepared to line up to nine is no stranger here. she is a lot of your neighbor and she started her first radio gig down the

road and as the president mentioned she is the brilliant scholar with a degree from stanford, oxford, rhodes scholar in the award-winning television host. i have read her book "drift" the unmooring of american military power" i recommend it to to you. i recommend to everyone including the marines that i know that confirm of what is in the book so far. the u.s. military is so private many stay out of the process altogether. with those of expect did connections she reminds us

the book took a lot of time and intensive research that was available for public record. listen to your public officials and read the document and follow the money. she said the book is not about democrats, republicans, cons ervatives or liberals or good and bad america as a great country that has forgotten what makes us great. we can get back to that to have they talk about it. rachel maddow is here to discuss it. please welcome rachel maddow [cheers and applause] >> you are embarrassing may.

think year. i have four hours 45 minutes left of being 38 years old. ♪ [applause] and thank you very much. like it was not embarrassing enough already. [laughter] i have never written a book before. i don't think i will ever write a book again a.

[laughter] but for tonight, i know how to do this. is there a normal thing to do? i will read a short excerpt than briefly tell you what the book is about that i will happily take your questions then a sign books. objections? [laughter] two things as a preface. it is nice you have come around to see me. you may know me from tv but whether or not you know, enough about the book to know if his military and politics of four that is not

irregular saturday night thing. this is not candy. that can be more fun. just the fact you are here and would consider reading it is very heartening to me. you just hear people want the easy stuff. thank you for being here. you should probably meet somebody here you do not already know. if you want to talk about the military on saturday you would probably like each other. not to set you up on a date but this is probably a good place to make good friends. [laughter] >> not a particularly large

bird but if you bred a pheasant with an ostrich. a manager of storage with a shorter neck and legs. or a pheasant on steroids with a stretched out what -- neck and a wingspan. but it has provided crucial assistance to make the war in afghanistan but longest-running military show in the nation's history. may 2011 pakistan knows was other joint when there was a surprise mission and often the most infamous terrorist without giving a heads up to the host government. intelligence service had to explain loathsome a bin laden could be living in tranquillity down the road for the most important military academy crawling

with military officers. was pakistani intelligence back to incompetent or protecting bin laden? and how did a strike force climate and -- fly and spend one hour on the ground then leave with his carcass without being detected doorstop to? president obama took a salvatore lap but the pakistani sounded shaming. not a some of the law been in the backyard but the lack of respect from the united states. american troops taking action over the border is not acceptable to the people said the former president musharraf. it is a violation of our sovereignty. the parliament called a closed-door session with the generals have a spot of

trouble but deftly deflected much of the civilians a gerber broke united states was the real bad guy. good generals can formally demand united states would ensure the national interest was respected. of the pakistani people deserves of respect. to add some bite the general said they could force the u.s. to shut down the secret program this cia was running out of pakistan. unfortunately publicizing their demands that they the the generals also revealed to pakistani legislators the cia was using the airbase. [laughter] this caused an uproar in parliament for crop they were flying armed drones

came less of a surprise to the citizens and the tribal regions. those unmanned aircraft were used for surveillance in their early stages of the war but could be armed with missiles. then the bush and mr. shinn had been attacks launched a suspected terrorists. when the above the administration took over the number of drug attacks spiked. the next year the numbers more than doubled. the obama and ms. station refused to acknowledgement the caa drawn attacks but yet they announced the al qaeda or haqqani network leader was killed as if it was an act of providence.

good drawn attacks were the center period -- centerpiece of the read calibration. the obama administration had no intention to pull up stakes. that base is neither vacated or being vacated from washington. it is a standoff. here is where the bird gave some will go rubber co the tiny forgot 10 strip of land did not belong to pakistan.

but then the sign of friendship, flew to stand aside from being spectacular garden of the been wonders, is among the few wintering grounds of the bird held in high esteem among hunters from the uae and saudi arabia and carter. the poor bird was the bird of prey four falcon nest. the royalty was pleased to have this foothold and right away they build themselves a sizable waiting strip to have easy access to get to the remote corner of the world. of the sheik's say it is the challenge of about 10. telling them you're kirk at

the time it was built, the falcon is the fastest bird on earth. the houbara bird is weary with the number of tricks in. my single favor parts. [laughter] it is a gross. [laughter] and the ability to eight negative a dark green slime a violently from its event. do know what the event is on a bird? [laughter] the force is so strong it can spread for 3 feet and can temporarily blind the falcon or glue the feathers together making it unable to fly.

[laughter] [applause] that is the best part of the book. then they insist the meat is the aphrodisiac. now it was nearly extinct on the arabian peninsula. the fall of the shaw made bustard hunting difficult from a constant state of war so baluchistan he emerged as the destination spot for latter-day era of the rods. the sheik's and the princes and other ambitious dignitaries jockeyed for the best allotment of the last good place on earth to hon to the core bustard fill what it once held by the saudis they withheld oil supplies from pakistan and

money for flood relief in retaliation. according to the description people showed up with pop-up tent cities and hunting vehicles tricked out to infer read spotlights and bustard seeking radar. maybe not sporting. the ever rodis made one concession broker in the weeks after 9/11 when everybody wanted to pitch and they agreed with the pakistani president bashar of to let the americans use that carry as a base to fight the taliban and maybe for a few classified operations broke the 10 years that followed as the cia began operating lethal

attack droves the base was off-limits to pakistan's:airforce. when it it hit the fan or the slime hits the fall again the everybody had an out. that netted states could make it plain this caa was not vacating and pakistan that could save face. official said we just checked the land records and it turns out it is not legally pakistan controlled we gave it to the ever rodis 47 team hunting so there's nothing we can do about it. and the uae said they had no me built the air strip but it was used for recreational

purposes. they could not say the recreation of the caa. they assured it was never operated or controlled by the united arab emirates. so we still have the drone bass no allied takes the blame to hand it over to us. [applause] that is a little how all the but those. that is the best part. especially the part about this time. [laughter] i am not an expert on the military or war. my gig is politics that is what i pursue as an activist , academic and what

i talk about on television. this is about the politics of going to war and ending those we are in. the consternation over vietnam war was a multi front effort to make sure we did not end up in a mess like that again. we have the war powers act that presidents cannot take a stand and congress pass to be asked in congress gets to decide. aside from that congress got up on their hind legs as i say. [laughter] and exerted a more muscular attitude toward matters of national security. or wanted to remain gauge

with it be known that many thought would get us started again. he was set on doing it thought it was the right thing to do and members of congress said no. then they had a serious confrontation he thought congress overstepped their bounds to say he would that they would withhold dollars on the appropriations process to stop him. the powers would be confronted if not changed but that is the balance at a time congress flexes his muscles. we don't feel it is our business. the abrams doctrine. as head of the army, dying shortly after the war but

first worked the of the total force policy. the military would be restructured so we could not go without disrupting life. when it lbj made a decision he knew he did not want to make that argument. he made that decision and it was not smart. . .

and not very many compared to the guardsmen and reservists and adult serving on the ground in vietnam. the draft use to expend the number of people we had a there instead of but when he got a hold of this idea of restructuring the military he said guard and reserves are going to have to go. we have to operational restructure the army so that you can't have a big military obligation of any kind without having guardsmen and reservists. why? so that it would be disrupted by the fact that we were in more and there wouldn't be a divide between the civilian life and that had so crippled the country emotionally and politically and cut vertically at the end of the vietnam and that is important to

the politics of the war and it would keep the country focused on and feeling the sacrifice. there wouldn't be the military during its own thing. ronald reagan's did the. he started a war with the congress barely knowing about it when congress said no to what he wanted to do he secretly went around them to do it any way reeking of law. when he got caught in his administration trying to save his presidency they invented a brand new radically expand the doctrine of power that he essentially said a president alone has one person can direct any war related action anywhere on earth even in the direct contradiction of the law passed by congress which is bizarre to save him at the end of the contrast that became the basis of the political life of an obscure wyoming congressman named cheney. [laughter]

and the became unexpectedly important when congress muscularity on issues of the war wind flabby and then cheney as the white house chief of staff and later as the defense secretary came up with something that was essentially the cure to the abrams doctrine instead of making sure the manpower needs of the military and gauged the whole country whenever we went to war he restructured its of the manpower needs of the military would be met as quietly as possible with upset as possible the manpower needs would be met in part to for-profit privately. the administration was delighted to increase and expand on that project it made it easier for them for a sample when they needed to get around their own political constrained to use force in the balkans so this book is not about the merit of any individual war.

the congress waxes and wanes and mention interesting constraining overseas interest in matters of the war even though the constitution does put them in charge of it. the president's expanded powers that treats the u.s. military as one personal army those powers have grown and grown. the military has become more from civilian life. the national security budget keeps growing and becoming more and more impenetrable. they are declared secret. the politics get more and more muted. the war gets longer and longer and the sense that something is wrong it's deeper. i feel both for the guidance putting the magnetic rabin on the back of his suvs and the person on the plane next to them on that magnetic lid been on the suv is impotent. i feel both of those things think they come from the same place. they come from the sense that we are a country that hasn't gone to the war we sent a military to

war and they went without us people feel the left and the right and people feel that you have no politics at all. we barely noticed when the iraq war iraq ended. after eight and a half years more than 4,000 americans killed even if you only care what the americans killed and not the iraqi skilled. after all that time when did it and? december. it was from the civilian population. st. louis but new york didn't. these are changes that happened over a relatively short period of time. i do not think there was a conspiracy although i love hearing of the conspiracy theories because i find them entertaining. i think it's essentially we had a series of understandable decisions made by people looking at short-term political necessities. i see something i think we ought to do for national security purposes but the price isn't going to sound too high for people with tel dan it's free its give them a tax cut telling

them it's free hoping they don't notice and their grandkids have to pay for it. i want to deploy a large number of americans but i don't want to have to answer to how many americans are deploying what's have some be working for private companies because then only to be not to answer for how much we are paying them we have to answer for the lines of accountability are when they have to do something wrong if they die or get hurt no one will ever know we have to do something for national security to the congress passed the law against it. i'm going to a certain time of the flaw. i would like to wage a war back in i don't know, say pakistan. but i don't want to get around the political constraints between me and the war in pakistan so why wage on in secret and not answer when asked about it. i don't think all of those decisions have been all loved ones. i think they have been over a relatively short period of time and was all about trying to get her out of these annoying constraints keeping us from reaching the war wanted to and

keeping us from using the military in ways the we want to use it and those constraints are some of the best things we inherited from the fathers. those annoying constraints are there for a reason. the constitution's structure to the five injured 35 squabbling members of congress including whether or not to declare the war because the squabble of the members of congress about something that important is due to be loud and take a long time and be a pain and it will engage us all and there was the point if they wanted to be easy to go to the war they would have given power to the president and the emphatically did not and they talk about it at the time and we can read their letters about it. >> so this is not about the merits of any one war. i feel we cut away from that begot in the constitution to make us not too were like as a country, to make as it has of this country and i'm not a pacifist and i know that i have a lot of respect for pessimism as a way of life and thinking up these things. it's not my point of view.

sometimes they are necessary. i want us to have an excellent military but i do believe that the constitution's structure was to be a deliberately peaceable nation where peace time is our stifel and war is the operation and that's been. [applause] and it turns out there is a bust that makes us better stick together and it turns out if you leave the nuclear weapons sitting around for too long the growth on this. i really enjoyed writing this. but i liked writing this and they cannot the way that i wanted it to and i'm grateful that you are here and would consider reading it because i would love to have a national fight about this stuff i think it can all be fixed. thank you very much for being here. [applause]

thank you so much. we are not sure where we stand we have time for a few questions and as i said previously, we are going to start in the balcony and i already see someone standing and ready to go. go ahead and ask -- >> [whistling] dhaka question that was asked about st. louis, i was wondering both if you have seen any movement towards having a new york parade and if you think that there is any legitimate justification for not having cut

parade until all of them come home. estimate excellent question. i feel there are legitimate sides to the debate. i need think i am inclined and we ought to do it, we ought to mark the end of the iraq war and let the civilians say thank you to the veterans and welcome them home and acknowledge. the racket of guinness and war are separate political entity is the same people have been citing both of the war and which of 90,000 americans deployed right now in afghanistan, so to welcome them home from iraq is essentially welcoming them home from a political entity with a lot of them are not physically at chellie home and i have a lot of respect for that viewpoint and a lot of people know that care about the issue as i do adopt that as their position. i just talked to a lot of iraq

and afghanistan veterans that say i've been in both places, i've been deployed in both places and if i were in right now knowing that there's been a parade to mark the end of the iraq war would make me psyched to come and think about coming home to do that for me when i'm home from afghanistan, too. i don't think this is an issue where you are wrong or right on the affair. i would love to debate it. i think it is wrong the pentagon wants there to be -- they said they support their being parades' and other countries, every other city in the country but not new york. the head of city council and a few of the counselors still want to do it. iraq and afghanistan support the idea. the pentagon don't get the last word on this so it is still sort of an open question. >> we have a question in the second balcony.

>> i read and enjoy your book but one of the premises of your book is the demise of the citizen soldier after vietnam and to discuss several reasons but one and you don't discuss is the fact that a significant portion of those civilian soldiers in vietnam revolted. mutiny against their army, killed their soldiers. killed their officers on the history assisted and this scared the shit out of the army and ever since that incident the eliminated the soldiers, they turned themselves into a professional army so they never have to again. could you comment on that and why it was never mentioned in your book? >> i think it is implicit when you talk to the military right now about this left and right combination that we ought to bring back the draft. a lot of people have said to me about the book since it's come

out but whenever people talk about this we should talk about how we need to bring back the draft and show people are more connected to consilience ar more connected to the threat of military service have a skin in the game and the reason that usually gets shut down doesn't go much further is the military says absolutely not. the military has no interest in their being a draft. they don't want to be in the environment whether it is trimming and firemen or combat environment of the people who don't want to be there. the last time that was true was in vietnam and ultimately i think the civilian soldier idea is broader than just the draft or conscription. it's the idea that we are not a country that maintains a massive standing military force that we are looking to use all the time and that's something the founding fathers debated and we sort of decided something different and we ended up with. the citizen soldier idea is that we have a peaceful economy and

country that is this located temporarily for the purpose of the went to the war and then we go back to normalcy. it hasn't been true for a long time but it's a very good question. >> down here, please. >> we have a question down here. i will confess i'm a big enervate triet i have your book over light and read it in advance of tonight. >> thank you. do you agree the was the best part? >> i actually grew up 40 miles from the air force base so that struck home as well. but any way what struck me as most interesting about the book is you talk a lot about the executive branch and the legislative branch and there's not a lot about judiciary. over the past week we have witnessed the role of the judiciary determining what is and what is not constitutional and one of the premises of the book is that the executive has

overstepped his authority to declare the war and i'm wondering why you don't think there has been any role of the judiciary to check the power. >> it's a totally good question and because the judiciary has deferred to congress because the judiciary looks of the division of power and says we know this isn't us and it's not new, it's you guys you are supposed to use your equal power s. con. res. to weigh in and keep that power that. you see that at one point of the book is forgotten the history now and it's not long ago the members of converse suit in federal court to stop george h. w. bush from waging a world war war i. this was my land to his of the -- it's called milanta to use of the screaming and but it's not supposed to be you alone.

[applause] >> some members of congress were yelling that at him and actually decided to seek a federal court injunction to stop the war which is a crazy idea. the ruling from the judge in the case is a beautiful thing. it is really beautifully articulated. i could have essentially plagiarized it and made that the thus thesis statement of the book. but having concluded you are right and the president is doing stuff he's not supposed to be doing and this is the congress power of i can't stop him from doing anything. you as the contras have the power to stop him that this can't just be the bills and members of congress or whoever it was. you have to take action as congress which means you have to act by a majority vote within yourself as an institution to

stop the president from doing this. do your job. it's a bucket of cold water but it's true. i don't expect any president, no matter -- you could reincarnate jesus and maybe that would work but aside from president jesus, i don't expect that any president would give back power that the executive branch had accrued through the executive action. nobody gives a we've covered. if you are president in view of the country's best interest at heart and are stymied all the time the people in politics who don't on the best in the country you are not going to give away power to get something done if you believe you are doing what's right and other people are stopping you presidents don't give power away it's like an agent of rubber band that stretches one direction congress has to do it on their own behalf

and they don't have much faith to do anything that big but that's what needs to happen i think. thank you. [applause] thank you for coming tonight. my question has to do with the nature of the war and talking about and in your book you talk about more formal war. but my question is what does the role of this sort of iraq of the war and counterterrorism has to do with military functioning what it is a reclassification of their reinterpretation of the wartime hauer what does that have to do with how the military is functioning that is different from the war? >> excellent question and hard to answer. i think that basically there is reasonable wiggle room in terms

of the way that we are set up as a country under the residence commander-in-chief powers to do some things in an almost unilateral or temporal unilateral way the way the founders talked about was a few things like repel the invasion. there are some things where i think the president is given the authority to act as a commander outside of what because the constitutional prerogative. to the extent we're making right now is about transnational groups that don't have governments that speak for the more borders to the respect. i think those have work to get her to expand the amount of military power we use without any difference to congress whatsoever. for example, we do a lot of military, a lot of our military

worked out through the cia come and the cia is essentially functioning as another branch of the military but they are one that has the deniability in terms of whether we explain or own up to our actions, and i can see why somebody wants the power to act in the nation's national security interest want the flexibility to be able to marked anywhere in the world in secret and denied they ever did it and never explain it and a cup. i just don't think that that is america. i understand why somebody once the power but we are not designed to give that power at least in a sustained way, so i think it's put pressure on all of the weak points of where we were already. estimate of in the balcony. >> good evening. [laughter] >> thank you so much for being with us tonight. my question is after the war in

vietnam there is another clear period of reflection and questioning votes on the part of the american public and american politicians as to what are the lessons we've learned from this war and my question is a similar period of rutka reflection in would come about after the aftermath of iraq and afghanistan removed from the military actions for that to happen. >> fed is the 64,000-dollar question. when i was on the daily show this weekend the was john stuart's question he said i see all these things that you're in pleasantly praising after vietnam happened after the national people. do we need something that big again in order to a surge of power over these things to make the kind of things that we say

and i think it's arguable. to have fought not only the longest war in american history but alongside that, to have fought another eight and a half year long in my back to the longest war in history and to have had only 1% of the population fighting the war and to be completely on paid for and granting itself the tax cuts over the course of those when you put all of those to get your life you are approaching unsustainable crisis and how we think of ourselves as a country. [applause] i am a big believer in protest amendments. the action gets to it and the reason there were so many changes after vietnam is people were in the streets. [applause]

i don't foresee that happening on this issue now because we are in the fact these are happening in our name because it feels like it's something separate so i don't foresee that kind of mass social movement but we also have a situation in which there is no affiliation in terms of how people feel about these things, how people to live with the afghanistan war mike is disassociated with people's party position at this point. almost every controversial issue was bifurcated by party or liberal conservative ideological leans, not this. so now we don't have the social movement pushing for this, but they will share their pushing on an open door. i don't think there's going to be as much resistance to this as we think. it's fixable lifelike the crisis we are is big enough national

discussed road in the protest movement. i think this book can be part of meeting the problems we can talk about how to fix it. >> mittal balcony. >> your show and the information on your show are well researched and i'm kind of curious how you ensure the facts are facts we get stuff wrong one thing we're about tv is not a history of on error corrections which don't understand. it's like cause for the giant rebel of excitement when we do a correction on the air but if we get something wrong we try to

correct the marine and the rookies the navy admiral. i think it's in your academic work you have to do everything you can possibly do to make sure you know what you're talking about before you say anything at all. you have to have somebody with fresh eyes checking your work and you have to be willing to be wrong. you have to be willing to make it right when you are caught up with something wrong especially if you catch it yourself and nobody knows so it is a spectrum in a process. there is no magic bullet. you just have to work hard and care about it. go ahead. >> congratulations on the award. in your interview you were talking about how the republicans were willing to lose battles to win the war and you just said this is sort of a door

to be pushed on. is that a good way to bring liberals back and is a more progressive session to open that door of conversation and what do you think are some steps that we could take to bring the country back towards the left? >> it's a good question and i don't think i know the answer to it. the problem in left verses right politics, and you notice i can tell on the promise it puts it in the premise of your question that basically my idea is that on the right you've got the conservative movement which is well founded the of infinite resources to do with it and you've got the republican party which is kind of knowledge about all some -- not that awesome.

[applause] don't mean republicans, i mean the republican party is not a good organization. they are not good at what they do. they are not as good as the democratic party is out with the do. if you are applauding because you are a democrat and it's like a compliment, okay. i don't mean democrats could come republicans bad, mean running a political party they aren't good of the basic stuff you need to be organized but they don't need to be because there's a conservative movement the hook themselves on to the movement and do what they are told and it means they have to lose elections in the short run it's because they're executing against contraception and 2012 the conservative movement doesn't care to read the republicans short-term electoral interest because they've got their eyes on generational change. that's why you get this phenomenon the right that you

don't get on the left. democratic politics have essentially been the same for most of my adult life. the policy positions haven't changed. they skidded to the right but they've gotten more liberal and they don't move very much. republican politics move so fast, so far to the right they are turning on each other and having to reinvent themselves. john mccain and sarah palin ran on a bailout the banks found faugh john in 2008, sarah palin. mant fahmy has to run against moly himself as a governor but as the guy that ran in 2008. [applause] they are constantly out pacing themselves because the conservative movement is making them whoever has the furthest right position in politics becomes the new standard and

whoever deals to verso when you do that meanwhile the democrats are like standing over here of these democrats are standing here among themselves, interest groups. how much we care about union? is it okay the majority leader -- i don't know -- that's democrats and republicans are over year looking to the right and as you do that, democrats whenever they have to compete in general terms of the are constantly scrouging over to try to be sort of centrist and that means the center moves to the right which means there are republicans who falloff that edge of the time but it doesn't matter to the conservative movement in the long run they don't care about the politics they are going to lose all the midwest governor richards they did in