>> i am hoping that once we get

into the debates and the topic of mexico comes up, i am hoping that this comes up as a debate topic. i would just say talking about it, you know, and using social a media to tishare articles andone best way to really get the information out there. and also read the book. >> thank you. >> every weekend, booktv offers 40 hours of programming, focused on nonfiction authors and books. watch it here on c-span2. >> from the national constitution center in philadelphia, kevin bleyer, a writer from "the daily show" with jon stewart, talks about his new book, "me the people." this is about 45 minutes. >> that is far too appropriate. to i think they were applauding for me. >> oh, okay. >> good evening.

it is nice to see all of you here tonight, especially since we are having a little bit of fun on this holiday week. it is great to see so many new faces in the audience. we are here to talk about your book. i thought maybe the way to start off is to show everyone your trailer and to show everyone why you wrote the book in the first place. >> okay. >> who wrote the constitution of the united states? would you please recite the constitution? have you ever read the constitution? what is your favorite part? >> i like the bit around the edge. [laughter] [laughter] >> who wrote the constitution. >> george madison. >> that is not a person. >> that is incorrect. george jefferson. >> george jefferson?

>> have you read the constitution? >> no, but i did see the movie. >> there is no movie. >> that is why i rewrote the constitution. >> good night, everybody. that explains it all. that is just the tip of the iceberg. in my research for this book, i like to call it inevitably by research. in my recent book i found out that more american teenagers don't understand the constitution. about three quarters of americans believe that by the people for the people is in the constitution rather than written

by abraham lincoln. most egregious to me is that many americans, almost half, believe that it was written by james madison rather than karl marx. and just so you know, he is not one of the three stooges. they actually have brothers but they were not funny. we can keep going. this goes to the topic, as they say. you may remember a few years ago, congressman john boehner held up a copy of the constitution and set i stand here with the founders who wrote in the preamble. unfortunately, as we know. i begrudge no one because my blind spots, i'm sure before i started this project were as wrong as anyone. if you has to have a constitution began years back, i

would've said it was the best of times and the worst of times. and in some degree, and actually was. i just want to say thank you for being here. it is so good to see so many friendly faces out there. in fact, if it is possible for someone to rewrite the entire constitution, i am in fact humbled. i would also say to you that many friendly faces are slightly less friendly today, because you had to pay to see me talk. i understand. and i would encourage you not to think of it as a service charge for a 5-dollar fee or a penalty. think of it as a tax. [laughter] >> the front wrote people were way ahead of me on that. >> what did you learn? what surprised you the most?

>> well, beyond the ignorance of the constitution, i get asked why did you rewrite the constitution and why did you take on this progress or they would be perhaps too convenient, but not altogether incorrect for me to say what other people have said. which is everyone has done so, why not me. for anyone who also said that there should be a lot come i get to say, here's a whole new set of laws. [laughter] it bears repeating that i had no choice but to rewrite the constitution. because no less than thomas jefferson told me i had to. he told me i had to. he said, as you may know, that every constitution naturally expires at the end of 19 years. nineteen years was a generation. by his mouth, our constitution, i guess, has been naturally expired for over two centuries.

dead and kaput. i just feel that i'm getting to it now. so i have been slacking for two centuries and i owe you all an apology. beyond that, there are some things that happened in have happened in the last few months that i feel like actually put a stamp on my work and said you did the right thing. to some degree isolate i felt the constitution need a little bit of publicity. as we have seen, even though people certainly cozy up to it for all the good reverend ways that we do, unfortunately sometimes they use it as a political battle. as a weapon in a political battle. it also felt like i needed publicity to be reassured by. as we saw justice ruth bader ginsburg, she said she would actually be decided democracy, she would not necessarily use the american constitution as a model. that kind of surprises you. she is known for protecting it. but in the truth of the matter,

she was saying something that has already happened. twenty-five years ago, 94% of americans had used the american constitution, at least in part, to base their constitution on. the last 25 years seems like none of them have. that is certainly a study that came out and was suggested. they look instead to things like south africa and canada. right? oh, yeah. in their explanation, their constitutions do more service to things like human rights as they say it. then something called the environment. so that is why they look to it. >> this has been a team of some of the interviews and you have also been on our blog. we are talking about why he needs to be rewritten. in doing so come you compared yourself to the chief justice. would you care to explain that?

>> i compared myself to the chief justice? >> about why it needed to be rewritten. >> i do remember going to justice scalia about at. >> he you said in your open letter to the chief about it. >> forgive me, right. certainly i can do nothing less than write the constitution of the united states. [applause] >> it was breaking news on constitution daily. >> yes, that's bad news. >> you mentioned your interview with justice scalia. >> he isn't hurt her, that is true. fascinating. honestly, i wanted to meet with them. who in the country it would be most amenable to the page one rewrite of the constitution. a man who devoted his career to protect every clause, sentence,

punctuation, and things on it. as you know. to my surprise, to my amazement, he agreed to meet with me. we met at the national gallery and had a great lunch. we did, in fact, the satires versus the jurist, so to speak. incredibly charismatic fellow, as many people now. we talked about many things constitutional. but i knew at some point that i had to go and address the judiciary and propose my suggestion changes to the supreme court. as you might imagine, he said don't you dare. and if you do, at least grandfather me and because i love my job. here is what he is thinking about this.

i've learned in my research that is partisan on the constitution. the third article merely says that the justices shall serve during good behavior. for a bunch of very good reasons, we always presume that that meant for life. because they were reacting to it in that way. they were kind of revelatory, about how that went. by the way, this is my bookmark. you'll have to forgive me for that. okay. so i have explained to you the difference between the actual language and how we interpret it. i don't bother lecturing justice scalia on any of that spirit after decades of legal study and years of service as america's top judge, instead i began my cross-examination. how about you, i ask. how about me, what?

can you imagine just walking away? of course i can. i couldn't care less. he had just signed a two-year lease on his supreme court locker. when i'm not doing the job as well as i used to, it will be time to go. how will you know when that is, i asked? he looked at me in the eye. so you don't need some outside authority limiting the term? >> i'm fairly aware. i will know when i can no longer the program. what if i told you, your honor, that someone says you're wrong about that. someone even more powerful. who is that? someone you know quite well. he looked at me wondering if you should ask. who?

if this were a case in a courtroom drama, this is one i would stand to the jury and look back to the judge and call in my witness. i now call to the stand, the current chief justice of the sprinkler to the united states. if this weren't a drama, the double doors fly open and the stenographer would record the action, and chief justice john hugh roberts junior would saunter of the aisle. he would lock eyes with justice scalia and steal his glare. he would explain to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury that justice antonin scalia should've been kicked off the court hinders them. back in real life, when he was a lawyer in the reagan white house, john roberts argued on behalf of a 16 year term limit for supreme court justices. it was a pragmatic proposal. they adopted a tenure.

in a principled one for many of the same reasons. a judge for 25 or 30 years was a rarity then, but it's becoming common place now. it would ensure that federal judges would not lose touch with reality through decades of the ivory tower dissonance. it is an indictment of lifetime tenor too compelling to ignore. as i finished explaining, one thing is clear. school yet knew nothing of this. is that so that robert thought that? have i a lawyer that the longest-serving justice of the supreme court? yes, i say. yes, he did. for a moment, anthony scalia seemed speechless. i intended to shut the prosecution rests. but i don't.

instead i grin and anthony scalia is grin returns. well, i doubt he does anymore. [laughter] he has a good point. robert doesn't think that anymore. when he had his hearing in 2005, he flip-flopped. his issue had evolved. on the issue of lifetime tenure, where one stands depends on where one sits. schooley as joe puts them back in the office. are you going to make me retire? with your new constitution? i have been here longer than 15 years. >> oh, he's not on the attack. he is throwing himself on the mercy of my court. no, sir, i'm not here to buy a justice scalia. what do you propose? i said simple.

the judicial power of the united states shall rest upon one supreme court and the judges shall pour -- pulled the position of songs they have good behavior. i dropped you from behavior. we take it literally. we've revised the original article and we honor the original language. judges shall hold their positions as long as they have their behavior. it is the law to which he owes his entire career. who determines the behavior? good behavior, i direct him. [laughter] that is what i said, he said.

who gets to decide? >> i have anticipated this question. a judging body, determining whether the justices are passing the good behavior test as revised by my new constitution. he gets what i'm aiming at. a supreme supreme court he said with a laugh. he is amused by the idea and i can tell he's not ruling it out. just one question, he says. i raise my chin and say yes, your honor. how long do they serve? i hadn't thought of that. what was great about anthony scalia is that he knew, i presume, he was understanding the intent of my book. they take a look at it and read it. >> if the gateway drug to the constitution. [laughter] >> there we go. i think this is evident, is that

he has a great sense of humor. i knew this. i have been told that he did. but what i didn't know until i started looking into it is that he is officially the funniest supreme court justice. how i know that he is officially the funniest? many years back, "the new york times" actually reported that they had released a transcript and someone looked into it and counted the number of times that laughter was indicated by the stenographer. by a long shot, he has the most laughter in the chamber. o'leary's way, he was two times as funny as justice breyer and 19 times as ruth bader ginsburg. it is possible that he is infinitely funny. but he is always funny no matter what he says.

he could be the patch adams of the supreme court. we are not sure. thank you very much. >> let's talk further about your book. justice scalia goes on to say that this court is already rewriting the constitution. did he argue brenner books obsolete? >> no, he probably did. pretty hilariously, there is a gentleman who has a great name that i could not possibly make up. it is almost cartoonish. he is a fascinating character. even in some of his decisions, he has rewritten the constitution. we could talk about this and the second amendment. he actually did the work of rewriting what it meant, using the language and flipping it around. he is not alone in doing that, either. he did it essentially talk about

the serious version in my book. he was another colorful character. he had the delusions of the grand jury that i have had as well. he spent the last three decades of his life writing like 72 drafts of the constitution, intending for it to be gratified and embraced by nation. i don't think it worked. i'm not sure. but he is one of the people that have done this. the court in schooley as eyes -- in justice scalia size, he said the same thing he meant this as a compliment. it is a valid argument to make. it is one half of the argument

of the constitution itself. >> you are here at the national constitution center. nectar is our anniversary. we're talking about different products. if we could change it and rewrite it, what would we do? you have some opinions? >> i do, in fact. what i hope i have done with the book and i hope this is where it's interesting as well as amusing, i tried to get to the heart of the issue. i try to point out what the debate has been about where people have fallen short or where they live up to where we wanted to be. the first was 80%, i do actually, i think, they dig deep and try to find out what those issues are. the last 20% is where my rather absurd solutions come and why. most of my solutions are debatable, and that is the point, i think. some of them are even funny. let's take the congress and

executive branch. one thing i know about congress is that, first of all, we don't really approve of it. it has an approval rating somewhere around [inaudible] famously, as with tom coburn, there was a recent high of 14%, even tom coburn said something like who are where these 14% of the people that trust us we met i don't know who they are. i was told, and i'm not sure it is true, lindsey graham said he wants people to recognize them first. which is kind of hilarious. we know that we don't approve them and we also know that we sometimes can't name a congressman. it is warm in here, you are right. if we know that we want to approve of our congressmen and also wants people to name a congressman, one solution is we all become congressman at earth. that way we have a vested interest. even though i came up with a

rather good solution and i explained why. again, it was in the research in which i learned the george washington himself spoke only two times during the constitution. one of the times he spoke was near the end. the only time he really weighed in on a matter of policy. and he said i think we should change the number of people of representatives we have, instead of one every 45,000, 100 30,000. and i thought if he is going to take her, i will do so all the way. what we know about the executive branch? we revere george washington. he was presumed to be, what i think we all want. which is something of a reluctance to you.

certainly, george washington was one of them. we also know that in this day and age, we want someone who is an average joe. we often suggest that we want a president who we could go to a bbq at. or have a meal with. i suggested that the only way we know the president would be truly of trent lott than an average would be to pick him or her randomly come only from the subset who show no interest in the job. [laughter] interestingly, i look at that and i think that is kind of absurd. all right, only a few weeks ago, you have mitt romney, who went out into the world and he was in vegas. he was with donald trump. and he said they businessmen looked at me and i think it was a pretty good idea. let's consider for a moment. we have certain requirements, eligibility requirements.

certainly age, nation of birth, citizenship. but this businessman businessmen said we should have a provision in the constitution -- we should add one a provision that all should have been required to have at least three years of experience. and i looked at him and i thought, that is kind of crazy, but kind of great too. mitt romney is starting to reduce the number of people eligible. why not? of course, it would also make ineligible many great presidents we have had. he also said that the executives that he might forgo a salary and work on more of an intensive business. that would be the first time that we had a president on commission. it is pretty wild. that might work, too.

perhaps i should have been in my book. because if he raises the debt ceiling, lowers the deficit, maybe it would have been. in the grand scheme of things, it's not that much, i suppose. >> you want to talk about the book, the particular section that many of you have talked about in the last couple days. particularly about your visit to the national constitution center. i want to make sure it is correct. in your book you call the national constitution center the opposite of disneyland. we have no credible games at or bromine mascots. >> yes, i learned that recently. >> no cherry trees and no lines. i believe you call our ward

winning production of freedom rising, a cross between a planetarium, the laser light extravaganza, and an experimental one-man show. [laughter] [applause] >> that shows how inspired i was about it. even in that short presentation, when the "me the people" is broadcast, until it was right -- you have to read the book is a full understanding. i am so inspiring by freedom rising that i decided i was going to rewrite the constitution. >> you did. >> it was very inspirational. >> we have opportunities here. you could have a first amendment roller coaster, you can have a preamble labrecque, a second amendment shooting gallery. you probably wouldn't want that, actually. [laughter] [applause] >> you are right, we are about

getting people active in civic we engaged and getting them to do something. you mentioned that we follow little bit short. what else should we be doing differently here? >> what else would you like to see in a museum? >> what i would suggest is on a day like this, and something i would suggest to congress as well, it seems to me that the only way we can get anything done is that there is a ticking clock here. i make the suggestion that only a few blocks from here, these men got together and they wrote a constitutional reform in this will see -- they wrote it in the sweltering heat. they locked the doors for privacy. there were animal carcasses in the street, there was a riot for much of the summer. they were drinking beer for

breakfast. many comments at the time to drink beer and soda water. nonetheless, they were drinking beer for breakfast. some of them drink so much that they actually -- they still got a constitution written. talk about rollicking. they did two things. they established a committee as a whole. it basically suggested that at anytime, anytime they want to revise an idea, they could do it. it was a committee of don't hold me to it. so for four months, in that sweltering summer, they still managed to do it despite the fact they had so much against them. i say to the world, you know, perhaps the solution is for

congress to stay in washington dc and turn off the air conditioner all summer as well. what i was going to suggest is that you want to give people an experience, maybe have one room that is truly just open and everyone puts on the heat and it has to sit there like a sonnet. we could debate something and find out his window when. >> you do make a good point. stability was different in those times. 225 years ago is very different than now. you point out on several occasions in the book that the government is a little bit dysfunctional now. >> indeed, it is. hopefully some of my solutions might be -- they might solve the problems. >> what is the cause? how we get the right people running for public office? >> unfortunately, we are already be in office, for that matter. i can answer a broad question about that. i kind of think i left one

question unanswered earlier. why not point out that the constitution we have is great. and i agree, it is something to be entirely revered. i actually want to read two quick sections, if i may, that might actually suggest that. also, answer your question about how can we get the right people running for office. i open the book with a fair explanation as to why i decided to write this book. and i lost my bookmark because of this. >> their beloved bell was in jeopardy. it had hung beautifully for decades pealing hourly from the steeple of the pennsylvania statehouse. breaking the peace in the streets only to remind citizens

that all was well. but these were no longer peaceful times. it was 1777. a year after declaring independence. only days after george washington suffered a defeat at brandywine. the revolutionary capital might as well be the next to fall. the kings men would melt any metal that they found. a few american patriots crafted their own bell, soon to be known as the freedom bell -- the liberty bell. it was hidden in the safest place they could find. under a pile of horse manure. the marauding redcoats never got the british hands on our american liberty. the lesson learned back then is clear today. sometimes in order to save another something we cherish, we have to [bleep] on it. the c-span cameras would be upset with me.

to cut to the chase, and suggest to the world what i actually feel that the constitution. i think there is one other thing that i can read for you. their beloved stamp was in jeopardy. it had been designed carefully and artfully, also with a denomination chosen to reflect just how long it would last. how long it should last. forever. a forever stamp. [laughter] >> it was 2011. 125 years after the statue was dedicated and featured as a gift from france as a memorial to independence, enlightening the world, and honoring her long journey, 3 billion cents had been printed by the pitcher that the united states postal service. 2 billion had argued an issue. countless were peeled and stop

the letters across the country. enlightening one envelope at a time. it wouldn't last forever. one eagle eyed individual with way too much time on his hands made a discovery. the lady on the stamp was not the statue of liberty. no, sir. the lady on the stamp was a pint-size knock off on the las vegas strip. looking over the newark, new york casino in las vegas. less the stuff of immigrants hopes and dreams. more the stuff of fiberglass and styrofoam. a replica. in other words, we have 3 billion of these? a real lady would not be caught

dead with such a blemish. someone, somewhere had raided a stock photography service and said yeah, this must be right. well, someone noticed. the usps lease an official statement, but not an apology. they said we still love the stamp design and would have selected the photograph anyway. [laughter] they admitted no defeat, made no excuses, announced no recall. it must be said it made me proud to be an american, where at least i know i am free to pretend i totally meant to do that. even when i totally screwed up. after all, what was the postal service to do? should they deny they made a mistake? james madison might have wished in that summer in 1787. and perhaps anthony scalia would still advise today. should they recall the stamp and continue living in the past.

that is what the youngest delegate to the constitutional convention did. he never once updated even has manner of dress. the last of the top acts. a walking example of arrested development. we shouldn't represent a whole and bold makeover. i am your humble servant, kevin bleyer, which are shown in these pages. the postal service insisted that the stamp was a perfect spam. it still secures the blessings of liberty as we know her. life-size and unfold. it interprets the life of thomas jefferson, with testimony ended deeming them like the ark of the covenant. and james madison, too. that we not suffer for antiquity. they interpreted it in some different ways. that we should just get over

ourselves, stick with the program and meet up at the craps table, baby needs a new pair of shoes. the light shines bright and is unmistakable. sometimes in order to honor an icon that defines a defined the nation, whether it be a giant green woman were constitution of the united states of america, we should roll with what we have done because it is darn awesome. i didn't want to spoil the ending for you, but the idea is, you know, it makes a debate, but there is not one written preamble, many articles that are saying that we shouldn't rivera. >> one of the jeep compass is, as you call him, was james madison. he seemed to have a repeated thing. >> we did. >> i would love to explain your audience here your beef with

james madison. >> i don't have to point out that he and i have [inaudible] he was a short man, as i often send this book. i see only so far as i do because i sit stand on the shoulders of a short man. james madison is the ego. i consider him my ego. yes, i explain myself to him. he is the overachiever but i always wanted him to be. he should have 11 days before the delegation. i totally understand that. i was a grade a, grade a- student. he also was considered a stiff and gloomy creature. joseph ellis called him self-consciously inconspicuous. you would not even notice them in the room. he wore dark colors and were black. which i found kind of

interesting. i make the joke but shouldn't we presume that the father of our constitution is, you know, a man of steely gaze? i said, well, between the two of us we can wear a trenchcoat and join forces. >> i do want to make sure that we leave time for audience questions. those of you that want to ask questions, please come up to the microphone. a lot of folks are interested in your experiences with the daily show. both with the book and your writings, this comes from -- it is fun, but it's also a place of deep intellect. you have done a lot of research and you know a lot about current events. we must focus on right now for current events? >> and then if you'd walk us through your time and a day in the life of "the daily show." >> of course.

we knew that this constitution was an interesting thing. we were happy that it landed on that thursday before we take a break. we usually miss it, but we managed to get our teeth into it. we really enjoyed it. it is what you might expect. it is a bunch of people with their radar looking for interesting material and try to do something interesting about it. hopefully saying something insightful. we get into the office, anywhere between 730 and 9:00 o'clock. the first meaning is quick paced and what have you. it is a bunch of footage. it is getting angry at a bunch of footage. and we think we can turn that anger into some kind of amusement for our own health. that is what might be the first segment. throughout the day, we are just writing and making sure that we have our eyes on the price.

three or four times we will get together with john and he is the vision for the show. by 430 we have a script. >> you mentioned that justice scalia is the funniest. who is the funniest writer? >> oh, no, no. it's not a competition network. but you are right. you are suggesting this. hopefully we will make some headlines. to some degree, i was surprised how much we set off each other working on the book on nights and weekends and also working with "the daily show" during the day. it would be amusing to me that yes every time you show up at the show, someone, somewhere would say something about the constitution. it is funny that you mention the supreme court decision.

i would've found a way to put it in the butt just because someone says something constitutional does not make it constitutional. so now i would be revising what the court has to say, rewriting numbers at that point. a couple of people are apparently spies in mind. by definition, those people is how we have decided that things are constitutional. for example, that kind of quote, i would either get to go home and kind of investigate, all right, what we know about this? what does it mean to be constitutional and find some way to cherry pick the best anecdote. >> have you been to go to history but? >> anyone can do anything.

obviously people have strength and what have you. i was a history buff privately before the book came out. >> if you have questions, there is a microphone here. i want to talk about the new cycle in the "the daily show." does it trouble you that more people now say that they get their news from "the daily show" then mainstream news? >> you are right. every four years the pew foundation puts out a research study that says this. when i hear that, i find that quite expiring and utterly horrifying. we want a full buffet for news digest. i guess we try to get it right. we try to get the news part of it right. so i do think we are adding value as far as that goes. but ultimately, i think we have to trust the people, no when we

are going into the punchline. if they didn't read the news elsewhere and they have not seen the news to someone else, they might be confused by that. but i don't think that we will be confused by that. i think that they say that because maybe they want to support us. but i also hope that they have a broader brush somewhere else. >> that is what you hoped. >> i hope and i presume. i need to think at. >> what has been the richest material for your? when you have the most fun but? >> it won't surprise you that this debate was an amusing time. no doubt about it. as far as going forward, i think we are going to see how much money will go forward with the campaign. you can't really predict what's going to happen on anything. truly, you show up and it given day and you work with what is given to you.

it's impossible to work the show that way. >> as margaret mentioned at the top, we have a number of things going on during election season. i want to put you on the spot. those of you who have seen the website lately, there is recently a project called address america. we have launched a new project this year during election season to ask all of you what you want to hear of or from your politicians. can we have the address america video? on the flipside, we will ask you for your six word speech. >> some speeches are used over and over. the stump speech is back to when

canada stood on stumps to sums to address their message to the crowds. they use the stump to keep their message focus. we are asking you to boil your speech down to six word spread in six words, people can say a lot. >> less money, i think breast-feeding can change america. >> let's bring our old values back. >> let's take care of the homeland. >> help prevent all poverty and bullying. >> freedom comes with great responsibility. >> america is beautiful. >> tolerance, freedom, independence. >> change the economy. equal rights not. >> let's the united states again.

>> more protection equals more free rides. >> politicians should go far, far away. >> performing arts and sustainable energy. >> america needs a broader world perspective. >> it out into your country. >> that is address america. we will take this to the republican national convention this summer. what is your six word stump speech. i am asking the author of 700 page book. >> i'm pretty happy with this first one. in the words of patrick henry, give me liberty or give me -- speech?

[laughter] [laughter] give me liberty, that's all he's asking. there are six words. you can count. honor the constitution. read the constitution. >> fantastic. i will say that we will quote you on that. [applause] [applause] >> kevin, what is your next project? any other crucial american documents that need to be rewritten by kevin bleyer? >> as i indicated, i might write a sequel in 19 years. look forward to that. in the immediate future, i will probably need to rewrite the federalist papers. in the same way that they wrote those papers to try to convince people to ratify the constitution, i, too, probably have some explaining to do at this point. maybe that will be the next. or maybe 50 shades of gray. i will be right back. john stewart said i should call my book 50 shades of red white and blue.

take the next question. >> you are a self-described overachiever. obviously coming have a lot of passion and you have done research is why comedy is important enough politics. >> why comedy? i enjoy it. i don't know that i would be a good politician. perhaps because of whataburger britain. [laughter] i enjoy having this kind of bingo online. i enjoyed taking something and turning it into economy. >> kevin, i want to say thank you. thank you to all of you who have joined us tonight. i would love to give you the official leather rounded version of the constitution. you passed the test. thank you, kevin bleyer, for

joining us at the national constitution center. happy independence day to all of you. [applause] [applause] >> is there a nonfiction author or book you'd like to see featured on the tv? >> send us an e-mail at booktv@c-span.org. work tweet us at twitter.com/booktv. [applause] [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [applause] [applause] [applause] >> hello, everyone. can you hear me? oh, good. wow. this is so exciting. this is my very first book.

in my very first and probably only book signing. this is so good. this is so good. well, let me just say that i am so proud of this product. the book is everything i would have imagined, i wanted the book, "american grown", to be beautiful. i could tell because when my daughters picked it up, it's like oh, your book. how nice. they actually got pulled in by the pictures. and then they could not put it down and they started looking through it and reading it and then eventually i got a thumbs up. so that is what we hope the book will be. the book is really not just a story of the white house garden and how it came to be. and how we had our ups and downs in the trials and tribulations.

it is also a story about community across the country. everything from a wonderful community garden in hawaii to some excellent gardens that are happening in schools right in the middle of new york. some great schoolkids. the stories of the work people are doing across this country are really an important part of the book as well. but we also talked about one of my key initiatives, which is my campaign, "let's move." these are initiatives going on across the country to help kids lead good lives. it is practical, too. i am not the best burger in the world, but i have great team of national park service people. i have my main crop kids. they are my partners in crime in this respect.

these two schools have been with us from the beginning. that was one of the things that we said. if we planted a garden, it would have to be a teaching garden. a garden that kids could participate in and understand where their food comes from and they engage in that process. that is really what i learned in my own life. when i involved my kids in the food they ate. we did not garden in chicago but we certainly went to farmers markets and we got them involved in changing their diets and claiming that process. that they expected a lot more. we have seen out with these kids. you know, these kids are working in the gardens in their own schools. i know that they are bringing back ideas and questions to their own families and helping to change the way that they eat and do great things. these kids have been amazing. and they have just been a pleasure. they come to the white house. they don't get starstruck and they don't around.

they get to work, they get the garden planted and harvested in a matter of 10 or 15 minutes, sometimes 30 minutes. we could not do this without them. i am so proud of you all. so very proud of you all. thank you. thank you for helping me. thank you for helping me. i just want to thank you all for coming out. i am just thrilled and i hope you all enjoyed the book and i hope it becomes at the beginning , a conversation in your homes and communities. i hope it leads to a healthier generation of kids that at some point, there are also some good recipes that are easier to follow and pretty good. white house chef recipes. i urge you to try them. i look forward to seeing you all appear. [applause] [applause]

[applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] , one. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]