>> wow, that was nice. it is almost enough to make you want to run for office. >> almost. almost. well, we are delighted to be back here tonight. i've had the opportunity to visit the nixon library needs him on a number of occasions. served in the nixon administration during the first term. so i'm always pleased to come back and visit this part of the world in he reminded of a very important time in our haste to and i was happy to be a part of his administration. we are here tonight -- i probably should explain on the net while we are here together. the fact is i was born in lincoln, to an land was in

wyoming. in 1954, when i was 13 years old about to go into the eighth grade, my dad moved the family to wyoming. he had a choice between wyoming or montana and it was a good day because lynn and i grew up together. i first took her out when she was 16 years old. we will celebrate our 50th wedding anniversary, august. [laughter] -- [applause] >> if dad had picked montana and wyoming, of course i would of never married lynn. ..

nixon invented before, sponsored by the nixon library when i had other books to write, to publish. and now we wanted to have an opportunity for lynne to present yours. it's a superb book about our nation's fourth president, and the plan is i will ask your questions and she will respond. at the end of the period of time we'll open it up, take some questions from the audience as well. with that let me begin by asking why madison? what made you decide james madison needed another biography? >> before you get the august am so grateful to date for joining on this book tour. i started referring to them as my arm to -- arm candy.

[laughter] i've known i was interested in medicine for a very long time. i had the privilege of serving on the bison to the commission for the constitution in 1987. it was then i first began to understand how magnificent madison's accomplishments were and yet how little recognized he was in terms of what he had accomplished in his political life. it wasn't until five years ago i became serious about writing a book, and it has been a labor of love. i only hope that you'll enjoy the book as much as i enjoyed writing it. he was the architect of the constitution, the architect of the bill of rights. he was crucial to this announcement of the first government under the constitution. he was president during the first war under the constitution, and he performed, if not magnificently in all those jobs, at least very well.

at the end of his presidency, john adams who was kind of a sour figure and not given to making compliments easily, john adams wrote that james madison's administration had covered itself in more glory than any of his predecessors. which is a great compliment because his predecessors were washington, jefferson and adams himself. so i do think he has been underappreciated, and it's been really so much fun. i know five years of labor doesn't sound like fun, but discovering things, being able to put it into a form i hope would reach a wide audience. as the book is called, reconsidering james madison's life. >> which was the most important contribution? contributions were enormous, but if you had to pick just one, what would it be?

>> it would have to be the constitution. i think he was a genius, and the reason is he was the kind of genius he had is he was able to break through conventional thinking. when everybody else was thinking one way, madison did necessary except. he would think of other possibilities. and he did that in the case of the constitution, in the case of establishing a great republic, which is what we are. the conventional wisdom was that you couldn't have a great republic, a republic where people voted for representatives, representative gohmert, that it would be too loose over a long and vast extent of land. and it would fall apart unless you had monarchical power, a team at the center. medicine thought that was not true. he thought in fact the danger in

the republic is that one faction will dominate and oppressed everyone else. madison's genius was to see that if you had many factions as they would be in a large republic, that no single one was likely to be able to become aggressive. that was the rationale for the constitution that was produced in philadelphia. it was his genius to see through what everyone else believed time and again, and to transform the world by doing it. >> you talk about his relationship with the other founders, like george washington, for example,. >> you know, we think sometimes of the founders as sort of sitting around having a polite conversation, and having the greater good in mind at all times. it's much more interesting to realize them as they were, which was people who firmly believed in their point of view and were willing to fight to see it

succeed. in the beginning madison was washington's chief lieutenant. when the first government under the constitution began, this will be similar to any of you in politics, washington had an aide right is an ideal address, and the agent produced a 72 page disaster. to washington wrote to madison and asked him, please come to mount vernon and help. so madison did and he wrote washington's inaugural address, did a very good job of it. after washington delivered the address, madison who was the leader of the congress wrote the congress' response to madison after washington got it. thank you, you laughed so i got it wrong. he wrote that congress is response to the inaugural address in washington by the sum thought medicine was so good at this kind of thing he asked him, madison, to write washington's

response after congress. [laughter] it's hard to imagine how his voice was at going off every wall. i'm not sure there's been another time in history when one man has been so influential at the beginning of his administration, the way medicine was in the beginning with washington. >> talk about the constitutional convention. there were battles over various provisions in the constitution. we ended up with article one, article one, two and three, and it took a long time, many, many hours and days to put it all together. but can you sites are the specific compromise, most important provision that they argued about and ultimately were able to resolve the? >> it was the thing we all learned in history books about the big states and the small states, and, of course, the big

states wanted states they represented proportionally according to the population. the small states one of the states to represent the states and we all know the compromise to make a represented states innocent and proportionally in the house. medicine was appalled. he thought there should be proportional representation across the board. he had gone into the constitutional convention thinking that the greatest threat to the republic where the states. he called them the evil states because they had been so irresponsible under the articles of confederation, repressing religious freedom, churning out of money, rhode island was guilty. it was called rogue island. churning out of money, and then this is what rhode island did, pass laws that made it necessary for merchants to accept that depreciated money. for debt that had been occurred. maybe you're getting paid off at 1 penny on the dollar.

the states were taxing one another. they were conducting their own foreign policy. so madison thought states need to be controlled, and when it turned out that the compromise was to have the states represented at the states and not proportionally in the senate, he was very mad and it took him a couple days to get around accepting that. >> what made them think they needed a vice president? [laughter] >> that's kind of an internal question, isn't it? well, it had to do with the electoral college, and every collector had to vote. if i got to the electoral college when they couldn't agree on anything else. so the alternate at that point was to let congress choose the president. just imagine how different our presidents would've been if the congress was choosing. you wouldn't have had a ronald

reagan. well, nixon, i don't think you would have eight makes an easy but you would've had 20 of speakers of the house though go on to become president. the electoral college, everybody gets to vote. again, the big states and small states. the small states are worried that the big states will always elect a president. so to assuage their concerns, a deal was made that you could only cast one vote, one of those two votes. the other had to because for somebody from another state which would give the small states a better chance. but then they started worrying, and you have all played this kind of game, you want that one vote for your own guide in your own state to be really important, you throw away the second vote. you expended on jim who doesn't have a chance. to prevent that, finally getting to the answer, they invented the vice presidency.

the idea was that the person who got the second highest number of votes would then become vice president. and that it seemed like a pretty good idea but then they started worrying, what was he going to do? [laughter] it's so interesting to see how this thing just builds up. they decided he needed a job and that they would make him president of the senate. by the end of the constitutional convention there were two delegates who were so worried about the vice president, being president of the senate, part of the legislative branch, about his just violating the separation of powers. two delegates, no, i'm sorry, george mason of virginia

specifically cited the vice presidency as reasons that they wouldn't sign the constitution. they called it that dangerous office. so there you go. [laughter] >> during the course of his career come in terms of implementing the constitution, alexander hamilton became an important player in all of that. can you talk about what it was that led to their major disagreements and confrontation? >> first maybe it's important to understand that he and hamilton were not buddies exactly but they were friendly colleagues. they wrote the federalist papers together with a little help from john jay. this sort of writing the federalist papers come if you don't mind i'll speedaisspeedais h go right ahead. >> divert a little bit. the story about writing the federalist papers is so interesting because it was done at such speed and such haste.

i was explaining to a college audience, and from college and universities in this area will appreciate that what madison did during one period of time, during 40 days, was the equivalent of writing a 10 page paper every other day. you could do that. that doesn't seem impossible, but the papers became immortal. so writing, writing philosophy, writing politics, writing an effort to convince people to support the constitution at breakneck speed. the printer was putting the beginning parts of essays into print often before they were finished. so madison and hamilton respected one another, until hamilton became secretary of the treasury under george washington, and began to make his financial plans clear. madison was troubled from the

beginning, but eventually, particularly when the issue of establishing a national bank came up, he was deeply concerned. he didn't think that the bank was a bad idea, but at the constitutional convention, in fact he was such a good idea that at the constitutional convention he had proposed giving the congress the power to grant charters, which is what you needed if you wanted to establish a bank. however, the constitutional convention had turned that opportunity down. congress didn't have that power and that was madison's problem. hamilton was simply running roughshod over a strict number of power that congress had been given. there was no power to grant charters and, therefore, madison thought you should not establish a bank. he lost the fight, but he went on to kind of when the war i guess you would say.

he established the first opposition political party. now, parties to make any better reputation then than they do know. so again this is counterintuitive. it was against the conventional wisdom that said that parties were divisive, they were noisy. we didn't want them in the republic. madison said, yes, we do. a government without opposition is little more than a monarchy. so we organized the first party in order to change the way to defeat the way that hamilton was trying to carry the government, to make it so strong that madison thought it was something the constitution hadn't contemplated. and by founding this political party, leading the founding of it he managed to get jefferson elected president in 1800. jefferson, like madison, was a small government guy. >> one of the most important functions that we've seen in

recent years, throughout our history is the role of commander-in-chief, is going to run the war, be in charge of the military. and, of course, madison as you mentioned in the opening was the first president ever to conduct a war under this constitution. the way that power was vested in the presidency strikes me as a great story, but that's not how it started out. could you talk about that? >> the proposal at the constitutional convention, there was just about to go through, was that the congress had the power, was the power to make war. and madison, his mind was so quick, his intellect is instantly grasped what would be the results of various proposals. he leapt to his feet on the floor of the constitutional convention and changed the word make to declare.

congress would have the power to declare war. he did this in part because he had seen what a mess congress may do things when they were in charge of war. he had seen him he'd been a member of the confederation congress where there was no executive, and the congress would decide. they would write george washington and say, send light horse harry lee south. and then they would realize there was more trouble in the north and they would say, since light horse harry north. it simply wasn't, wasn't the way to run a war. so madison leapt to his feet. he said congress has the power to declare war, but what that did was make the president the commander-in-chief when the war had been declared. >> how did he do as commander-in-chief? the british marched on washington, burned down the capital, burned down to the white house. was he a good commander in chief?

>> he was patient. like lincoln, like lincoln had trouble with the generals. in the war of 1812, the generals were people who had served in the revolution and they were getting a little bit long in the tooth. they weren't communist, as brave maybe as they might've been in their younger years. one general who was supposed to invade canada near detroit over the border became so alarmed at the rumors that turned out to be true actually that the british had formed a strong alliance with the indians who were great warriors, that the americans might have to face this, that he just turned around and seeded detroit. he not only didn't invade candidate, he gave the british detroit. so generals as they were with lincoln, were a problem. not so with admirals.

and 80 which was started under john adams with six frigates, they had eight or nine by the war of 1812. the british had more than 100 warships or frigates. but the navy had trained all that time and brought new and younger blood. command the warships. you can't just mothball and 80 and build it up again. so the navy kept going all the time. and as a result it was magnificent victories, naval victories in the war of 1812. and while people like general hall were playing from the british and indian allies, isaac all who was indeed related to general hall, isaac hall was commanding the constitution, and the constitution of course, uss constitution most famously encountered the british frigate carrier and just, you know, wiped her out. part of the reason was that our

frigates, though they were far, far fewer, were better built. and the cannonballs just bounced off the side of the constitution, which is why she gained the name of old ironsides. so they were splendid, splendid naval victories. towards the end of the war we were developing a new class of general. so when i see madison was patient, he suffered through those first channels. i don't know what choice the commander-in-chief has in debt. and absolute help celebrate the glories of the navy. he also changed his mind, and he was not afraid to do that when circumstances change. he had long regarded armies and navies as too expensive and as a threat to the republic, to easily use against the

citizenry. by the end of the war of 1812, he was suggesting to congress that the expand the navy and provide for a standing army. >> how would you evaluate him over all? how was he looked upon? was reviewed by the public in the day of his command as successful or not very successful? >> his contemporaries, madison was one of those fortunate few left of the presidency highly regarded by all of his countrymen. they regarded -- we don't pay much attention to the war of 1812, but it was regarded by americans as evidence that we could, we should, by gosh, he recognize on the world stage. we deserve to be recognized on the world stage. in fact, the rest of the world begin to do that, especially as you pointed out, after andrew jackson just beat the heck out of the british at the battle of

new orleans. >> one of the most intriguing aspects of the research that came up had to do with madison's health. i think it's a major contribution from a historical standpoint. he had an affliction that was with him throughout his entire life, and yet he was able to achieve these phenomena object is under extraordinary circumstances, and purely as one of the most important founders. can you tell us about that, both what his problem was and how he dealt with that? >> it was one of those puzzles to meet in the beginning. people called madison shy, which he wasn't there to simply reserves. and they said he was sickly. and, indeed, you can see that he was sick from time to time. but he also between the episodes of whatever it was, was enormously energetic, taking

thousand mile trips by horseback or carriage with lafayette. another one with jefferson. traveling in days when travel wasn't easy between his home at mount failure and wherever the capital was, new york, philadelphia, washington. undertaking just as routine trips i have often thought was something that none of the scholars who called and sickly could manage. during the war of 1812 he was on horseback for 60 hours when washington was burned. so there was something audie. he was sick a lot but between sickness he was quite well. is allegeis a letter that he wre towards the end of his presidency and it has been published. i certainly didn't discover it i think i was the first person who really paid attention to them is that -- it's at firestone vibrant and princeton and it's a draft of an autobiography that madison wrote, in which he says he was subject -- this is the

quote -- sudden attacks, somewhat resembling epilepsy, in suspending the intellectual function. well, nobody had taken him seriously really. i think people just wanted to shy away from it because it was kind of a difficult topic to figure out health in the 18th century. but i decided i would take him seriously, and you can see that terri did through his life where he did have these episodes. his description of a sudden attack, in fact, fits quite well with what they're all just today call complex partial seizures, which is a mild form of epilepsy. and i think that was it. the first, he had seizures as a child, is often part of a syndrome that involved seizures, at the looked at seizures as an

adult. so he had fits right into all that. he suffered the first at princeton when he was at college. you can just see it. he knew he was talking that, i will take him at his work and he fell into this period of deep despondency when he worried about his soul an come when he worried he wouldn't live long, we be worried that he wasn't good enough. and he was lucky. he founded doctors come his family did, but urged him to exercise. that being said would help. didn't end of the seizures but he was remarkably fit, you know, which doesn't fit with a sickly man. he was very fit and i think he decided once he had taken his physical health in hand, he decided to take his soul in hand. he was not going to believe all the things people said about epilepsy. people said if you had epilepsy or seizures resembling it, that

you were evil, that you are full of sin, that you would even possessed by the devil. and madison violent just decided he didn't want, he didn't have to believe that. i really think this fed into his strong support, freedom of religion, people who believe in religion to believe whatever religion or no religion, into his strong support for freedom of conscience, intellectual freedom. nobody should have to believe anything that he or she thinks in himself is rugged and that idea liberated him, and i think indeed help liberate us all because he led the way for freedom of conscience for intellectual freedom, for religious freedom, more than any other founder, even more than jefferson. >> what happened to the autobiography? >> he didn't finish it. it's just a draft.

this happens to you after you've been in political life for a walk, people write and say would you tell me some things, tell me some things about yourself, and his fellow wanted to publish whatever madison sent them. so madison started the autobiography that he didn't finish it. and he decided subsequently not to talk about his epilepsy, i think, because it was so demonized, that he decided it was more trouble than it was worth to call all of the doubt in his head at the end of his presidency. >> but he still had this amazing ability to perform as he did year after year after year. >> i really do think that seeing him as having complex partial seizures critics point how he could be said time and again. but in between he was ful full f energy to get energy expended at the constitutional convention was phenomenal.

>> dolley. >> dolley, don't you love dolley? well, she was a beautiful. men stopped in the streets of philadelphia when she walked past because she was so beautiful. she had dark hair and pale skin, blue eyes and ruby red lips, the whole package. and madison was smitten when he saw her on the street. and he asked his good friend, and this will be a surprise, his good friend arenberg -- [laughter] -- aaron burr. he asked aaron burr, before aaron burr got in trouble. he asked him to introduce him to dolley. she received in in her parlor. she wore a mulberry red dress and yellow glass beads and he was a goner. [laughter] they married a few months later, and she was a political asset. i'm always kind of skeptical about how important wives are. deal was important but i'm not

sure anymore that that's, it's as important as it might've been or as we sometimes think it is. more and more wives have their own career, you know? so they are central for getting there has been elected. but dolley was. in those days the congressional caucuses picked the presidential nominee. they weren't, there were no conventions but the caucus on the republican side and on the frozen side picked the nominees. and dolley made all those members of congress very happy. they were miserable. washington was just getting started but they all lived in boarding houses. one senator said we are insensible like mayors from talking nothing of politics from boring to me. there was no place to go. there was one club in washington that specialize in rope dancers. [laughter] i know, i'm not sure either but

maybe -- [laughter] may be tightrope walkers? that's my story. i don't know. so these men were so happy when the madisons opened the doors of the house and welcomed them no matter the party. they played cards. dawley took a little snug alongside henry clay. they shared a snuffbox. it was just warm and congenial and they didn't want to talk politics. jefferson was very different. he didn't like people to talk politics ranting. he lied thanks to move and called and he didn't technically didn't invite people from both parties together. you'd only invite people from one party at a time. but no, the madisons mixed it up. people love dolley. she loved them. they begin to feel not only great respect for madison but i think greater worth because of dolley's entertaining. there is contemporary testimony to her having been in some not

insignificant measure responsible for his getting the nomination. spent james and dolley were married for 42 years. >> not as long as us. [laughter] spent in august as i mentioned we will have been married 50 years. telecom what was the high point of those 50 years for your? [applause] i'm going to repeat the question. what was the high point of those 50 years for your? [laughter] not the 42 years with the dolley? >> no. >> i knew it was going to be a tritrick to have you ask me questions. [laughter] eighteen and i can think of, dick, really prevent you -- put you in a light that i don't think people often see when. darth vader is the image.

[laughter] folksfrom limited, he is a real romantic. and for the 50th anniversary of our first date, and what year was that? >> would have been 1958 spent so it was 2008 with the 50th. date arranged a surprise party for me to celebrate the 50th anniversary of our first date. all husband in the audience, try to top that. it was very special. we invite all of her college friends. he even had the good sense to tell me we're going to the british ambassadors for dinner. now can you don't want to take somebody to a surprise party, especially -- i think it is true, especially a woman. if you don't have on a nice dress. you don't want to take her if her hair is enrolled or whatever. equipment nowadays is. so he got me to dress up and told me this story weeks in advance. and then the annual gridiron dinner happened in washington.

and as vice president, president and vice president, spouse, we always sit at the head table. this particular occasion after just having to we were going to the british embassy that night, i was sitting next to the british ambassador. [laughter] so as they put it, i had to red him in. he had to tell him the cover story. the british ambassador didn't say a word, and those the surprise was complete. it was really a wonderful night. he had a cake made that was paul and had a little sort of body sticking out of it with blond hair, but the cake was red and it was his first and to do that because on the first day i wore a red formal with a big red skirt. see?

[applause] >> are you blushing? >> no. [laughter] just like dolley madison. one more question and then we will open it up to the audience. this is a difficult one, obviously. what was madisons greatest disappointment with respect to the constitution of the formative years of the republic? >> he wasn't entirely pleased with the constitution when it was finished but he thought it would -- it was probably the best human beings could do so we became a fervent defender. but at the end of his life, about his life he hated slavery. he wrote a letter as a young man where he said i'm going, everything i can to become independent of slave labor. to get off his father's plantation or farm as they call it, live an independent life in which he wouldn't be dependent upon that dreadful institution.

and he tried at the didn't really have a long time to try at it because he became involved in public life. in creating the constitution and so forth. so he didn't succeed. jefferson also hated slavery and he didn't succeed either at freeing himself from it. so i don't think, i don't think it's such a goal, such a firm goal in mind as madison did, but at the end of long lives they both died owning slaves. you could see him sort of the end of his life clinging desperately to what the only thing he could think of which much of which was the american colonization society. one of the problems by the 1830s was that if he freed the slaves they couldn't stay in virginia. there was a law that prevented that. a neighboring states pass laws to free slaves could move there. so there was this idea of finding a place in africa and

paying the way for freed slaves to go to liberia. the problems are many, one of which, a major, was freed slaves or slaves generally thought of the united states as their home. the slaves at montpelier had been in virginia as long as madison family have. so it was a failed scheme from the beginning but you can see him just clinging to it not able to think of anything else that could give him the kind of hope he had as a young man that this awful institution could be done away with. >> maybe just to wrap up this part, could you say a word about madison, if madison where tonight, would you think that we have been through the basic principles embodiment in his work is? >> i think he would be appalled at the size and scope of the federal government. he would think that we have moved far away from the limited

powers that were given by the constitution to the federal government. he might be somewhat gratified, so is this what would be much greater, it seems the ways in which the constitution still does prove itself relevant time and again. i was earlier telling the people a story, and it just occurred to me in the last few weeks, the supreme court is considering a case that involves whether the police should have the authority to search your cell phone if they stop you for a traffic violation. there were two instances in which this happened, and those two cases are argued before the supreme court. it's interesting, when i mentioned this to people, they will say that's wrong. or they will say, well, that's right. maybe the guy who stopped was a terrorist. what's interesting and what i try to emphasize is that the that we decide things in our

society, about how you feel about it, but what do you think oh, that's right or that's wrong. we turn to the constitution to make these decisions, and the supreme court justices will go back to the constitution that was formed so long before there were cars, so long before they were cell phones, but the justices have to go back to the fourth amendment, which madison wrote that talks about citizens not being subject to -- what's the phrase? unreasonable, that's what i couldn't think of, unreasonable search and seizure. so he would be gratified i think that the constitution still lives although there is an enormous effort to ignore it. >> with that, why don't we -- >> thank you. let's thank lynne, lynne and vice president cheney. [applause]

>> they have agreed to a few questions which we will do before the book signing, and i'm going to start with this young man who is from what school? >> chapman university. >> and your question is? >> you talked about how he was viewed by history, could you talk about maybe how he was viewed by the public, whether they like him or whether they didn't like him and the way that he kind of started the government? >> well, madison wasn't the kind of person, i mean, if he were alive today he wouldn't be the fellow who elbowed everybody else out of the way to get in front of the tv cameras. i don't think that all of his deeds in the early republic were fully appreciated by his fellow citizens. but asserted by the time his presidency was over he was deeply appreciated. his contemporaries were most enthusiastic about his job as commander in chief. i do think that has really been -- good question.

>> from corona high school, corona delmar high school. >> what is madison's most significant domestic -- >> odds are? >> significant domestic precedent. >> significant domestic achievement maybe, well, the constitution. what we had was a country that was growing increasingly unstable during the articles of confederation, and what madison did was the constitution and this idea that, you know, faction would be put against faction, and patient against ambition. to create a stable environment. alexander hamilton is often credited for the economy that we have today, for the pilot economy that the united states has, but madison's role in giving reasons men and the rest of us a stable environment in which to live was a major

contribution. >> what precedent did james madison said during his presidency? >> what precedent? well, i think he set an important precedent, really important one as commander-in-chief. there was a seditious movement going on. in the northeast, they particularly didn't like the war, new england, some in new york. they hated the war because it was very damaging to the part of the country economically. there was so much anger about the war that there was talk of secession, and even some organization of course talk of secession but there was an effort to strangle loans for the war by going after the people, the big bankers in the northeast and convincing them not to fund the war. so i think we madison refused to

put down that kind of protest, it was free speech. you're welcome to stand up and say whatever you want, and you're not going to be oppressed. we madison let free speech continue, ma even though in my opinion a lot of it was seditious, i think he set a very important precedent. it was certainly one that his countrymen appreciated. he knew that in fighting for the republic he didn't want, you didn't want to suppress those rights that the republic had been created in part to protect. so that's it. >> which president in the last century would you best be quite to james madison? >> new question. >> you know, it is a good question, but i find myself as

an historian thinking that you have to take founders, and abraham lincoln, and put them in an entirely different category. not because they were a different people, but because the challenges they faced were so enormous. it's hard to think of somebody like franklin pierce. maybe you could include franklin roosevelt in there, too. you look at presidents who faced existential challenges. if what they were doing didn't work out, they would go the republic. the founders faced that kind of existential challenge, and i think it ingrained themselves in our national story because of their, overcoming the challenges they face. lincoln faced that, and i think you could say franklin roosevelt did, too. so i guess the less essentially the 20th century, maybe roosevelt in terms of the

challenges that he faced and overcame. .. >> eisenhower in the last 150 years, our only bald president. and i was wondering -- [laughter] did you think there's going to be any more? yourself as a partially-bald

vice president. >> well, if i may go first? >> please. [laughter] >> i've always believed in the principle that my good friend al simpson lived by. al used to say we all have only so many hormones, and if you want to waste yours growing hair, that's okay by me. [laughter] [applause] >> a young lady from redlands, california. >> hi. you had mentioned how important it was to madison, the freedom of conscience. so i'm wondering how you feel about the fact that the whistleblower who exposed the torture ram is the only one current -- program is the only one currently sitting in prison for it. >> well -- excuse me. please finish. well, and i think there is, and the supreme court has wrestled with this too.

you're welcome to believe anything you want to. you're welcome to say almost anything. but what you can't do is violate national security ordinances that would endanger the country. edward snowden is a case in point. i think he's a traitor, and i feel it's so, it does not bode well for our society that -- bode well for our society that he's being valorized for having betrayed his country. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> i'm sorry, you need a microphone. >> ea -- a gentleman -- >> maybe this is off point. [applause]

>> dr. frank -- >> well, i respect your right to speak your mind, but i also reserve the right for myself and dick not to answer your question. [applause] >> dr. frank cannon in the back of the room here. >> you spent five years living with, in addition to the vice president, living with james madison -- >> i gave the other 45 to dick. [laughter] >> can you talk about writing a book like this? where are the papers? where did you go and visit? are there madison descendants, and if you could ask him, james madison, today one question that emerged from your research, what would that question be? >> well, that last is just really a puzzler, and i'll have to think about that one while i talk. the madison papers are in different places. you do have to travel a little bit. you have to go to princeton, for

example, because there are unpublished papers there. you have to go to live live phi. there are unpublished papers about madison's family. but 30 volumes of madison's papers are online. they've been digitized, and a wonderful job of digitizing them. dolly's papers as well has been done by the university of virginia. so think of that. research is so much easier now than it has been before. i think if, you know, i was chairman of the national endowment for the humanities for a time, and i used to be appalled at some of the things that we funded. but if they were to increase the endowment's budget so they could make the funding of the founders' papers and digitizing them so that citizens can have ready access, i think that would be a good expenditure. you know, frank, i can't give you a serious answer. i just have to think about what i would ask madison. so my unserious answer is i

would say how tall were you? [laughter] there, it's been disputed. someone said 5-4. his favorite aide said, no, 5-6. there's confusion about whether the aide was trying to be flattering. you know, i'm feet tall. i think even 5-4 would have been just fine. [laughter] >> a young man who studied in singapore and is a student at pepperdine university. >> yes. my name's jacob young. per pertaining to james madison's life, is there a particular piece that maybe the history books are missing that you think there's not enough information on or that you'd be more interested in learning about? >> well, there were two things that really stuck out to me as i went through, personal things. this whole idea that he was shy is a 20th century invention. his contemporaries said nothing about that. they noted that he was a canny politician who had learned the

trait of not speaking before you needed to, of being respectful to your elders when you were a very young politician, of not speaking carelessly. madison spent a great deal of his life cleaning up after jefferson who was prone to speaking carelessly. so the fact that he wasn't shy, you know, i spent a lot of time showing in the book that, in fact, he budget. and then this -- he wasn't. and then this sickly thing. that was really important, too, to get rid of this myth that he was so, so burdened by his health at all times that he could barely get out of bed. you know, you just can't see this vital politician as a man who was that way. and i think the idea of being shy and sickly has damaged his reputation. and i hope my book will do something to restore it. >> a gentleman from orange, california, with a quickie. >> yeah, quickie. mr. vice president, where'd you guys go on your first date? [laughter]

>> oh. well -- [laughter] we actually, we went to a formal thrown by one of the high school girls' social clubs. we went with some good friends, so we double dated. lynne did wear an amazing red formal gown -- [laughter] and afterwards we stopped at what in casper is referred to as c hill. >> oh, stop. [laughter] >> no, it gets better. >> no. [laughter] >> we hadn't been there very long when we discovered that some friends of ours including, i think, somebody who dated lynne before i did, had snuck up and let the air off the tires on our car. [laughter] so we spent a lot of time creeping back down to the filling station so we could get air in the tires. and by then, of course, we were in danger of violating lynne's cur fee.

>> we hat violated -- curfew. >> we had violated it. >> so we, i was very concerned at that point that we'd violated the curfew first date. i knew i was going to be in trouble with somebody. but the great thing about it in retrospect was that lynne's mother was the secretary to the police chief of casper, wyoming. [laughter] and we didn't make a move that night that hadn't been reported to her at home before finish. [laughter] >> all right. one last, one last question from a student from chapman university. >> could you share some of the most, like, influential authors or works that you think would have influenced james madison in his writings and opinions? >> i'm sorry. the microphone wasn't quite close enough. i couldn't quite hear. >> could you share some of the most influential works or authors to help madison shape his beliefs in writing the federalist papers? >> well, he had a classical

education. and in the runup to the constitutional convention, he undertook a study project of years reading classical a accounts of previous attempts at establishing a republic. and he, you know, saw where they had gone astray, and that helped inform his proposal that -- proposals at the constitutional convention. but practical sources were important as well. he not only wrote, you know, what had happened to past republics, he wrote what was wrong with the current one. and that he had learned from serving in state government, serving in the continental congress. it's a nice pairing, you know? he not only undertook this philosophical exploration, he undertook an understanding of the art of politics. he was a genius at both, and so his reading was part of that reading, sources like his

practical experience was crucial to his successes. >> ladies and gentlemen, let's thank the cheneys for this great presentation. [applause] i want to thank them and -- >> we'd like to hear from you. tweet us your feedback. twitter.com/booktv. >> booktv covers hundreds of author programs throughout the country all year long, and here's a look at some of the events we'll be attending this week. look for these programs to air in the near future on booktv on c-span2. on tuesday and wednesday, we're at the new york public library for an author panel on long form journalism. followed by a presentation of the helen burn steven book award for excellence in journalism. on thursday, former treasury secretary timothy geithner covers his tenure at an event in

santa clara. on thursday and running through saturday, booktv is at the annual publishing convention, bookexpo america, in new york, where we'll be with talking with authors and publishers of forth coming books. and that's a look at some of the programs booktv will be covering this upcoming week. for more go to our web site, booktv.org, and visit "upcoming programs." >> some people in the movement decided to take the cause of marriage equality to the united states supreme court. and that's really what i chose to write about. and i'm really gratified, you know, "the new york times" called it a stunningly intimate story. and is that's, that's the story, that is what i set out to do. i wanted -- i was fascinated. i wanted to know what would it feel like to be a plaintiff in a major civil rights litigation case? one that, you know, was incredibly high profile and controversial. like what did that feel like? what was the judge thinking, you

know, as he was considering the evidence? the judge, as it turns out in one of the many craze i twists in the story, turns out himself to be gay. you know, what does it feel like? i guess ultimately what i really wanted to convey is what does it feel like to want something that everybody else has and be told you can't have it? >> from the first attempts to stop california's prop 8 to the supreme court decision to strike down the defense of marriage act, jo becker on what some are calling the new civil rights movement tonight at 9. on "after words." part of three days of booktv this holiday weekend on c-span2. and online our book club selection is "it calls you back" by former gang member and community activist luis j. rodriguez. join other readers in the discussion at booktv.org. >> here's a look at some upcoming book fairs and festivals happening around the country. may 29th-31st booktv will be talking to authors and

publishing executives at the publishing industry's annual trade show, bookexpo america, in new york city. on june 7th and 8th, we're live from "the chicago tribune"'s print beers low lit fest -- printers row lit fest. during that same weekend, the first sacramento black book fair will take place from june 6th-8th. then on saturday, june 21st, the franklin roosevelt presidential library will feature numerous author talks on the 32nd president. look for our coverage of the roosevelt reading festival on a future weekend. let us know about book fairs and festivals in your area, and we'll add them to our list. e-mail us at booktv@cspan.org. >> next on booktv, "after words," with guest host jeffrey rosen, president and ceo of the national constitution center. this week justice john paul stevens and his latest book,

"six amendments: how and why we should change the constitution." the retired u.s. supreme court justice targets gun violence, the death penalty, gerrymandering and campaign finance in amendments he believes would better protect and empower citizens. the program is about an hour. >> host: welcome, justice stevens. on behalf of the national constitution center, it's so great to see you. you honored the national constitution center a few weeks ago by visiting us. the constitution center, as you know, is the only institution in america that has a congressional charter to disseminate information about the constitution on a nonpartisan basis, and i can't think of a better book to discuss in connection with that mission than your wonderful new book, "six amendments: how and why we should change the constitution." you've proposed six constitutional amendments on topics ranging from campaign finance and sovereign immunity

and political gerrymandering to gun control and the death penalty and the anti-common deering principle. all of these are cases where the supreme court ruled differently, and you dissented in many of these cases. tell me why you decided to write the book and why you decided to propose these six constitutional amendments. >> guest: well, it's sort of a project that just kind of grew, to tell you the truth. the heeled cause was the killing of the school children in connecticut. and "the new york times" story about theéwu.uéñtát(u tñat ther anti-commandeering rule places an obstacle in the way of the government's getting total information on background checks to precede the purchase of guns. and i had not actually realized before i read that new york times story that that rule does, in fact, increase the likelihood t