so you know there is a long period there where there is a lot of bloodshed. i am a family with united states in the 60s because we couldn't take the bloodshed anymore. there are just so many black people being killed. that didn't lead to anything for the longest time. a lot of black people got killed in charleston. and even before the president gave that stirring eulogy, the flak started coming down. >> yeah if i hear you correctly, i share a sense of unease as well because it doesn't really translate that because you have a massacre, a flag. i am glad the flag is down. any discussion of it being about southern heritage is to begin

with, but also disingenuous. but there is a certain masking as well that goes with that. that was that. we brought down the flag end of conversation. the post conversation, we haven't talked, for example, do they talk about this as a form of terrorism? i haven't seen much discussion about it. >> my facebook page -- [inaudible] >> in general i don't think we have that. when abdulazeez, i forgot his first name was caught in

tennessee, any time this happens with one of our muslim brothers would go immediately look into what website is elected not. has he ever googled for a school project muslim fundamentalism. this must be the root of all of it. i hope some group didn't send him in there. let's be clear. on his facebook page is for aggregation flag on his jacket. he's 21 years old. the real throwback is unique not just a confederate flag. get the rhodesian flag. that is her white supremacy. he is the lone gunmen who showed up and that was that. somewhere around there something deeper going on.

>> one of your colleagues noticed that photographs. laura webster specializes in the image and she says the photographs are posed and they're actually fairly sophisticated. he did not take photographs by themselves, which reminded me of the marvelous piece in my book black american and then asking to be black and look at that. it is about a lynching. the whole question is who is on the other side of the camera. and are those even co-conspirators. so that is the art part who took that picture and how did those ingredients get in there?

>> with abdulazeez i feel like someone who will grow up a treat at 2.0. there is no discussion, nothing like that. i'm not saying we need to militarize the state. i don't like militarize police at all. >> there has been some discussion. >> we have not seen the mainstream respond than what we've had over the last 36 hours. >> related to that, she talked about will receive the patriot act 2.0? i do want to talk about national elections revving up to the next presidential election. we've talked about local

politics, but to what extent is there any? do you have any hope for a possibility as tied to who becomes president? how does that bear on this question of whether there's a crisis confronting black america. >> if the democrats ran a yellow dog, i'd go for it. whoever the democrat is i'm afraid i will vote for the democrat. for me and much more interested in local and state politics and my your blankety-blank governor is moving to new hampshire. new jersey's governor is the strongest nation in the

government. where is our governor of new hampshire? or he's in iowa with the crazies and talking their language. for me you hear me talking about the local politics and the state politics. that is where i think we can put a thumb on the labor to get people voting and make it count. i feel like the national politics. i get a billion e-mails from all the democrats and progressives in the whole world that there are a lot of people working on the national and i'm just one person. i am not working on the national right now. i am working on essex county.

in town and the current candidates on both tickets concerns me deeply and i'm not trying to be flip, but the gop side, i've never seen anything like this. it is really wild and it says something. this has since been i don't have faith in hillary clinton if she were to calm brown but i don't see either party producing a

candidate that will do it on the grounds that it's good for america to tend to the problem. >> what you do with your concern? >> i do what i do. i go to work. that is what i can do and i am here today and a lot of people are watching c-span and hopefully this is what we do. we are doing something now. this is helpful. >> i'm glad the election is in for 15 months from now. i don't know what i would do at the moment. i do know that i don't like my vote being taken because i am black. i do like the idea of what i see in the gop.

i hope donald trump stays around because he's just hilarious. i don't think he has a shot. i just love watching the cap that he does. i don't know what's going on. in all seriousness i don't know. there's a way in which the democratic birdie has taken for granted our support and got their address of even bread-and-butter issues because without directly confronting issues that apply to us and understand those who apply to people are not apply. the gop says reagan had trickled down economics the democrats did trickle over. if we talk about one group it would just melt away without getting up there and say this is what racism looks like. it is structural and implicated

with other forms of that quality that may not be specifically african-americans. but the assumption that we help the middle class that is trickle over economics. i'm glad i don't have to vote for the primaries coming. >> way down in the middle of 2016. >> i still have a little bit of time to think it through. >> in terms of once again local and state politics, these decisions keep getting made on a local level almost month by month because we have so many elections. i would like to see us be

invested as well as the ones in which voters we are one of 150 million if everybody voted. thinking about the confederate flag and talking about voting, i am thinking that one of the forces that i would say was really important in this change was the fact that there is now a significant electorate in south carolina. that is the single largest pressure on making black south carolina and visible ms people who are not represented by the confederate flag. the tragedy that a member of the state senate was assassinated that made a difference as well. but when we talk about this sort

of tsunami of politics, black voting i'm sure has made the revolution is too strong a verb but it's made all the difference in the world. >> this is in some way related but one of the things that has been discussed in florida in particular is the growing puerto rican population and have been significant for the next presidential election. but it also opens the door for us to have some discussion about immigration and politics of race with respect to that. we saw something in terms of the digital activism with significant to what is happening

to haitians in the dominican republic. so we see a growth and cited concerns about race internationally. but also domestically, the way we talk about immigration. not historically, but the last decade or two has focused on latinos. to what extent the issue is should be primary with respect to are talking about race currently. >> just a background a little bit skip the goal about the way race and immigration can come

together in a way that can push race in america forward. one comment that i study intensely but a lot of what happens in america today, even though more than 100 years past is the idea of the one drop rule is powerful and the way in which, for example, i am a puerto rican man. people just assume i self identify as racially black but it would make a difference to a police officer. i can't say stop i'm puerto rican. you've got the wrong guy. that would make a difference. so the historical backdrop in which people are with power and how that plays out and that's how i will say about that threat coming up there.

>> i think the integration of large numbers of well-educated people from africa and to a certain extent caribbean is going to make a difference in certain places like my new jersey your new jersey that immigrants are less burdened by the tragic side of african-american history. and more able to take advantage of the tremendous opportunities of american culture. this has been true of immigrants to matter where they come from. they tend to say here is something i can do and i'm not going to do with all this other stuff. let me do what i need to do. there is an advantage for immigrants no matter where they come from.

but in terms of we see this at princeton with salmon at the black students i read it black students are rated themselves immigrants or the children of immigrants and they are very well educated which has been the key to the advantages of asian immigrants that the immigrant population is very well educated. it is much more popular than it was a generation ago and they will continue being complicated. complicated in the sense of people coming from various places. complicated because we now have more voluntary immigrants from the african continent than we had in voluntary immigrants in the slave trade area.

that is a big difference. just the sense of possibility the sense of freedom that immigrants and their children brain. i wouldn't be surprised if in the next sense the next sense that the one after that we have an ethnicity within flag as well in the way that you don't anymore for a black or white. 100 years ago there were at the cities within way. you have to say where you were born and where your parents were born and how many people are immigrant. that went away is what people thought homogenized. this will change with the tide of african descent into immigrants. it's a very interesting time. >> i think the way immigration

is discussed in capital politics on the other door level there don't seem to be that many new ideas coming from there. the challenge for us is to see the similarities, make the political connections as well. there are millions of people who live in. state secretary d. vis-à-vis this national fiction of citizenship. citizenship itself is variegated some of them are more equal than others. some have none at all. that is where there is this larger burden we have to think a shared across so many other

groups. california or los angeles anyway, half of the police murder and brutality are borne by latino population. clearly that is not much different from what we see in south carolina and via alabama. clearly a linkage. in terms of the crisis for democracy, how do we remake of democracy or try to fine-tune this thing. we have to think expansively. i may sound like an old-fashioned liberal on this, that expanding the franchise is one of those things. >> you don't have to apologize. >> i feel like i do. you know we are at a participation to the larger population may be at an all-time

low. the title of the panel is in a moment of crisis, suppress voter voter -- we talk about apathy. i'm not sure if this is people who are discouraged or can't vote because of criminal records are the obstacles police officers saying if you have vote and a child-support comet will be the last ballot you cast in a while. voter i.d. laws, all of that. >> i register people to vote. many people said rd registered and it reminded them of the next election. some people said i don't vote. some people said well i am still on parole. i can't vote. >> i don't want to get on a soap rocks but it is ludicrous that people who are clearly part of our policy would not have a say

in it. we were saying where do we go from here -- and mark this is the entire crew log would have written off in anybody's calculates. there is no boat to be gained there. >> okay. >> i'm not registered in the state of new jersey. >> i want to step back a second from voting even though i think it is still relevant. you raise this point about varying levels that people confront and one of the ways that we talk about undocumented immigration, people without

papers, but of course there's all kinds of people without papers. people who cannot access for certificates or social security cards and of course folks who are her serrated, various kinds of exclusions from the full exercise of participation of membership. and yet, given that, why is it so difficult to forge alliances across these other kinds of perceived differences, whether it's national identity or ethnicity. what is hampering that? >> i come right back at the relationship between jobs and politics is like this. patronage, jobs. it is a question of jostling over terms. who is in charge and who is going to allocate their jobs. it is a real need.

>> another thing earlier about what happens when immigrants come here and whether folks are already educated, previously, it better. there is no strategy. there's no better strategy than to divide people of interest. i live in new haven, connecticut . if you go through the teeming neighborhoods, something happened. they are poorer but they're independently owned businesses some people in homes, some people rent homes. the city has just completely -- it's just a different place. as you move through these areas, it's a whole other story. part of the issue about forge an alliance if you think you're doing better ,-com,-com ma the

other group will hold you back down because of the stigma attached in the resources and the connection this is not my expertise, but i can say commonsensical eight that want obstacle to getting what people think is he'll be dead weight because you don't have the kind of hole and people don't respect her community as much, et cetera. that is one thing that i think is a problem. >> we have former mayor saying the same thing coming out. [applause]

[applause] >> adapter named. >> i didn't know i was going to have this privilege, but i am delighted to have it. i am supposed to be outside signing books and then they offered me an opportunity to come in to greet you folks and i of course seized upon it. we have several intellectuals here. i am not to be confused with them. so if the spirit moves you i hope you'll stop by barnes &

noble outside and pick up a book. the purpose of writing a book in trying to promote in the first instance is not to make money but rather to talk about a lot of wonderful people who did great in good things when we were privileged to serve this city. so that which we did right they get the credit. where things were not done as well as they should have been, i will take the blame. i hope you stop by and take a look at if you haven't already. i've got someone telling me you've got to go now. but i thought if you were a day

had a question or two, i might try to be responsive. >> we have just been asking what it is that keeps different parts of the community separate like the latino neighborhood in the african american neighborhood in the african neighborhood in the white neighborhood, what keeps them from working together? >> one obviously they cannot be separated. in that lovely book we've done is the mayor's life governing new york's gorgeous mosaic. i went to school in harlem for a while a very very long time ago and we were taught that new york city is a melting pot. but it is not a melting pot. i would say it's a gorgeous

mosaic. they speak more than 100 languages in queens. we need to not permit folks to divide us. our interests are the same. i don't know why it is the way it is. people almost every year around dr. king's birth date the question is posed as dr. king's dream then realized and of course the responses of course the response is a negative. no it hasn't. but things are better. not what they have to be but not what they used to be. >> can i follow up? you created a successful

coalition. how did you go about that? >> well i had some really good people. some of you here though was bill lynch, for instance, died much too early. 72 it is still difficult for me to talk about him. but he was a large part of the reason that we were able to put together the group we had. some folks who worked with us that i had never not only didn't know, have never heard a period basil paterson and i assume you know these names but he said to me you know you're going to need to counsel.

i said yeah i know that but who? he says that that just the guy. george daniels. i said who is he? he is a judge. kill never get data. he said ask him. he is one of the smartest, nicest guys you ever want to meet. he is now a federal judge. before i left i appointed him back to the criminal point bench that he got elected to supreme court and clinton made him a federal judge. we call him the heavy judge because there was a time in harlem where we were making plans for a community center and the chairman was scared white sand james watt and who was a federal judge. he was the chairman of the group

and one saturday afternoon brothers and sisters are getting anxious. come on, i've got to go. he said no we've got to wait for the judge. so in the door was heard at a who was a state supreme court judge. the judge is there. no i mean the heavy judge. so henceforth, federal judges are known as the heavy judge. but i have a lot of good people. oslo was the chairman of our judiciary committee. this is a nonpaid position just got to understand. he and his committee if i had two appointments they'd bring me maybe three or four people. it didn't matter which ones i picked because they were all that good. so we had more women more a

more people of color than ever before. but it was because of basel. he too has gone much too early. so it is no exaggeration to say that we did get some good things done some things we didn't do as well as we might have and i will accept the blame for that. but we did get a lot of good things done and every now and then somebody remembers them. that is not too often, but once in a while. but it is because of these folks. with outstanding, many of them are now government. some of them working for deblasio, some of them not. there was one guy carl

widespread who at the very last minute and 1883 when i'm about to block the city doll -- city hall doors and carl came rushing at but they never ran to a vendor standing to be by the deputy mayor for finance and economic development. the last minute. now what with most of us have been doing that late in the game? dbo surveyed in trying to get a job. he was working on the one he had. the agreement that he brought in was for the disney deal to start a cleanup of times square. so he did that. we had a lot of women and men. they were good.

they were really good. [applause] and so that is the reason for the book. honest to god, it really is. i won't go chapter by chapter. i promise you that. but i think you will find it interesting reading. it is imperfect of course errors may come at things we could've said differently and i wish i had. for instance, there is a jan t. report so-called on crown heights and governor mario cuomo said to me you know, i sort of watergate down.

it was bad but it wasn't that bad because he watergate down. i told the governor pcb and the mayor in a fight you help the mayor. [laughter] that was in politics. it was not gracious to make that kind of comment. but it is fair in writing. so anyway, i hope you'll read it and i thank you for giving me this opportunity. [applause] >> thank you for being here. it is wonderful to have you join us. i think given the conversation we were having, which you are not aware of, there is a question we could add and

extend which is we have seen debates about racial representation in executive positions in our cities as well as in our police department. giving your tenure at the time of tremendous racial turmoil and upheaval around policing and racial violence committed yusuf hawkins comes to mind. patrick lynch was in the news in the wake of air turner's death. it just seems to me you are one of few people who could comment on how we are to think about what has happened in baltimore, the change in leadership, the response to the death the recent changes in the city in response to the one-year anniversary of eric gartner. i felt like this is a great moment to capitalize. thank you. >> i thank you. i am chairman of the foundation.

i am sure everybody here recalls that. we were so outraged by that charlie ringo, al sharpton i. ,-com,-com ma handful of others decided to get arrested. so the police were very, very nice. they said mayor, we could take you out of the back. i said you don't understand. this is the point. so folks can see. and so this is diablo, an amazing foundation that continues. there have been too many instances like that. you recall 41 brown's hitting,

was not threatening anybody. they're equally outrageous circumstances. so we continued to be outraged by these things. it is absolutely necessary and what were referred to as community policing. the police need the community. community means the police. most of the people who commit crimes are apprehended in the final analysis what the community. the folks living in the community don't want people among them committing crimes were all too often they are the

victims. and so, we are very much mindful of that. i think among the things we need is what i call a community policing. for our young people, education is absolutely essential. we owe folks like me just the other day july 10th i turned 88. so i am old. but we owe you young people the ability, the capacity to achieve your potential. we owe you that. this generation should be better than the one before. by brad and i., we are fortunate. we have a little boy and a little girl.

the boy is 61. interprets it. a couple of grandchildren. god has blessed us and makes a difference. but we owe not just her own children. i maintain lots of kids. i have lots of young people with whom i worked in a field that way about then. so we expect it is our responsibility. we have an obligation to see to it that our young people inappropriately educated and are not ill treated by police or anybody else. i better go sign these votes. thanks a lot.

[applause] >> what a gift that wise. i think we are actually at that time where we want to open the floor for questions. >> hello. i met a six county sister. i am also involved on the local level on the local school board. one of the things that i want to ask you all on the panel, especially in the conversation between local versus national versus state. i think they all tie together. you can't win on the local level when the state is doing things ultimately i'm doing what you try to do with educational funding in new jersey. you see it as quite the mess. national plays them as well.

when you look at your point of the lack of engagement around politics and voting at an all-time low. i started voting local in 2005 we moved to bloomington, indiana. even trying to find out who these people were on a ballot was very difficult if even in the internet age. but you are right in that the impacts of local is immediate. so your involvement on a local level can have an immediate impact and that is one of the best ways to people in to start engaging. but how do we battle against what happened with social media and the attention span that we are generated in the new generation to allow folks to care enough and engage in math and plug-in enough to actually commit to making the commitment

and growth added to state and national. how do we do that? >> speaking about essex county and newark in new jersey what i see is when people around the schools for instance, parents see their kids school closing. it is not in the abstract. here is an issue that affects me and here is how i can do something about it. you point out my husband and i have phd's. we have so much trouble finding out who we are voting for her. part of that is the loss of the star-ledger. we still read the newspaper every day. what is in the newspaper is less and less and less. so you know, if i were a full-time political person i

would do two things. i would create away for people to know who is running for a wide and of course i would put my spin on it. this is what they stand for. here's some very clear guidelines for voting. when i was out there i was with people and the baptist church that i got to bethany baptist church. at eight and a half by tad appears who can vote. >> kind of related to what imani genocide, i'd been in the field

of mental health for 40 years and so i certainly witnessed people approach crises and crises can either mobilize them for action or it can paralyze them. those that are able to mobilize for action are usually held to tolerate the level of uncertainty. what i think often happens with our community is we are not approaching or perceiving the experience that we are red the suppression we are in as a chronic. it is not a sprained it was a long-distance run. when i think of what we are in and how we are to approach these next steps, the former harlem i and all their professor john

henrik clarke who always spoke about the long-standing march taken on our journey towards liberation. don't forget the phrase he always is that our prayer should be buried in the continued the planned that our efforts should not be centered around a personality but the fact that there's indigenous leaders within every community and where we stand and that's why i like what you are saying professor painter about doing your work. my question to the panelists i think people often confuse political power with partisanship, which doesn't have to be the same thing.

but i would like to know is what kind of institutions do you think we need to be developing in our communities that can help us become connected and mobilized around personal issues that are of interest to us than we could be working on and then be poised to take advantage at a time when something comes to the floor that we need to take action on as opposed to just coming together around crisis in crisis and crisis that we would already be to gather as an organization. that is where i think we are lacking. we are always starting from square one is supposed to already been poised to take advantage of opportunities. >> what i've seen happening -- [applause] is that people start.

you could call it a crisis but start with an issue that affects them personally. and then, what often happens is people will mobilize, but then it falls apart because people are not experienced in using their power politically. i am not going to speak to the issue of psychology here because i think that if a therapeutic side that politics or political mobilization will not adjust. and newark, long time activist jury is williams runs a group, and ongoing seminar for local people who were mobilized and if he helps them find those skills

of translating your agitation into moving the leaders of power. you need somebody who had the experience, the knowledge is willing to make that an ongoing seminar. >> it has become vogue lately to say we did the charismatic leader anymore. they put in a plug out to you live. precisely because one thing that is important, being politically active our resources. people don't have time. people don't have jobs in the jobs they are looking for. one of the things that the personalities are charismatic readers help do his resource people and/or make a sacrifice.

but to help keep other people in the game because being in the political game requires a long-term commitment that most people would like to make it. many of them simply can't. somebody to energize a god who is always on the ground to let them know what is going on and what can be done at that moment because something is happening somewhere else. i think things could be factual. we don't need that one leader anymore. the good leaders that people can rally around are not just simply inspirational. that's a very practical function for communities that don't have the privileges to be consistently politically they been informed. >> they dependent. and may also become very easy targets to be knocked off and then the movement dissolved. i think there is a plus on either side.

>> thank you. >> also too bad, i like the point about leadership. barbara raynes b. has a piece out and color line magazine. the myth of the later dualist movement where she talks about the importance of leadership but also calls for structure as well that in case the leader will not be there that you have a structure in an organizational capacity to keep moving on. unfortunately we were creating organizations now, but unfortunately some of those are to take some of that capacity as well. also a recent immigration question if you like at the writings on both political scientists, immigration and labor unions for example clearly these are places where their ethnic divisions between

not just black versus non-blacks, but within black communities. it covered a lot of ground, a lot of common ground. let's be clear. the labor movement right now is to be an agent of change. it is involved in ways that it has evolved in many progressive issues in the ways since the 80s really. i encourage everyone to keep in mind what happens there as well. durkheim in ways that assume the crisis moments and some of these organizations right here. many progressive unions have been around for a long time. >> just a follow-up to the observations by the woman who commented about meeting ongoing organizational activities. the example i wanted to remind people love, which a number of you know is the work of the caucus in montgomery alabama

which created itself and worked on discrimination and segregation of the buses. so when there was the rosa parks of rest, there was an opportunity to act as a whole network of people in the city of montgomery. so that is a comment that it's a wonderful idea and something that should come out the idea of the example given as a gentleman who's organizing and just giving people a place to come to learn about organizing. so there is back and then the issue of the charismatic leader is a very complicated issue. our bakery were already mentioned barbara raynes b. al baker was already critical of the role of martin luther king and how his role as the leader

of sclc but also the black minister was problematic for the black community. so she was an organizational leader without the public presidents that she's come to take on as academics have begun to write histories of her life. >> i will just kind of piggyback on that. there are ways in which we don't recognize women leaders as having charisma. this isn't just about this moment. this is a western civilization and is deeply embedded in our culture that we think of charisma as an often masculine trait. we need to think of what this leadership and what is charismatic leaders. for someone like ella baker, a biography of baker who she knows leadership is important but it's

very tricky. [inaudible] i actually have a question related to the thread of the conversation we are having, it is related to some of what i have been writing on recently is we both have a history of organization that did varying kinds of advocacy work in bringing political pressure, but also asking the associational life with a lot of self back to videos while. so i'm just thinking, for example, the national association of teachers and colors close where every state would have an organization in addition to there being a national organization and they work on issues like doing best practices and thinking about how to collect data as well as abdicating for equalization so

that the joining of organizations as part of a kind of cultural this seems to have waned generally. you don't think so? >> but i guess the other part of the question for me as to what extent also a significant vis-à-vis the question of developing the kind of trust and interdependence necessary for waging these battles because the point that was raised by the person i spoke to about the vulnerability are the dangers of charisma also has a point about trust and being able to depend on each other. >> one of the things i discovered when creating black americans as a whole raft of

caucuses since the 80s within the segregated organizations there is a black caucus airline pilot and enact -- history professors and a black caucus of professors. [inaudible] [laughter] so as the need arises, people do come together. i don't think you should despair about organizing around racial interest groups. as long as we are in organizations in which we feel people are getting our issues, two philosophers will come together and somehow put those issues on the table.

so all is not lost. the other thing about juniors williams who is the kind of person -- he is a special person. he's been a day for 30 years. so he really deep roots and a lot of knowledge. probably there is somebody like that in place as they have universities. this is not somebody who is untutored. but he knows how to get things done. it turns out that they are sort of a lifecycle of outrage organizations or groups of people that come together around a crisis or outrage and they worked together for a while and somebody gets jealous and then it all falls apart. it turns out you can foresee this, warn people and give them some ways of working around that

and getting past that and continuing to work together on the same issue or perhaps new issues. >> high, fascinating conversation. i was thinking -- can you hear me? we are publishing the inaugural issue coming out this year, an year, an interview that was never before seen in 1969. is 19 pages long in manuscript form. be the guy who did it in 1969. you guys will be blown away. in that interview, baldwin talks about the language and civil rights, which is a decidedly american turned the civil rights as a decidedly american turned and what he says that his provocative for me and you guys i hope is that there is no such thing as a civil rights

movement. there is always a white movement to maintain a certain kind of power and black folks organize to check that. what do you think of this idea that somehow folks aren't organizing, but instead responding to rack leave to wipe our regrouping and reorganizing to shut us down? >> so, what i know about the thought is i wouldn't attribute to him the idea that there is an organization. he had various ways i've been dieting people and groups. .. following: movements are the kind of things that people proactively take on to create something new. and what black folks are doing they're not trying to create something new they're just trying to get something they should have had in the fist

place. [applause] how can that be a movement? the movement was to bring people here and keep them down. that's how i read that kind of a thing. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. >> well, not knowing this and not being a scholar of ballwomen, i think -- baldwin i think i will let you have the word. >> i would just add, i mean i think there's also increasingly we're hearing that people who were involved in the movement resisting the term "civil rights movement" and talking about how they've talked about it as the freedom movement. and there's a way in which the language of the civil rights movement really contains the political vision so that it then is described as the movement for the recognition of a set of political rights that ends, right, we had the triumphant ending with the passage of the voting rights act and ignores watts less than two weeks later. you know, and ignores the continued movement around issues

with respect to economic inequality and police brutality and all those sorts of other things. so i do think -- jobs. we have to engage in a collective of the way the language limits us, and the t it sounds like this is an important entryway into doing that. any oh questions in -- other questions? panelists, you all have any questions for each other? [inaudible conversations] >> actually, i'm not making any art these days. i'm writing a memoir. it's called "old in art school." [laughter] because i was old in art school. the first thing people asked me at mason gross was how old are you? and i said -- >> [inaudible] >> -- 64. [laughter] >> what are you working on? >> what am i working on? >> yes. >> i'm working on a book on the history of race and drug

addiction politics from the '50s through the '90s. a long time ago -- well, it's a relative term, there was what was called the crisis in heroin addiction, and under that rubric we expanded police forces we passed the rock feller drug laws -- rockefeller drug laws, we circulated all kinds of very interesting, sometimes strange b definitions of addiction and recovery and rehabilitation. and i'm looking forward to finishing it. my summer is not quite done, so i still have some writing time. >> actually right now i'm working on an intellectual history of black lives matter, as a matter of fact, trying to -- there's something that, there's something that people are trying to put forward that slogan that actually has a deep history that most of us in this room know about but white america, you'd be surprised at the level, i mean technically not in a derogatory sense of ignorance, just not knowing when

people say black lives matter the long tradition of black thought, american thought that that slogan is really a part of. so i'm putting together a project now to try to give more heft to the idea and offer it to a wider readership. by doing things, by doing the work my very, very, very, very, very very small part is actually to try and provide an educational function for the american polity because that's something that at least somebody like myself can do. >> brilliant. >> i -- i'm just going to say really quickly i just turn inside a manuscript although it's not nearly done -- [applause] that is a history of the song lift every voice and sing known as the black national anthem which is part of the reason i'm somewhat despairing, because it just -- going through the history of the song shows how rich and robust all these forms of black associational life were and the conditions under which

black people joined to sing the song were always really kind of rich both politically and intellectually and socially. so that's, that's where i am. >> [inaudible] >> hi. >> hi. so we've come to that moment where we prepare for the next. but before we prepare for the next, i want to thank our panelists for -- [applause] for wonderful and engaging conversations and wonderful imaginings no? just wonderful possibilities. i'd like to thank our sponsor, certainly, the house of schomburg, arturo schomburg who, at one point, decided that the root is always stronger than branch. and we thank him for that. our sponsors, columbia university, of course, c-span,

city sightseeing, barnes & nobles wnyc, wkcr. i'd like to finish by reading a quick letter. dear mr. rodriguez congratulations to the harlem book fair on 17 years as the largest african-american book fair and the nation's flagship black literary event. i am thrilled to be able to sponsor hbf's initiative give a book in your name and provide books to children in harlem community where i was raised and educated. the best gift you can give to a child is a book. reading not only builds their vocabulary, improves their listening skills, it develops and stimulates their mind and helps them discover new things. as a child my mother encouraged us to read every day. she kept our book shelves filled with books. if i read them all she had me read them again. books opened my mind to many possibilities and allowed me to dream and later the make those

dreams a reality. if i did not know how to read, i would not be where i am today. i would not have done well in school, would not have known to read, to understand, to follow directions, to fill out job applications, to be able to start and run a successful business or even sign contracts. i would have been limited in what i can accomplish. it is for this reason i chose to get involved with the book fair. i want the children of our community to know that we as a community care about them and want the best for them. i want them to understand if i can accomplish my dreams, so can they. i want them to understand they can succeed academically, be their own boss, have dreams. it is up to us as parents and communities to insure our children have the proper tools needed to succeed in life. with this imagination and, of course, there it goes, we're going to try to, again -- there

we are. with big imagination comes big dreams and big ideas. let's work together as a community to provide our future leaders with a great foundation and insure all have success and a great start with a book. god bless sean "diddy" combs. [applause] all that to say that the intention of the book fair is not only to acknowledge ourselves, but also to acknowledge and to share our contribution to american global culture. it continues. and it continues from not only the artistic but from the intellectual engagement. the book fair will continue to marry books and culture in a very active way. combs enterprise support of that

idea is reflective in what we see today and what we see out on the street today. it was amazing. for those of you who are in the televised audience what went on outside today was absolutely captivating. it is the best of who we are. so thank you once again. our next event the harlem book fair midwest regional in kansas city, is a partnership with the naacp and el centro. we're excited about that. please, i'll send you all a hold the date, 7/16/16. we'll see you next year. thank you. [applause] buy books outside at the barnes & noble's and the schomburg gift shop. not just buy books, buy their books. these are great conversations. thank you so much. [applause] ..

a [inaudible[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> that concludes booktv's live coverage of this year harlem book fair. >> presidential candidates released books to introduce themselves to voters and to promote their views on issues. here's a look at some books written by declared candidates for presidents.

>> and now i'm booktv former chief of staff john sununu discusses george h. w. bush's presidency in his book "the quiet man." he recalls the 41st president accomplishments in both foreign and domestic policy, including his leadership during the collapse of the soviet union and the fall of the berlin wall and passing the americans with disabilities act. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to gibson's bookstore. it's a beautiful afternoon. thank you for coming indoors to spend with us. today we are very pleased to welcome back to new hampshire. he was here for several terms as governor, and then he went off to become george h. w. bush's

chief of staff. please join me in welcoming for "the quiet man: the indispensable presidency of george h.w. bush" governor john sununu. [applause] >> thank you. let me think gibsons for the hospitality. i am an old book and bookstore addict, and i think the way you been able to handle such breadth and scope and still keep it as an into the facility should satisfy any book addict, and i recommend that anybody was looking for a place to browse and find some great stuff to read, this is the place to come. i would also like to thank you all for taking a little bit of time to join us today. i wrote "the quiet man" because i really feel that george herbert walker bush had in his one term as extraordinary a presidency as we've had in modern times. i wanted to get between the two

covers of a book all of those great accomplishments and put it in a way that people would appreciate how unique, special and how important that presidency was. since you are all here buying books, i won't go through from page one but i thought what it would do today is talk to you all a bit about what i think the highlights of his presidency all covered well and in detail in "the quiet man," and talk to you a little bit about some of the things that made him a special individual. a couple of anecdotes that i think will underscore the special character of george herbert walker bush as president. most folks remember him as a great foreign policy president and he was but beyond that george herbert walker bush has more domestic legislation and more significant domestic

legislation than any president since lyndon johnson or franklin roosevelt. it's amazing that a lot of people almost don't realize the breadth and depth of his domestic achievements, and that's one of the reasons i felt it would be good to put all of that in one place in "the quiet man." if there are three or four things i'd like you to take away after reading the book one of them would be the fact that he came into office after ronald reagan had to rebuild america's strength. remember the phrase was peace through strength and ronald reagan made the exceptional investment to rebuild our military capacity. and although a lot of folks really are in a bit of denial on it, the fact is that the soviet union took one look at the

economic capacity of the united states to build up its military capacity, and gorbachev coming into office understood that there was absolutely no way they could compete, and that what he wanted to do was to begin to interact with the u.s. and our western allies. reagan built it up and bush understood the opportunity that the world had after nearly a half-century post-world war i two superpowers with tremendous nuclear capability. bush understood the opportunity was there and in his own style began to build the western coalition that was necessary to take advantage of it, and the relationship of trust and cooperation that was necessary between the united states and the soviet union.

the european allies were not as eager as a george bush to move quickly, but bush with a series of meetings first with mitterrand and then with coal and then with fatuous able to convince them that the nato allies should make it a significant step in terms of announcing a reduction of u.s. troops and armor and your aunt invite by that act an equivalent reduction or even a greater reduction by the soviet union with the occupation forces in eastern europe, and it worked. gorbachev welcome the opportunity to reduce his fiscal obligations to occupation and that became the loosening that allowed elections to take place in poland and czechoslovakia and

the freeing eastern europe. it was george bush's amazing personal talents with both our allies and our foes that created the trust that is necessary for big powers, great powers, significant powers to make the kind of policy commitments that produce good results. in and out of about two and a half years george bush was able to lead a coalition interaction a peaceful coalition interaction, that produced the dissolution of the number two superpower in the world without a single shot being fired. i personally think that his greatest mistake was making it look so easy. and i hope as she read the book you understand exactly what i mean when i say that.

second thing george bush did in terms of international policy was to recognize that for too long the u.s. had been limited in its capacity to influence certain things because of our post-vietnam syndrome, where we as a nation have become frozen in our capacity to project the power we had. he also understood that with the collapse of the soviet union there was a period of time in the world in which mr. may want to extend itself -- mischief. and has watched saddam hussein occupied kuwait and try to take over what could've been in combination with his own resources 25-30% of the total petroleum resources in the world, bush was willing to accept, as leader of the united states, the responsibility to lead a coalition to get saddam

hussein out of kuwait. he drew a line in the sand. he said this aggression shall not stand. and it was not a soft line. it was not a may be line. it was a definite line. and he then went about and build a coalition, an amazing coalition considering that iraq was a nation in the middle east with decent relationships with many of its arab allies. bush build a coalition that included virtually every arab nations including syria. i remember a very memorable meeting with assad. we went to switzerland to meet with him, and assad dominated the conversation for about four hours. but in the end he agreed to join the coalition. and then bush held up piece by piece our capacity with the

patient, our capacity to spell saddam. everyone has to remember iraq at that time had the fifth largest army in the world, and it was all poured into kuwait and masked -- and i'm asked around kuwait. when bush was ready, he got the approval of the u.n. to use force, to expel saddam hussein from kuwait, limited extension of authority, or at least comforting assurance from his allies that they would be with him. and in less than 100 hours, george bush is use of u.s. power pushed saddam hussein out of kuwait and vanquished the fifth largest army in the world. and then he was smart enough not to get caught in the quicksand

of an occupation force. and took the criticism that made the firm choice not to follow saddam hussein all the way into baghdad. a lot of criticism at the time, and that was people look back on it they recognize it was the right decision. but i said he didn't just do foreign policy. he did domestic policy. he took a 13 year logjam on clean air changed from command and control where bureaucrats dictate how you're supposed to reduce emissions and build a package of legislation based on free enterprise and incentives and flexibilities, and got more than emissions the people have been desiring at between one-tenth and one-fifth of the cost. he recognized it was time for a civil rights bill that it had to be a good civil rights bill.

he had the political courage to veto a civil rights bill that would have been a quota bill, send it back and have it rewritten so that it was a fair bill but ineffective bill. he proposed and got congress to pass an americans with disabilities act. he proposed legislation to deregulate energy, and we are benefiting from the deregulation of energy today. he passed legislation which provided vouchers in support for families for childcare instead of building up the bureaucracy of childcare. he proposed and passed and agriculture reform act which took some of the old subsidies and converted them to incentives for exporters which was really the gateway for american farmers to begin to enjoy what has been an important part of our economy today, our agricultural exports. he passed legislation which addressed the need to support

our inner cities with resources to deal with crime. he witnessed a drug czar bill bennett put together an extensive drug program primarily focus on education of our young people and on of rehabilitation in addition to making sure that those that profited from the drug trade had serious tendencies associated with trading in drugs. george bush called only the third summit between a president and governors, and brought the governors together to talk about k-12 education, and re-energize the commitment of the states to deal with k-12 effectively. he also passed the 1990 got past the 1990 budget act which he took a great deal of criticism. i think everybody remembers he

made the read my lips promise. we got the first year budget passed without taxes, but now the economy was softening. growth rate had become stagnant. the savings and loan crisis had taken its penalty on the real estate market. real estate in the u.s. the economy was really turning down. it really needed to take of the problem of the deficit and to give the country some stability over a long period of time that they clearly need a multi-year budget. and we went through about a year and a half negotiation and it became clear that tom foley who controlled the house and speaker with 260-175 come and george mitchell who controlled the senate 65-45 were not going to let george bush get the budget this time without paying a ransom for taxes.

you have to put a context of timing in all of this. we are now moving into august, september, october of 1990. yet just sent young men and women -- he had just sent young men and women over to the middle east to pull them together to take on saddam hussein, to cheat you out of the way. and what the democrats held over his head was arrested question on defense spending which would've handcuffed those young men and women that he had sent into harm's way. and so after a lot of negotiation, we ended up with a package that was approved by all of republican leaders in congress, all of the democratic leaders in the congress, and the president approves it. it did contain attacks it contained was a gasoline tax increase, a gasoline tax that had not been adjusted for inflation in over 10 years. and what he got for it was three

and a half times, in dollar value, cuts in spending, and new budgeting rules that put spending caps on discretionary spending and require for any additional programs pay-as-you-go. it was that budget that produced the surpluses of the early '90s that lots of people who came after george bush like to take credit for. surpluses after decades of deficits. in addition to that it produced the growth period in the 1990s, the boom growth period in the country that against other people like to take credit for but is a reflection of the stabilizing of the economy cutting the deficit down and the growth stimulus that was built into the budget package. the george bush achieved i believe, not just great results in foreign policy but great results as a president who cared

about both the short-term and the long-term needs of this country. let me just give you three or four anecdotes that talk about the man a little bit, and then i will open it up to questions. i usually find that's a better way to talk about what you'd like to talk about them what i would like to talk about. one of my favorite which you think defines george bush, and in a way as a reflection of the title of this book "the quiet man" is what he did as we were moving through the changes in europe. it was november 1989 and he and gorbachev had begun to trust each other. and george bush recognized that gorbachev, in spite of being able to make the changes that everybody was applauding in relaxing the pressure on eastern european countries, gorbachev

had serious problems at home. they were hard-liners affair that were looking for an excuse -- hard-liners affair -- to stop these changes that they did not agree with. they thought he was giving up the empire. and bush understood this. in our member the scene the day the berlin wall came down. i went into a small office next to him to give them the news was scowcroft, and we decided the president had to say something to the press. so we arranged for a little press meeting in the oval office in which tv would send a representative, a couple of representatives, right you would send a couple. not a full-blown news conference. and as the press them in they were clamoring for george bush to be cheering loudly because of the collapse of the berlin wall. and they really were as usual

obnoxious about trying to say that he didn't understand the importance of what was happening. and bush had the self-discipline to express in calm terms how much he believed that is going to be good for the world that this was happening, but never once did he grow in such a way that it would embarrass gorbachev into the hard-liners and excuse to stop the changes -- crow. now, for any view that event in politics or watch politics, you know the self-discipline it requires for a politician not to take credit for the collapse of the berlin wall. the second incident is another incident. it doesn't seem like a great deal but i truly believe one of the most significant moments in his administration and in modern american history post-vietnam.

we had gone through a presentation by colin powell and the military chiefs on what was required to get saddam hussein out of kuwait. entitled member of the exact numbers but it was basically 150,000 men and women 1000 tanks, a couple of carrier groups, so many airplanes. and about the middle of october after we had been going through this since august colin called and said he had to meet with the president right away which i avenge the employment which i did. and colin committed office and i was there was scowcroft and the wasn't the usual bantering. george bush really had a low-key easy style, and whenever anybody came in to chat with them, the first few minutes were really quite friendly and a nice exchange but this time colin was serious from the very moment he

walked in. and he started saying, mr. president, i i just have some that i had to communicate with you and you have to understand it. we've just reviewed everything and we are going to need 250000 men, two or 3000 tanks, x number of airplanes, so many more increases in the neighbor groups that we're going to have. all almost doubled that we have heard over the last couple of months. george bush listened, and he nodded his head and he thought for a couple of minutes. then he looked general powell in the eye and he said colin, you can have everything you need and if you need anything else to do it right you come see me. and that was it. now, why do i think that's a

significant? george bush remembered that in vietnam the military would come in c. lyndon johnson and lyndon johnson felt they were asking for too much and he would give them 75 80 90% of what they asked for but always less. and whether it was in fact largest psychological, i believe george bush felt that was an excuse for failure. failure. when you look at colin powell in the eye and said general, you can have all that and if you need anymore you come to me he was saying you have no excuse to fail, you must do this right, and we are not going to micromanage. the ball is in your court. to deliver. and kidney that was a milestone change in policies for the united states and it really

established the principle that if we're going to go into conflict, the best thing to do is to go into conflict with more than you think you need that less than you think you need. the third anecdote has to do with a relatively minor, and i use that word, not trying to denigrate the issue but there are issues like war and peace and budgets that dominate but the issue of child care. the process of negotiating a budget george bush had learned the previous years talking to governors how important child care was to the evolution of the way america was changing in time. lots of single mothers out there need a child care. even families with two parents, child care was necessary to allow them to be a two income

earning family. but he also learned that there was a tendency in many places where childcare was being debated, to be talking about it as building government-run facilities are allowing government contracts to support huge facilities or support any facility. and the governors were saying, and the family groups were saying, it's really important to give the money to the family and give them flexibility on where the child is taking care of and how it is taken care of, and even allow in some cases for community groups to come together in church owned facilities for the childcare. so the president made a commitment. the commitment was in essence to provide the support to a voucher structure go into the family to provide flexibility to the family, for flexibility to choose where it was going to be spent and taking care of.

doesn't sound like a huge issue. now, we've negotiated a budget for almost 20 months, and disagreementand thisagreement was compact between the president and democratic leadership in committees and the speaker of the house and the senate majority leader. and the agreement was that they would be put into the budget, that he was going to send as part of the negotiated agreement. we'll come in congress you've seen it when a big public that is put together at the last minute, they are putting it together, and so i went up with some of our key people from all we become office of management and budget, to kind of watch what was going on, and before i left i went to the president enlisted about eight or nine things that he wanted to make sure were in the package including childcare. adecco up, about 2:30 a.m. and the pieces of the legislation are coming in and tom scully

was dick darman deputy over at omb comes over and says here's the section that childcare should be in and the provisions the president agreed on and wants are not in it. so i went to tom foley and i said after speaker these provisions are not into. the president has said he will veto this bill if they are not in it. he looks at me and me and i think he must have thought i was bluffing, and he says the president is not going to veto this bill after 18 or 20 months of negotiating. and it's important we will find something went and put on a bill coming down later. i said, mr. speaker, the president will veto this bill if it's not in a. now it's close to 3 a.m. he says well we are not going to change. i said mr. speaker, just a minute. i picked up the phone and i called the white house.

the asher answered the phone but that i said could you please wake up the president. the president comes to the phone. i said tom foley doesn't with you will veto this bill if childcare the way you wanted is not a. he said can i speak to the speaker? and he told tom foley he would veto it. tom foley scrambled and got the piece of legislation put together the right way. but he had made a promise. bush was committed to having those provisions in it and he was willing to start the process all over. the last item, and then i will talk about one more thing and then let you come back with questions, is really the energy side. this is one area where the president participated on a very active level and was committed to a policy that really was based on freeing up the capacity of this nation to deliver the energy it needs to itself and to

the world. and yet a task force led led by the secretary of energy, admiral watkins, putting this whole package together. and begin timing is important the time. i remind you that we were going to initiate the air attack against saddam hussein in kuwait in january, middle of january january 1991. and bush is going through all of this process on energy. in both december and january of 1991, just before we are sending all of our troops into action starting with the air attack, george bush personally chaired to energy group meetings in which he was there because he was worried that there was too much pressure coming in seeking to impose a tax on energy rather than to provide incentives and

flexibility. and having seen the dynamics of cabinet meetings and groups like that i can tell you that without the president of the united states personally weighing in, things like that can get dragged off by a cabinet member and putting there. and i am personally convinced to this day the reason we have a great the regulation that has provided the energy resurgence in the u.s. is because george bush was willing to take time under the pressure of getting ready to go to war to sit down and deal with the domestic policy issue personally lead in the right direction. last point. i'm often asked why george bush lost, having done all this why did he lives in 1992. there's a couple of reasons. one is ross perot. ross perot comes in and takes 19% of the vote, two-thirds of which should've been bushes, and ross perot spends a fortune

pounding bush on television without ever commenting on bill clinton. but the second two reasons are even more interesting than that. they are sort of historic imperatives. the first is that since 1952, 1952 when eisenhower took office, no party has held control of the white house for more than eight years, except once, and that's when bush succeeded reagan. and so if you will the pendulum of history wanting to swing and in the other direction have built up a lot of pressure to go back toward the democrats. but the second reason is a very interesting one, what i call the church will affect. you remember winston churchill by his personality and his leadership had led england during world war ii to hold itself together and to defeat with the help of the u.s. to

defeat nazi germany. he's the hero of world war ii to the brits and yet before the war is finally over they hold an election and the brits vote churchill out. ..

i hope as you read this book you will come to the same conclusion about the presidency of george herbert walker bush was an extraordinary president he and i am convinced history will continue to to treat him better and better as we all get a little bit older. thank you very much for coming. [applause] i will take questions or go away quietly. whichever you prefer. >> i am interested in your end life on the differences between the bush presidency in the

current era in terms of nuclear disarmament or rearmament. there are great achievements in terms of disarmament if bush's presidency. now, despite the intentions by president obama to move forward we are embarked on a plan for a whole new generation of delivery vehicles. what could we get in with reverse that. the mac there are two major sizes to nuclear disarmament. one is between and among superpowers are almost superpowers and the other is the proliferation issue of everyone else. we are living in a world in which the proliferation may see this as serious as problem is the face-to-face come rotation between superpowers. the key to dealing with the superpower issue is trust and confidence in a little bit of fear and the other guy.

we've lost trust and confidence in nobody fears us anymore. we have absolutely no influence on them mutants of the road. proliferation is like building a salami say much. it happens once i set a time in the wrong direction. they don't acquire it instantly. the key is being smart enough to deal with that. and smart enough to understand that a failure to deal with proliferation constructively creates an incentive for mischief by others. we want to be at least equal to their neighbor for example. the india-pakistan rivalry is a good example. the key to all of this is presidential leadership. you don't get anything done in the world today without leadership from an american president who understands what

is right and what is wrong and knows the difference between fancy headlines and real results. there's no substitute and i don't think we have it. [inaudible] be medicated for disaster. if the president had stuck to his original criteria for an agreement it may be possible. but this thing has been eroded because the iranians are masterful negotiators and we have no idea what we are doing. this would be wrote it into an absolute visible disaster. now it is a subtle disaster. by the time to extend the deadline further it will be an invitation to the saudi's to get equivalent c. it will be an invitation to others in the world. it is an invitation to mischief.

but i would rather talk about "the quiet man." >> i am curious what role you and your other advisories that out for in a moment of darkness of weight or burden and how you felt that was a nice exchange. >> in order to understand the answer had studied a style of operation in the bush white house. the most important meeting of the day took place from 8:00 to 9:30 although sometimes extended to 10:00. i would've come in at quarter after six. a six. a couple southward give me reports overnight but was going on. i would talk to my staff. the president would get up about the same time and he would be getting news reports and stuff back in the residence area of the white house will use the number of face. i would have at 7:30 meeting with all the senior staff.

in a half hour 18 or 20 of them would go through anything that concerned any of those individuals at the table so i would have been at least in my head because i'm going in that it ought to the president. 8:00 i go into the oval office for scowcroft. scowcroft would have been at 7:30 meeting. dan quayle is fair. he gets 1520 minute briefing from the cia a personal briefing. he was very disdainful because he wanted to interact and ask questions. it was always a personal briefing. when that gets them come us go kart takes a half-hour talks about what happened overnight that we might not have expected come with the short-term medium-term and long-term agenda is on foreign-policy issues who would've been discussing or new. i then take over and talk about everything else. domestic policy interactions

with congress, what is going on politically, whatever. we always kept a half-hour of march in because it never ended at 9:30. an important part about the meeting. you have four people in their they really like and respected each other. if you read barber brushes both she's got a line in there weren't that eating should be walking in the rose garden and all she heard from behind those doors was raucous laughter and she could not understand how those people could be running the world with all that humor. it's a very important part to answer your question. they are such a strong personal relationship. baker and scowcroft on foreign-policy. myself on foreign and domestic and roger porter on domestic policy. everybody trusted each other and

everybody trusted the intellect and the intentions of everybody in the game. so when george bush had a tough issue, he called the group together and you will see pictures of that in the book. he argues some in this direction and some in that direction come the really aggressive intellectual argument from people who knew what they were talking about. and george bush listened and he encouraged it. and when the president made a decision, everyone of us marched to the president's agenda and that is how we function. yes, sir. >> governor, you're talking about the ability to build a coalition to go into kuwait and it did seem that the time to be started masterful to get so many leaders throughout the world to get behind him and he mentioned his personal qualities.

was there a single keys to his ability to do that? or did he have a project you are louder with each country or if you could elaborate. >> a very important key to george bush's dealing with people. in his first call in contact with you in a second call and third call, he never asked you for anything. he is building up a relationship. all of these people who were leaders of the world at that time, it is not the first time he talked to them for the fifth time he talked to them. so they're talking to somebody they had built up a trusting relationship with. when he asked, they responded. the other asset was jim baker. jim baker was masterfully able to go out and deal with the concerns people had on these issues and come back with recommended proposals on how we have to deal with them to me

that we had to change the u.n. resolution a little bit this way or that way in order to lead assad if you're comfortable or gorbachev feel comfortable. all of that were recognized in the other person at the other end of the phone call or across the table had the perspective that has to be taken into account. it's how he understood he couldn't crow when the berlin wall came down because he was in the gorbachev seat for a moment trying to think about what the concern was. but that is the art form and i hope we'll see a n. i tried to get an intimate set of descriptions of those interactions in the book and the give-and-take that takes place in a real white house in a real west wing compared to what you may seen on television. >> i remember the campaign and i

also remember thinking strongly as it progressed that president bush was letting it slip out of his hand because of very low effort in my opinion of campaigning. that was. i am wondering if that may have been also one of the factors. >> i left in march of 92. i left because the lightning was coming down and i thought if i left the slings and arrows might follow me and not keep pounding on him, but it didn't occur that way. that water had died. he had gone on to start his great news rebirth career. i left his chief of staff. the three of us had in the heart no-space: the 88 campaign. looking from the outside i

thought the 92 campaign was not a tough campaign. they let perot get away with murder. i say the book if he had been around he would have hit it for about two by four twice a day and they didn't do that. you remember that moment in the debate when george bush looked at his watch. i saw that and i cringed not because i had any understanding of the political effect that would have. i must admit it didn't dawn on me that would be a political issue afterwards. but i cringed because i knew him well enough that what went through my mind is he saying how much longer do i have to take this abuse for? he used a slightly different word. in an interview after the election and its contained in the book. the fact is i could tell by looking at him he had really

lost a lot of the fire because what he saw was a campaign beaten this rent. he tried to get jimmy baker to fix it up and baker came back today. you are all great to come. thank you very much. i will hang around and sign some books. if you like it please tell your friends. i'm trying to get george herbert walker bush the 41st president of the united states to credit he deserves in history would give them. [applause] >> thank you very much for coming. we will be moving now to a signing table by the door past the register. if it back to chat with them or he will be over there. i see most of you have them already. if you want one -com,-com ma we have been at the register. thank you for coming.

[inaudible conversations]

>> now barry estabrook investigates the pork industry touching on food safety issues and alternative methods of pork production. [inaudible