her survival. america's future and the future of freedom for the entire world now depend on us. president reagan put it this way, we we will always remember, we will always be proud, we will always be prepared so we may always be/f% free. thank you very much. >> thank you [applause]. a post go go

>> host: is great to see you tonight. we have got a lot to talk about today and not much time to do so so let's get right into it. you have a wonderful new book out called "fracture." congratulations to you. i read it over the weekend and is just a fantastic read, a wonderful read. i think it's a must-read for anybody who loves history and politics who cares about race relations in america and maybe who just wants to know who the next president is going to be. tell us what caused you to write it and what motivated you and what did you hope to accomplish? >> guest: first of all thanks for having me. i appreciate the opportunity and when i first started thinking about this book it was in 2013

and that of course was a big year anniversary of the march on washington in 2013, 2014 and 2015. i wanted to write a book about what it means to have the first black president what that's meant to the country and what it's meant to racial fallout and i thought maybe i will write about the republican reaction to obama then i decided in a what if i'm going to write about the political reaction to president obama i'm going to start with my own party is a party i'd grew up in but the democrats because it's the 50th anniversary is also their arc from being the party of segregation and rejectionism to the party that produces first black president. >> host: you say in the introduction and i'm not trying to give your age here but you say in the introduction that when you were a child in the 70s and the 80s, and that

quote the democrats were our party and by that yeah i think the black peoples party and the republicans were their party. you mentioned that of course that you wanted to write about your party. so the history tells us though that this was not always the case. as you talk about in the beginning of the book, tell us about this evolution. how did it come to black people becoming all republicans and white people being republicans? >> guest: i know all the republicans in the south are still republican because they had a visceral reaction to the word democrat. when they were growing up it was the democrats who were terrorizing their communities and their parents to keep them from exercising their right to keep them from going to school with white children so there were a lot of african-americans

and the republicans party was the liberal party for most of the nation's history that see happening in the 20th century when the great recession hit, the great depression hit it with a democratic president franklin delano roosevelt who put this rescue plan in place. the new deal. ironically enough a lot of compromise with the seven democrats in the democratic party was the party of the south and pasted into the new deal and yet because of that economic rescue african-americans began to look to franklin delano roosevelt as somebody who was literally saving their economic lives even if it was a more more limited way than for white americans. of course they remain lawyer -- loyal to president truman. it was really volatile after that. you saw puppy inside dwight david eisenhower do well with african-american tsop prominent african-americans were openly

supported republican candidates so when you saw a 60-40 african-americans were 60 to 65% democratic but 30 to 35% republican through richard nixon. nixon got 30% of the black vote but really the turning point in what started the cascade of black americans away from the republican party was barry goldwater and so one of the reasons i really wanted to start the book in 1954 as i wanted to at this point by politics in terms of black people breaking into the democratic party but also barry goldwater really instilling a faith in the republican party that was unacceptable. >> host: you said 1964 is barry goldwater and lyndon johnson. do you believe that it was more of an anti-old water, anti-republican thing or was it

more of a pro-lbj pro-democratic thing? what caused this massive support of blacks in the democratic party? >> guest: i think was a mix of both. you had john f. kennedy come into the white house in 1960 and had ongoing negotiations with civil rights and militantly started to do certain things to enforce the rights of black folks in the south. it culminated in him proposing the civil rights act of 1963 that he then did not champion but then when his vice president who was a southerner who grew up in the segregated context who was himself had racial attitudes that were on towards towards black people when he picked up the civil rights act made it his own lyndon johnson went all in the civil rights act and a way his enemy had been reluctant to and i think i that showed a lot of african-americans that this might be a party -- one of the

things i found interesting in doing the research in the early 60s is in 1954 the young civil rights movement the leaders there looked to both parties since it gives your platform. more of a radical group said to the republicans in the democrats we want to see what your 1964 party platform is going to be that once lyndon johnson went for the civil rights act and barry goldwater became the standardbearer of the republican party and though he wasn't a southerner was opposed to the civil rights act and the civil rights movement i think that started this cascade. it took a long time. it wasn't immediate but by the time he gets to richard nixon the republican party was supporting him by the time they were messaging and republican party became very anti-+ -- buzzing and to segregation that sealed the deal. >> host: very interesting.

let's take it up to march 2008. let's talk a little head about the presidential primary and the historic election. barack obama made a famous speech on race relations and i can room for sitting down with friends and family and being glued to the television set when he was going to talk about reverend wright back and what he felt about race and body felt about this primary campaign, this historic campaign. my question to you is, were you impressed by the speech? do you think that was one of the greatest speeches on race ever made and if not what were some of the great speeches that you would champion? >> guest: it was a speech that was not made on purpose and i say that because it was explicitly nonracial.

they were not running him in a black context. he had run harold washington's re-election campaign and he understood how to run a black candidate in a not in a black majority district and the architect of some of the strategy really were staring the candidates in a direction of a second mental on race and that is to barack obama was throughout his public career. he was someone who burst onto the national scene saying there were no black and white americans and there was no red and blue america but by the time he gets to racialized this man who had never placed himself as a race man in public life reverand wright opponents had the chance to say this guy is not who you think. he's not this ecumenical figure. he's this divisive figure that

you fear black canada might be so by the time he gave that philadelphia speech he tells his aides if people don't accept my explanation of what happened with my relations with my pastor so be it i'm going to go out there and say what they need to say. it was a brilliant speech. in the last 60 years there've been a a lot of speeches that amanpour to non-race. obviously martin luther king made a brilliant one. i'm impartial to the voice of the unheard. sometimes the postcard king is the less radical than the kanga was challenging the nation to say you that you are not your best self you are not giving getting all of your citizens their full rights. even more brilliant of course on the mountaintop speech and others in john f. kennedy to after the killing of medgar

evers was pushing giving a nationwide televised address which addressed a race. the first time a sitting president did as well as lyndon johnson when he quoted i shall overcome in the voting rights act. i think we had a great moment of racial conversation. we just haven't had a lot of them. >> one of my favorite ones bobby kennedy just a powerful speech that night as well. you talk about these racial speeches and he talked about obama making this wonderful speech. in the book though you say and let me make sure i quote it accurately, with the election of president obama americans expected an open dialogue on race end of quote what instead americans got brief comments on shootings of young black males by the police, dear some meds on

the white house lawn. how calm, why do you think it was so hard for calling president obama the first black president to talk about race? >> guest: one of the things i write about in the book is my theory about the role for black national figures. you want to be a national figure and you're expected to be in a certain box. you are expected to comment only on progress and the convenience of the american experiment. you are not supposed to point out the flaws because pointing out the flaws makes you a reverend al sharpton and limits your rise of the candidates that are successful are people who talk about race and an elevated way. i think barack obama is perfectly situated to see that person because of the way he comported himself in public life after his moment of radicalism

and he did the anti-apartheid protest at occidental. he really wasn't ecumenical guide so he comes into office really focus on the economy that has gone over the cliff and 700,000 jobs have been lost in the auto industry. he was focused on that. i saw no evidence that barack obama as a man came to the white house to litigate raisin that was his goal. i think for a lot of african-americans there was a need an expectation to have our racial past litigated. this was a president focused on being president treaty with the present of the whole country and is focused on the economy and not on race. he winds up in the same box for eric holder is and reverend sharpton in terms of the way his opponents characterized him

because he had a few human moments. suddenly people said wait a minute you are breaking the bargain that we elected you on. you aren't supposed to just these kinds of things. trayvon martin is killed and he feels it deeply and personally so he addresses it in his opponents say he really was fooling you. he is the reverand wright guy this racial ecumenical character i think it was seized upon the instant he took towed toward it and didn't harm him politically when he did the tiptoe? >> guest: absolutely. the polling was start. one of the most dramatic and interesting things i found around president obama's tenure is immediately when he was making a comment in any racial context's approval numbers would slump. his approval ratings by

african-americans went up. it was a seesaw. whenever you would talk about the racial experiences he's affirming what i and my co-workers and crazy when i say the police treat me differently but here's the but here's the president of benefits affirming me. >> you say president obama and others like doug wilder were able to talk above and able to talk positively about the american racial experience and that help them politically with many white voters. of book about the ghost of jim crow where i talk about the racialized incidents that happened during the 2008 primary campaign and that direct your attention particularly to south carolina for it seemed to really , the conflicts seem to be race between clinton and obama

and there were some characterizations of obama as running a fantasy campaign for some characterizations of him being the affirmative action candidate for the black candidate to try to put him in a box. my question to you is, do you think that this was just politics as usual, two strong candidates competing for was this sort of hitting below the belt with this sort if using racial code words that we have seen many in the republican party? >> guest: the evidence that i got from talking with people in and around the clinton campaign at that time was that it was -- what he saw happen was the clintons both present she would be the nominee and they never thought he was on the horizon. hillary clinton when senator obama came to washington was a

fellow superstar senator and she understood what that meant. she was supportive of him and fund raised and helped him. they were blindsided by the idea that this upstart would run against her will when it was her turn and they were shocked that he got on and not only that he got in at some key advisers they assumed would work for him were really shocked by that. but then he wins iowa, very white state. he literally outwork them and shot the system of the clinton world. by the time they get to new hampshire there was a campaign that was discombobulated. i think they make mistakes. when senator obama mentioned jfk or king the response was critical.

by the way was lyndon johnson and i were making a factually accurate but stinging statement that the idea that the media was putting on this young man that he was a kennedyesque figure that he was a king like figure. particularly since bill clinton feared jfk and saw himself as someone who wanted that mantle. when the media put that on barack obama i don't think they knew what to do it themselves. the comments i got them in trouble for me to new hampshire. when the campaign was unraveling in new hampshire was over and they made it on toward statement and reporters are making ugly statements have desperation. by the time they get to south carolina which both sides need to win we now have people like jim clyburn of figure of the

civil rights movement and the politics back off. you need to back off these references of martin luther king was nevada's campaign but it didn't matter that point. so i think the clintons by the time he gets to atlanta which is destabilized and they weren't used to running against not just a black man but it lack community wants once barack obama won iowa he now had the african-american base they thought was theirs. they never thought they would have -- and now here was gone and i don't think they knew how to handle it. >> host: when the obama announced his numbers were very low and now you say at some point weather was iowa or right before new hampshire the black community embraced him. what do a tribute that to starting out solo and the

phenomenal embrace? >> i think what you had when you looked at the history of black political participation african american vote is very pragmatic. it's aspirational to a certain degree but it's about -- it's about which of these candidates is going to assure these are going to flow to our community and people who by and large are hurting. the african-american community has never gone to -- when it comes to the presidency. that was seen as not something that was practical particularly of political leaders. when jesse jackson ran 84 he had the support of the black establishment they were focused on winning the election. he runs in 88 and it's a movement of the black establishment moving toward him but it was not seen as a pragmatic thing but more black

voters said this is exciting. the establishment had to pay attention to him. when barack obama runs the majority side as a wonderful dream for the future. maybe he was somebody who could come up a little bit more in politics and one day be ready for that in right now we need to win and make sure democrats in the white house and democratic policies are in the white house. we are going to go with hillary. people wanted hillary not just of leadership at the base of party but when this young black senator by the name of barack hussein obama wins iowa one of the widest states in the country it was split. they saw as a practical possibility and once he loses new hampshire but on the night he loses what i think is the yes we can speech to talk about the

dream written in the founding documents and defeat it was over. >> host: one of the reasons i love the book is there book is there are some in the adjusting facts, some interesting tidbits and background information that you talk about and is a professor myself i thought i knew a lot of this stuff and i lived in cleveland at the time that -- became the first black mayor of a major american city in the late 60s. you talk about you mentioned surely chisholm and you said that the civil rights community wanted stokes to run instead of surely chisholm and she jumped the gun. it's backlight that that i think people will read this book and just be amazed. let's talk about fractured the title and what it means specifically in terms of reflecting the relationship

between president obama in the clintons in the racial divide within the democratic party. when did this divide first manifest itself? what specific things do you attribute it to and also do you feel it's more personal or more philosophical? is it about bill clinton and the politician, hillary clinton the politician nor is it about more personal? >> guest: it's a great question. i think the first, if you call it the ongoing fractured in 1968, this is four years after the civil rights act that we are in the thick of the vietnam conflict in the vietnam war and you have president lyndon johnson who is heroic in the eyes of many african-americans suddenly pivoting away from the resourcing of the war on poverty

which was meant to rescue not just black people but also quite rural americans from poverty and want and pivot away from that, drain resources from that imported onto the wire. you see african-americans dying in vietnam and not having rights at home and southern rejectionism lowering the advance of the voting rights act you also see rejectionism in the north where african-americans are being told you are not welcome in these neighborhoods of lack folks really start to look at lyndon johnson sideways and king comes out against the war. you have this break and then you have lyndon johnson go to that convention and 68. he wasn't going to run again and his successor to says to the mississippi freedom democrats a group of black freedom fighters

who were saying you are not doing what you said they are not accepting the voting rights act he says to them i don't even want to see them on tv. we have already done a lot for you. you all us in this is the party that rescued you, the white and i think that was the first ah-ha moment. then you have and 72 as you mentioned with surely chisholm the black establishment needing to respond. we need to show this democratic party they don't own us. they need to come to us and bargain with us. surely chisholm comes in and interrupts the plan and nixon wins. it's a disaster. and then you have african-americans looking to their party, where you and they are not helping. they're not winning. they have jimmy carter fall

apart and the response of the democratic party, the black peoples party is to say we are going to walk away. we are going to adopt the tough on crime message of your and our opponents. we are going to be more like them. sorry but the issues he talked about we can't talk about. jesse jackson can't deal with it. jackson wants to become -- and i think as you see african-americans pushed back these fractures existed under the surface. they burst forth and now you have the southern democrat, southern governor essentially what he saw as the death of a former president of united states. i was the first black president. you are with us. you are talking about the war but saying to their aspirations no, hillary and then you saw

what had been years and decades under --. >> host: you talk about this fracture beginning with lbj and in 72 he talk about it. talk about the clinton administration. their number of things you mentioned in the book that i was unaware of that highlight this fracture and i don't even think a lot of americans knew that this was occurring in the beginning of the clinton administration. >> guest: wanted things people assume is we want the civil rights and voting acts to exit the party. didn't exit the party right away but you had southern politicians including jimmy carter and including bill clinton who understood this wishful game where you have to keep wide rural voters in line and behold us at their hands at the same time. bill clinton comes in the 92 and one of the things he signals to

white working-class voters that he is their guy as he rebukes jesse jackson whose movement change the party. this incredible voter registration movement. he goes to his convention and rep nukes him. that wasn't a message to black people. that was a message to white voters. he comes in bill clinton and because of the need to compromise because you had republicans take advantage of his faltering on the issues and gets this backlash indian sub airing to the right. he does the crime bill. reverend al sharpton was protesting bill clinton and the crime bill passed. it was seen by a lot of civil rights leaders as african-americans on the streets of urban america. does the will for reform bill trying to get the other gingrich is trying to stop a worse though from coming through the federal

consequences for whites and blacks in the country. clinton had on the one hand it golden economic age for american and african-americans loved bill clinton in a lot of ways. there was a lot of tension there >> host: that's fascinating. i know you would talked about the urban agenda that many of the civil rights community were trying to push at the beginning of the clinton administration as well as welfare reform because the fracture as well. let's bring about go to 2015 and amazing year very tumultuous year with respect to race relations particularly when it comes to resent police interaction, police shootings. many of them have been captured on video and much of the nation has been shocked by this horrendous treatment and serious

consequences that have occurred. a number of movements have and spark by the shootings, the most well-known is the black lives matter movement. talk a little bit about how you think this movement has impacted the primary democratic republican? >> guest: i think that they have had a tremendous impact and black lives matter baby not formally but informally -- that really sparked what was going to be a national conversation about the value of black men's lives. when barack obama said something about trayvon martin am related to him that became polarized and suddenly have this left-right argument over who was the hero and who is the villain. the black lives matter is a

young movement that reminds me of self-directed and youthful not formal and ordered that powerful. it's non-african-american speaking for themselves about their own lives and they have forced a party that has mcgovern as groups. bill clinton rebuked them rejected the mcgovern i checks the jackson wing to great success for himself and became president and was reelected. that wang had been marginalized. the liberal wing of the democratic party which was the liberal white wing of the party went bernie sanders even though he is a democrat so that wang is there but they are focused on economics. there opens on the wall street argument about whether wall street has gotten away with murder and whether they should be reined in and income inequality is the key issue that

needs to be dealt with. black lives matter saying no, yes income inequality is important that we need to deal with the dust of these young black people. if you go back and look at the history the vast majority going back 50 or 60 years have been injuring someone by police and in the black community have people feeling absolute frustration over not being able to do anything about it. the black lives matter movement is saying to the mainly white democratic party you cannot bypass this issue by talking about economics. they forced hillary clinton who said her first --. for it forced bernie sanders to talk about race and challenge martin o'malley who was mayor and governor on police interaction.

what i do find surprising is that when you look at the democratic party and 2016 is sort of retro, and there aren't a lot of young people of color that are showing dynamism with politics. they're mostly within protest. we have almost the same dynamics we had in 1950 where you had largely white politics on the table for the election. it's kind of interesting. >> host: history is cyclical. i want to push a little because you mentioned the jesse jackson, george mcgovern wing of the party and i guess i want to push you a little bit in the sense of do you think there's a difference between black liberals and white liberals within the democratic party, the jesse jacksons and the bernie sanders? >> guest: absolutely. those three figures are really important in the modern party of

mcgovern whose liberalism was on poverty. mario cuomo who zeroed in on urban poverty and jesse jackson his agenda was about poverty and anti-poverty and outs of equal rights which at the time no one was talking about with his agenda is racism. i think there's agenda of between two to two and that black liberals are focused on race-based inequities and finding race-based solutions. that's something that by and large white liberals had white liberals in the white movement but it isn't necessarily beneficial to their argument. it's about income inequality broadly and it will lift everyone. where is black liberals are saying no you really have to deal with race -- and fsis been the divide in the black

movement. >> host: very interesting. let's talk about the recent campaign, hillary clinton running in the democratic primaries, bernie sanders and martin o'malley. at the end of the book on page 320 quote of voting rights activist bertha lewis. >> you talked about throughout the book who i think worked for bill clinton's campaign in 92. she became a leader in the acorn movement their rendition of many minority voters and you say and i quote from bertha lewis the prospect of a woman president is as exciting in fundamental ways as barack obama's candidacy was in 2008 end quote. do you believe most african-american female voters feel that way about hillary denton's campaign? are they ready for hillary? >> guest: i think some are.

it's as important for me to run as a woman as it is for me to run as an african-american. one of the reasons the black establishment was not feeling what she was trying to do. when i've been out on the campaign trail which i spend a lot of time doing covering the clinton campaign there are a lot of black people were certain age and i find women over 60 is my benchmark, black or white or latino are very excited about this idea. for a lot of women regardless of their race they feel now that country has take that box of having the first african-american president. it's now the next big step forward in our progress is a modern country. as for women to have an opportunity to send out possible -- powerful message across the racial divide. i find pockets of black women and these would be in general black women under 60 who still

have some feelings about clinton in 2008 and i do find occasionally where you have to say after the way that was run i don't know if i could support that. >> host: do you think it can be overcome? >> guest: i think a smart campaign by the clintons can overcome because hillary clinton is a tremendous and overwhelming advantage with black voters over anyone she is running against. far and away she is the most -- candidate for african-americans. it's a reason she retains an advantage over bernie sanders. his base is not -- were hers has the majority of lacks in women. the huge advantage for her. al gore said she would do just as well or better.

people line up for the opportunity to elect her the way they lined up for barack obama is the question. >> host: i ask you to put on your predicting hat. what do you think will happen? do you think she will be able to get the obama coalition to be as excited for hurt candidacy as they were for his? >> guest: i think it's going to be hard for any candidate to get that same level of excitement only because the audacity of hope which was the name of the book with this idea that a one term united states senator of a young man with a name like that whose middle name is hussein whose first name rhymes with osama that you could take that improbable of personage and put them in the white house.

i think it was such an emotional cathartic some and i think for a lot of young activists who were involved in a late for a lot of political, to come down. barack obama had not been president for a year when the liberal part of the party started fighting him and critiquing and attacking him for not being liberal enough for not closing gitmo and not ending "don't ask don't tell" fast enough. i think that makes it hard for people who have the same level of hope that you can add miracles in politics. outside of the bernie sanders moment where you have people having that euphoric attitude towards her candidate i don't see that happening. it's a lot more pragmatic cycle. i think hillary clinton can win

that fight. democrats have such an advantage. they have such an advantage. >> host: in the electoral college? >> guest: in terms of the demographics of the country. the country is turning more round. we are becoming 2% less white every year and that has increased democrats national advantage. republicans have such a high bar that to win such a high percentage of white voters. it's harder and harder for them to get into the white house. it's hard to win the white house at 10% or nine or 8% of the white voters in winning or losing 2% it's hard to win that way. >> host: that leads to my next question which is i'm going to ask you to switch sides now and go to their party. let's say reince priebus is the

head of the republican national committee and the republican candidates for president retains you and says look i want to increase my support with the african-american community. what would you advise the candidate for reince priebus to do? >> guest: republicans need to find someone with the credibility and the boys to repudiate not the messaging of some of the media part of the establishment but to the ear the rush limbaugh ask world that is really sure you're one of -- real when it comes to race and at the moment is that latinos but african-americans have felt it for a very long time as well. you have got to go against your own base. the republican party has a big issue and they need to become

the southern democrat. that is now their base. in the south is hard to find a white democrat. the preponderance of the democrats on the left and a politically active person to the republican party has to look their base in the eye and say this is not the way we are going. we are not going to despair the racial groups as a whole. if you go back to what jackie robinson said about barry goldwater this is impossible for me to talk to my own party. the great jackie robinson who couldn't even speak up to goldwater's standardbearer. i think republicans are in a dangerous zone.

the town has to change. there are republicans who get it. colin powell, bruce bartlett was a former reagan guy. you hear the language of the old party but not with the edge. you got to get the edge out of there but they do that they are taking a risk that they will lose some of their base. they won't like the new republican party that's not speaking to some of those anxieties and those impulses that some not all but some in the base belief. >> host: i agree with you, would be really interesting to see a candidate like colin powell who is a moderate republican and there are very few of those around. that would be the interesting race to see a moderate republican like powell see how

many african-american votes he could get, but i guess we are not going to see that. >> guest: a lot of republicans maybe think ben carson is that person but ben carson speaks a lot of the same language. i think if you have a ben carson rising in the polls presents health care overhaul and nazi germany that's not going to attract much support from african-americans. i think republicans would be disappointed with what ben carson is able to do with them and latino candidates like ted cruz. the language adapt to change. you can't have it in a personal color. that's going to be hard for the party and leaders to understand this by the way.

they talked republican strategist and understand they must -- the party to survive and they haven't figured out how to confront some element of their base. >> host: that's exact he what the democrats did with the dlc, right? they wanted to keep their base but spread out and reach out more to working-class whites, two moderate republicans to independents. so do you think the republican party could be as successful by keeping their ace as the democrats have done over the last several elections? >> guest: with the democratic party did was precisely that. they absolutely sidelined the liberal part of their base and they still voted for them.

liberals have bitterly followed was the dlc solution would silence the left. one of the thing that is a truism and i think it is true is that democrats despise their base and republicans fear there is. republicans are less likely to repudiate or confirm their base because liberals are the base of the democratic party and now lots of blue dog new democrats have fallen away from electoral politics. you see the liberals now coming back and leading the party. they were sidelined for 40 plus years. >> host: is it more today and

anti-republican that the republican party is somehow hostile to minority interests? is not accepting of diverse groups or is it more of a pro-democrat, the democrats had delivered. the democrats as you said supported the voting rights act. the democrats delivered civil rights. >> guest: i think the combination but i think it's more the former. i think it's a lot of african-americans. there's a recognition that the party has not always delivered on some of the promises that have been made and taking for granted the community that is voted 90-10 in their favor. i think there is a presumption among democrats that the black

vote will be there as the get out the vote elections show up in the community. they get campuses out. there isn't alot that one has to do in between. you are seeing a lot of black political class starting to question the advancing to the party that is not good enough than the confrontation between black lives matter and the sanders campaign, to think as you see experimenting with open primaries in mixed primaries i would predict you're going to see more movement of the african-american vote only because they think particularly the black middle class are very conscious of the way power works. you hear a lot of people saying we need to be spread out but very little you hear spreading out into the republican party.

the vibe that the party is suffering now is not welcoming and i can tell you republican operatives who are working physically to try to reach out to african-americans and hispanic voters to recruit them into the party, they are fighting a two-part war against the presumptions people make about the party and the actual words coming out with their mouths. it's very difficult. >> host: it's often said that black liberals in the democratic party really have nowhere to go. do you see perhaps an independent candidate running from that wing of the party or perhaps a third party being created? >> guest: i think the united states is a two-party system and it's hard for people to imagine a two-party candidate winning

the white house. we don't have a system that allows the party to get much oxygen. occasionally you will have the one-off governor or a bernie sanders and a state where you can be nonpartisan either democrat nor republican. it's very hard to imagine on a national scale. the system seems -- so for african-americans and you bring up that point in the early 1960s and late 1950s african-americans interested democrats were incredibly hostile to them and did not want them around. there was no other party with any power. the republicans made an entity soup he wanted power african-americans fought to add democrats into the democratic party. mississippi freedom democrats as you mentioned.

there was a point they had no powers or african-americans were always pragmatic based on their presidents. i would wager colin powell would do quite well at african-americans. i think 30% or 40% better. he is a respected figure whose presentation is welcomed. it's not because he is allowed only. that's part of it i'm sure. one person becoming successful but the way he talks about politics. >> host: he's very persuasive, very persuasive. what do you think about, you have a chance to call the first

black president and talks about the clinton. or is that barack obama? >> guest: it's clearly barack obama.when toni morrison labels it was around the time bill clinton was attempting, he had that unique position. a former southern governor who lived with african-americans were where you can talk to both of them and would be understood welcome. he had that at advantage of white southerners. he comes and andy tries and he attempts to face labor. and then to see a sexuality which was the other thing that triggered. here you have this man -- the

single mom the difficult upbringing and the responsibilities he took on as a child and then you have this aspect and demeanor going to a black church and getting on the pulpit and sounding just like a preacher. had he been black and jesse jackson white bill clinton would have been a preacher and jackson would have been the president of the united states. i think people felt comfortable with him. clearly he didn't have to face the slings and arrows. bill clinton didn't have to deal with that. >> host: is often said that during obama's first run was emphasized that he was bi-racial. how do you think that impacted

his electability? >> guest: i think everything about barack obama made him tailor made, his demeanor and the fact that he was brought up by a white family so we had an understanding of white america and white anxiety. one of the things that made the race so brilliant is he communicated that anxiety experienced by white people. he could explain that in a way that didn't feel like an accusation but felt like familiarity and he could explain the black context is he personally live. i think partly because he was bi-racial had that racial divide made him perfect for the job. if you are a little angry you're not going to get elected. >> host: i don't think i've ever seen barack obama be angry ever.

>> guest: a little girl jumping up and down the furniture but he's so calm. i don't know how he does it. >> host: i think it helps in a great deal manipulate the political scene. anything you want to add? we only have a few minutes left so is there anything i haven't asked you that you would like me to ask? >> guest: i think your question seven brilliant. i would add i think it's important even though sometimes we have two different ways of looking at race as black and white americans. african-americans indulge in a conversation about race because we live race every day. if you see a police officer -- in the countries beginning whiteness had a meaning and

attacked attack an embrace of whiteness. you now have americans who reject the idea of living racially. they are a lot more reluctant to feel about -- talk about it. we really need to get past that because we have to get to a happy medium where we can discuss some of the things truth and reconciliation. otherwise that divide that fracture if you will world remain forever. is a country founded on the notion that to be black or nonwhite had a meeting -- had a meaning. we have to do with it. >> host: how do we deal with the? clinton had the race commission and obama hadn't talked that much about race. how do we have this conversation it seems that many people want? >> guest: president obama has a way to have it on an individual level.

when he approaches it gets rejected soundly. it's difficult. john hope franklin wasn't able to make it happen. so many figures on the african-american side of the ledger are seen as a racist person so i don't know. i think it's going to happen on an individual level. people feel comfortable talking about race before we can expect leaders to come and meet us. >> host: there's an old saying that green is the eternal of life india given us a lot of green today and i'm very pushed it. thank you very much for your wisdom and your knowledge and the book is "fracture" sub five

and i encourage everybody to read it. >> host: >> guest: thank you so much. >> host: thank you. >> that was "after words" that was "after words" booktv's signature program in which authors of the latest nonfiction books are interviewed by journalists policymakers and others familiar with the material. "after words" airs every weekend on booktv at 10:00 p.m. on saturday, 12 and 9:00 p.m. on sunday and 12:00 a.m. on monday. you can also watch "after words" on line. go to booktv.org and click on "after words" in the booktv series and topics list on the bright side of the page. >> shakespeare was writing around the 1500's. 20 years after the 1600's during

the rain of elizabeth and he was a well-known playwright, poet. he wrote sonnets and he was a businessman. he was a shareholder in the globe theater company and a landowner and very well-known in his time for being a playwright and a businessman. henry bolger was the chairman, the first president and chairman of the board of the company the largest corporation in the world and the most reviled corporation in the world at the time. ..

this book the saved half of shakespeare's plays from obscurity became a fetish object for collectors and henry bolger the chairman of standard oil company wanted to own every known copy of the first folio. supreme court justice stephen breyer talks about his latest book on the american judiciary system at the national constitution center's annual celebration of constitution day. it's next on booktv. [inaudible conversations]