war on poverty to the war on crime." also former secretary of state cobbed please saw rice looks at democratic movements around the world in her book, "democracy: stories from the long road to freedom." and john mcwhorter examines black english and the controversies around and perceptions of sounding black. and on monday, memorial day, former president george w. bush talks about his portraits of american veterans. astrophysicist neil degrasse tyson discusses his many books on the cosmos. new york times book review editor pamela paul reflects on the books she's read over the past 28 years. michael whitmore offers his thoughts on shakespeare's legacy and much more. for a full schedule, visit booktv.org. booktv on c-span2, television for serious readers.

and now we kick off weekend with craig shirley recounting president reagan's political life from 1976-1980. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon and welcome to the gaithersburg book festival. i'm a resident of gaithersburg and a member of the democratic central committee representing district 17 which encompasses the beautiful city of gaithers burg, so welcome. gaiters thug proudly supports the airports and humanities. we are pleased to bring you this event thanks in part to the generous support of our sponsors and volunteers. so when you see them around and they're walking around here, please, take time to say thanks. appreciate that. like to get right to this event here, but first a few announcements. please, silence all your devices. i'll wait. [laughter] i'll wait, go ahead. silence all devices. thank you.

and if you're on social media today, and we hope that you are, please use the hashtag gbf be, gaithersburg book festival. your feedback is really valuable to us, so there will be surveys available here in our tent and b on our web site. but by submitting a survey, you'll be entered into a drawing to win a $100 visa gift card, so i encourage each one of you to enter that survey. at the end of this presentation, mr. shirley will be signing books, and copies are on sale in this tent and around the grounds here, so make sure you take advantage of having mr. shirley here. take advantage. a quick word about buying books. this is a free event, but it does -- and i emphasize does -- help the book festival if you buy a book. the more books we sell, the more publish beers will want to send their -- publishers will want to

send their authors with us. politics & prose benefits our local economy and supports local job, so if you enjoy this program and you're in a position to do to so, please, buy some books. all right. let me introduce this esteemed panel we have here. tackling the familiar is a challenge for even the most seasoned author. the task is even more daunting when the familiar is an icon and a hero to m. done well, the best books often illuminate a subject -- i'm sorry, let me try that again. they provide texture, context, nuance. w the really good ones speak tote the soul. noted reagan biographer craig shirley is that author, "reagan rising" is that book. the son of charter members of the new york state conservative party, mr. shirley comes by his

love of reagan and conservativism honestly. "reagan rising" is more than a mere biography.ev it chronicles the journey of a who, having just suffered a devastating defeat in 1976,uf picks himself up and becomes the leader of a new brand of brand conservativism. trump's presidency, perhaps, offers the perfect backdrop against which to study reagan's ascendance. with the republican party struggling to define itself, it offers meaningful insight into the development of the philosophy that it serves as a touchstone for conservatives across the country.ne reagan's philosophy still inspires to this day. as a special aside in researching what i'd say in this introduction, i learned that mr. shirley played an instrumental role in having the sport of lacrosse designated as the state sport of maryland, and for that i'm sure he will always have a special place in the heart of all marylanders, so

gaithersburg, welcome me in welcoming mr. craig shirley.y. [applause] >> and interviewing mr. shirley today will be juan williams, a man who almost needs no introduction, but we're going to introduce him anyway. [laughter] an emmy award winner and fox news contributor since 1997, he's a celebrated author in his own right. many williams has been a prolific chronicler of the black experience in america. selected titles include eyes on the prize: america's civil rights years 1954-1965, and thurgood marshall, an american revolutionary. for the sake of time, i truncated to those two. be finally, as the treasurer of the montgomery county democratic party, i'm pleased to announce the democrats are almost a 3 to 1 majority over registered republicans in our county, so, juan with, welcome to friendly territory. [laughter]

if you ever need a respite from fox news, we welcome you here with open arms. [laughter] gaithersburg, please help me welcome juan williams. [applause] >> thank you. great pleasure to be here with craig shirley who i have known since the reagan white house. >> early '80s. >> early '80s. i did not know about lacrosse, that is fabulous. but i wanted to start with a very basic question for the people who have been so kind to come into our tent here at thees gaithersburg book festival and ask why did you write this book, because you've writtenen extensively about reagan beforea >> well, first, thank you. first of all, i guess if you're in friendly territory, i'm behind enemy lines. [laughter] >> not quite, not quite. >> well, i'm retired from all that anyway. [laughter] but i did think that for making us late, we ought to rename his

tv show "the four." [laughter] i wrote this because it's an important part of american history, an important part of reagan history because it's never been explored before. like winston churchill, martin -- >> i'm going to pull this a little closer. >> martin gilbert, who was winston churchill's most famous, most important biographer, wrot a dozen books on various aspects of his life, and one of his books was called the wilderness years. and it was about that time in the late '20s and early '30s when churchill was cast aside by the conservatives in ending gland, great britain, and -- england, and 'em -- embarked on a new career. it mirrors reagan, because reagan in '76, as you pointed out, had been cast aside by his party.

churchill was spending most of his radio commentary and hisis columns running about the rising threat of adolf hitler and naziism, things that most people in england were ignoring at the time or pooh-poohing. reagan spent his wilderness years writing, doing radio commentary warning about the rising threat of the soviet soviet union. so there's a lot of parallels. of course, there are many, many issues we can get into later. it's serendipitous, but it's also because he forced them to the fore, issues like prop 13 in california, the panama canalth treaties, other issues you were covering, i was involved with to come to the fore that helped produce his election in 1980. so that's why i wrote it. you know, doug brinkley, who -- terrific historian and whola edited the reagan diaries said

the realm of reagan scholarship is just beginning to open up. and i think every time i start to sit down and think about ronald reagan, i think a new aspect of his life, his career and his times that has been either underreported or hasn't been covered at all. >> so let's get you to friendly territory behind these lines and talk about the elephant, unintended, in the room which is donald trump.oom [laughter] w so when -- >> no! no! [laughter] >> no -- >> i don't want to do it. >> no, no, no, i mean, no is the answer to his question. >> oh. [laughter] i see, you've seen into the crystal ball. [laughter] but here's the question. people say, well, gosh, how would you compare -- >> i wouldn't. >> -- reagan -- [laughter] to trump, and then they say what has come -- >> let me turn it around.

>> of conservativism from reagan to trump. >> you covered the grain white house for how many years -- the reagan white house for how many years? >> four. >> and the campaign. >> yeah. >> let me ask you, is there anything about donald trump that reminds you remotely of ronald reagan? >> no, and so this is -- [laughter] >> okay. >> [inaudible] >> yes, i did. >> but i must tell you so many people in the republican party really hold ronald reagan up as inspiring -- >> and with good reason. >> -- a paragon of the party and conservativism -- >> and with good reason. >> but then they'll say they are now with trump. >> well, that's just a matter of practicality. >> okay. >> you know, you can be with reagan, but you can also be in the modern age and say i'm for trump because he wasn't hillary, i'm for trump for whatever reasons, he's taken on bureaucracy, whatever else. comparing the two individuals, there is no -- my wife is looking at me. [laughter]

>> are you -- >> yeah, of course i am. i've been guilty for 35 years. [laughter] lock, reagan was an intellectual, reagan was thoughtful, reagan was an american conservative, reagan was kind, he was gentle, he was thoughtful. you know, even in his diaries he wouldn't swear. he wouldn't write -- he'd write d, dash, dash, dash instead of writing damn. but that's how genteel he was. there was a story that when he was president, you know, he had one of the first, second female secret service agents. and he kept standing aside as he was walking through a door to met the secret service agent go through. [laughter] because his mother, and he said my mother told me ladies always go first. the head of the treasury county

had to sit -- department had to sit him down and say, mr. president, she is not a woman, she is a professional. you have to let her do her job. reagan was reluctant. i can't imagine anybody be ever saying anything like that about' donald trump. [laughter] reagan was a populist. he was an american conservative. he was committed to his principles, but he was also flexible.ican c he was kind, he was thoughtful. not always particularly thoughtful but, you know, more so than most men. and i think, look, don't turn to me for evidence of reagan's importance to american history. john patrick diggins who in many ways was the official historian of the american left in the 20th century, he wrote books about the civil rights movement, he wrote books about the environmental movement. his last book -- and, actually, he had done battle with

then-governor reagan over the whole free speech movement and the riots of berkeley. done rhetorical ballot, not physical battle. but his last book is could "ronald reagan: fate, freedom and the making of history." and in this book, this liberal historian rates ronald reagan as one of our four greatest presidents because they saved or freed many, many people. he said that is the best definition of greatness, do american presidents save or free many, many people. >> craig, when we think about reagan and the republican party, conservativism, i think i go back to barry goldwater -- >> sure. >> to '64. >> right. >> to reagan's famous speech. >> right. >> so for the sake of this audience before we take them into the wilderness which is where you take him here, explain to us howe he comes to be.

because one of the great distinctions between reagan and trump is that reagan has a strong political history -- >> [inaudible] >> before he challenges the party establishment.t. >> that's right. well, he's already had a lot of executive experience as head of the screen actors guild. you know, a couple years ago reagan negotiated residuals which became important to a lot of old, retired actors and actresses who were out of work who were still getting stipend and residuals from the work they have done in tv and movies years ago. because the studios would pay, previous system was the studio would pay the actors and actresses one time to appear be, and then they could rebroadcast it and pocket all the royalties with impunity. reagan, in his last term as president of the screen actors guild, negotiated residuals so that they weren't just -- their images and their voice and their acting wasn't sold without

compensation to them. reagan was the one who did it. i had, i was having lunch with fred barnes a couple years ago, and he was in one of those washington movies, had a little role, i think it was "dave." and he was telling me about it, the movie had been rebroadcast in hungary or something like that x he got a residual check for $12.98.li [laughter] and i said do you know why you got that check? and he said, no. i said, you got that because ronald reagan negotiated that with the studios. so all these -- anyway, my point is that he had very good executive skills and very good negotiating skills long before he ever ran for governor. but, of course, his movie career had faded. he liked hollywood, he loved hollywood. but by 1962, '63, you know, he only made one movie after that called "the killers" which was an adaptation of hemingway's novel. and he hated the movie so much,

he never saw it. he did 57 movies, and it's the only time in 57 movies where he's depicted as a bad guy. he slaps angie dickenson in the movie. he hated that, so he would never see the movie. but he himself was in the wilderness several times including after '63. and he's kind of like a professional host in southern california introducing political candidates and various things. and he's starting to develop a speech which became known as "the speech." for local candidates but mostly for goldwater in '63, the draft goldwater movement actually started in the fall of '63. my parents came here to washington, went to the draft goldwater convex. walter -- convention. walter brennan kissed my mother. [laughter]

does anybody remember walter brennan? >> sure. >> okay, the real mccoy. excellent. >> it's odd to think of the walter brennan in my mind kissing your mom -- [laughter] kind of an old man. your mo [laughter] >> but so anyway, he's developing this speech, and finally a group of southern, wealthy southern california businessmen go to reagan and his brother neil, because neil was an ad executive in southern california, and they say to reagan we want to put this speech on television to help goldwater. so they put up the money, and it was broadcast on nbc, and it was an enormous hit. raised millions of dollars for the goldwater campaign and the republican national committee. and, of course, goldwater losesi in a historic landslide, but david broder wrote for "the washington post," our old friend, that the ray of sunlight in an otherwise dismal campaign was reagan's speech. and, of course, goldwater's defeat is devastating for the republican party.

i mean, there's -- the republicans are in the minority in the house, they're vastly inn the minority in the house and the senate. they have very few statehouses,n very few governorships. and in many ways, the republican party is functionally dead. it doesn't have a coherent philosophy. so reagan now is embarking, he's traveling to california, and he says a group of businessmen come to him, the same group, and they say, well, we want you to run for the senate. he said, no, i don't want to run for the senate, i don't want to run for congress.. they said, what about governor? that piqued his interest, so he began going around the state taking soundings, doing local business groups and civic groups and other, you know, organized groups and getting feedback. and the feedback from the people was good. so that's when he decided to run for governor of california. but, so, i mean, he now is just completely broken from hollywood.

now he's full-time -- but he called himself not just a politician, but a citizen politician. >> so let's go forward from "a time to choose," can which was the title of this speech which remains an amazing speech. you can go on youtube ask watch it, very clear. there's a landslide for johnson over goldwater. we come forward in time then through the time he spends as glove -- >> right. >> as governor in sacramento, and now we're in the nixon era. and here comes ronald reagan to challenge the party at a moment when the party is shaking and things aren't clear, but they want gerald ford. he's the establishment candidate. >> right. >> and in this book, you take us through some of these very difficult shows for a man who's popular, who says that he is in keeping with the real conservative ideology of the time -- >> right. >> -- but finds that his party is somewhere else. >> the party is still in the, somewhat in the wilderness, juan.

you know, the republican party kind of from 1932 up until the late '70s doesn't have a coherent philosophy. the democrats have a coherent philosophy, and they have -- they're also the party of optimism, the party of hope, the party of the future.e. franklin roosevelt runs for president, you know, and happyut days are here again. john enty says we need -- kennedy says we need to get this country moving again. the democratic party from '32 until, basically, '76 and beyond is the party of hope, optimism and the future, and the republican party is the green eye shade, eat your spinach, balance the budget party. >> right. >> and their message is basically me taoism. in fact, that is what a lot of conservatives accused moderate republicans at the time, is me tooism. we can manage government better than the democrats, we'll just do it better. that was basically their pitch, and it wasn't a very inspirational pitch, obviously. which is why they're in the

minority from '32 up until '68 and even beyond, actually, because '68 was an aberration. so, but reagan comes forward, and the early leaders of the conservative movement like bill buckley and others have a coherent message that was based on the framers, based on the founders, based on the constitution which had been kinn of cast aside or at least put on the sidelines from '32 on. and, but we're reaching an era, now, i have to go backwards. from '32 to the '60s, most americans believed thatrd government is working and government is working for them. it didn't solve the great depression, but it did a good effort, and people appreciated it. but it did defeat the empire of japan, it did defeat nazide germany, it did build the interstate highway system and public education. at one point, we had the finest public education system in the

world in the '40s, '50s and '6s. but by the '60s, government is starting to fail. government doesn't save john kennedy, president kennedy. government doesn't save martin luther king jr. government doesn't save roberte kennedy, senator robert kennedy. and then in the '70s, government can't win the vietnam war, government can't stop hyperinflation, government can't stop gas lines and high interest rates. so it seems -- and carter runs in '76 as, basically, an out -- was an outsider and was not wedded to the idea of big government. he's a reformer. he's going to clean up washington. he's going to go after the corruption.en he's going to cut taxes. he's really much more of a populist, some would say almost conservative who sees that people are us from rated -- frustrated in the '70s.os they don't believe government is working for them anymore. reagan also sees this. carter attacks it from somewhate

of the left but not really.ut reagan is on the right, which is why they emerge as the two most interesting candidates of 1976. reagan, to come to the convention, loses the nomination to gerald ford by 69 delegate votes out of 2,269 cast in kansas city. and for a lot of reasons, the mississippi delegation, the ohio delegation, the new york delegation, reagan is convinced that ford has not stolen the nomination, but not won entirely legitimately. and now we're getting really down in the weeds. but this really whets reagan's appetite to run again even though he's, at the time, he's 65 years old, and a lot of people said, look, ronnie, you've been around the track twice, you've lost twice. you gave it your best shot, you gave it the old college try, but now it's time to step aside for 1980 and let some new, young, fresh blood run for the '80

nomination, and reagan and mrs. reagan are saying, no, no,n we're running. >> well, you didn't mention ford in much detail here -- >> yeah, sure, sure. >> but tell me, you know, what is his view of gerald ford? is ford simply the establishment? >> well, first of all, ford and reagan don't much like each other, and mrs. reagan and mrs. ford can't even be in the same state with each other. [laughter] that's how little they liked each other. gerald ford, of course, ascends to the presidency by way of the 22nd amendment when nixon picks imoff spiro ago knew resignsne while being governor of maryland and still taking kickbacks even when he was vice president of the united states.s. and so nixon needs somebody who's going to placate all elements of the party but yet somebody who's not going to threaten him, not going to cause him to look over his shoulder, so he quickly deduces that gerald ford fills the bill. gerald ford, his lifelong dream

was to be speaker of house, and by 1974, that's never going to happen. so becoming vice president is kind of a nice capstone to his career. >> yeah. >> but then the smoking gun tape is revealed this july of 1974 -- in july of 1974. nixon, i mean, it's all in the news now, i don't even have to explain it -- [laughter] >> i said there's an elephant in the tent. >> that's right. [laughter] when i say smoking gun, six months ago people would have said what .45 are you talking about? [laughter] they know. anyway, nixon is revealed ordering the cia to try to halt the investigation into watergate, and that now spellsga the end of richard nixon. gerald ford ascends to the presidency, but gerald ford has no republicans made a a psychic investment in gerald ford. so he has his hold on the republican party very tenuous.

and he wants to run for '76, but he confuses nixon's appeal with nixon's policies, is and he was by and large, he was fairly conservative although not as dave as reagan -- not as conservative as reagan. is that for trump? >> i don't know. [laughter] >> you just sent the train through. [laughter] but, so he pursues all of nixon's policies. he continues detente. he continues his fiscal policies, he continues to appoint liberal jurists to the bench x. this creates an opening for a conservative challenger for '76, and some looked at it, but reagan was the only one who was serious about it. >> but then the reality is that carter beats ford by a narrow margin. >> extremely. less than 2%. >> right. so -- in -- >> and ford gets 240 electoral votes. >> right. >> if he carries ohio -- >> he would have had it.

>> carter carries ohio in 1976 by 6,000 votes out of every 3 million cast. and, of course, the teamsters are headquartered in ohio, so there's a lot of suspicion that the teamsters, you know -- they wouldn't do that, world they? >> no. [laughter] and mayor daley wouldn't do it either. >> no. >> so let me just quickly, okay, so but the fact that ford came so close -- >> right. >> -- would seem to indicate a shift. >> yes. >> but reagan now definitely in his wilderness in your book persists. >> yes, he does. yeah. he immediately creates a political organization, citizens for the republic, to advance his conservativism ask to help -- and to help candidates running for office. he embarks on a radio, he restarts his radio career and is doing five minute radio commentaries five days a week x he literally recorded them att the corner of hollywood and vine in los angeles.

and he records five minute commentaries that go out to hundreds of radio stations on either reel to reel tape or on 45 record albums. you know, this is before the day where you could, you know, send out a sound bite via the internet to 1,000 radio stations.r and these are five minute radio commentaries. at one point 55 million every week are listening to ronald reagan. plus he's got a twice a week column which is being carried by hundreds of newspapers. so in the mid to lay '70s -- late '70s, you have to be under a rock and not know about ronald reagan. >> well, did it work?ck >> sure, sure. i mean, he becomes -- after ford loses, reagan becomes, in fact, that that's a good question. he becomes the de facto leader of the republican party and, of course, one of his big issues as many of us remember is the panama canal treaty. it developed as an issue in '76.

the panama canal was considered one of the seven wonders of the world. my grandmother, i remember she was so furious that carter was going to give away the canal to the republic of panama. and it didn't -- i didn't realize it until later how important it was to her, because she grew up with the canal, you know, this is a great example of american exceptionalism. we failed -- we succeeded where the french failed, and it's very important psychically to my grandmother and millions of americans like her. so the idea that carter's going to turn over control of it to a panama is just infuriating. and this is also at a time where american -- america is waning in its influence. we've lost vietnam, we're losing to the soviets, america's day is over. plus, we've got all our problems at home here. it just comes at a terrible time. reagan, of course, is campaigning against first gerald ford, and then jimmy carter. reagan is out there starting ina

north carolina in '76, he's pounding the lectern saying we built it, we paid for it, it'sna ours and we're going to keep it. and his audience just go crazy over this. so he keeps, he keeps it up asov an issue even as carter becomes president. he's still going to continue the ford policy of transferring control of the panama canal'se zone. and he goes -- carter goes on national television to make the case to the american people why it's important to give over control of the panama canal, and he singles out for criticism private citizen ronald reagan. the president of the united states singles out one person, one out of 240 million people, he singles out reagan even though he's just a private citizen x. be so the next day -- and so the next day, cbs news calls private citizen ronald reagan, and they say would you like a half hour of national broadcast time -- >> wow.

>> -- to respond to the president of the united states? [laughter] i mean, it would never happen today.y. >> no. >> so reagan, of course, jumps at the chance, and he goes on and gives a half hour speech responding to the president of the united states attacking him over the panama canal treaties.h >> well, let's shift from him attacking the president to his fight then, again, with the republican establishment of the time embodied in george h.w. bush. >> right. well, it is that the party is split. and it has been split since the '50s. you know, in '52, see, it was eisenhower or robert taft. eisenhower represented the establishment, mr. taft represented the republican outsiders. then nixon and lodge, goldwater and rockefeller. >> right. >> and then, again, nixon and then rockefeller. but there's always a split inside the republican party

between the conservative outsiders and the more moderate insiders, and this, of course,ar hasn't again in 1980 -- happens again in 1980. reagan represents the conservative outsiders, and bush represents the more moderate insiders, and this is the fight over, you know, the nomination. the future of the party boils down to these two individuals. >> well, tell us about it. >> well, it was a see i saw battle for -- seesaw battle for a while because reagan kind of coasts. reagan is at his worst when he's not challenged. reagan is at his best when somebody's challenging him. he was competitive.. mike dever once told me he was the most competitive s.o.b. he ever knew. he needs to be challenged, otherwise he doesn't rise to the occasion. so he doesn't take the george bush challenge seriously, and he ends up losing the iowa caucuses in january of 1980 which was a stunning, stunning upset to the political world. it's enormous, it's huge. you know, this -- reagan had

been a radio broadcaster in iowa all through the '30s. he was from nearby illinois. he's a local hero, and george bush is from new england and texas. he has, you know, less ties to new england than he does to any prep school ---- >> no, no, you mean iowa. >> to iowa, yeah. less ties to iowa than a prep school in new england. so he beats reagan.p and this is -- that night tom pettitte of nbc goes on nationa televisionsays we have just witnessed the political funeral of ronald reagan. reagan is out, that's it. and five weeks later he scores an enormous comeback in the new hampshire primary, and we all remember the debate, famous national debate, you know, i'm paying for this microphone, mr. green, even though his name was green. and that begins, that starts the beginning of his comeback against bush.

but he goes to detroit. the party's still divided, and so he needs to pick bush to unify the party as they always have. thicksson picks lodge -- nixon picks lodge, picks gn -- agnew. and then it unify it is the party. but it goes through 30 primaries and state conventions is that the primary -- or the nomination is not just reagan's for the asking. he's got to fight the street fight of his life to beat george bush to get the nomination. >> and that fight is the source of the term voodoo economics. >> yes, that's right. that's right. it's that reagan has, was pushing -- [inaudible] it had been developed as an eshoo in '78 -- issue in '78, and then the tax cuts become one of the centerpiece of his '80

campaign. and it's really bedeviling bush, because he can't match it. he came up with his own tax plan, but it was more focused ot business and less on thebu individual whereas reagan was more focused on the individual and less on business. and so bush unwisely goes out and starts attacking a very popular plan of reagan's that reagan is scoring well politically with, and he calls it voodoo economic bees. and -- economickings. and reagan was so furious over that, he almost didn't pick bush for his -- in fact, it was a big sticking point with reagan why he didn't want to pick bush as his running nate detroit thisck 1990 -- 1980. >> we're about out of time, and we want to invite questions from the audience, so please have your questions prepared. i want to come back to this because we starteing craig, by talking about trump/reagan. >> yes. >> and, you know, reagan

actually gets a tax reform plan done. >> two. two. '81 and '86. >> and he's able to do business with democrats, with tip o'neill. >> yes. >> people on the hill. >> yeah. >> he has success in terms of moving things forward. >> yes. >> despite intense criticism at times not only from democrats, but from fellow republicans. >> so, and the washington establishment. >> that's what i'm trying to -- >> yeah, right.oc >> okay. >> right. [laughter] >> so here comes -- >> i didn't know if you were going to mention the washington post. >> i'm glad to. [laughter] craig shirley definitely likesio to skewer -- [laughter] >> yeah. >> so you get a situation now where people say, well, here's another populist, outsiderhere o challenger specifically to the republican establishment -- >> right. >> but you say the analogy does not hold water, and i'm thinking is it in your book a result of the fact that one guy could get things done in washington and so

far the other cannot? wa i think the parties have changed. there were a lot more conservative democrats in 1981 than there are today. there were a lot more liberal republicans than there are in washington in the republican party today. but ultimately, politics is personal. you've been writing about it for a long time, and you see it. politics is about the personal. reagan was able to work with democrats like dan rostenkowski on the '86 tax bill. >> right. >> rostenkowski deserves most of the credit for getting the '86 tax reform act through congress, more than o'neill because o'neill was getting ready to retire.o' but reagan -- go back to what i said, was that there were a lot of conservative democrats who were known as boll weevils so that reagan could bring them over to the republican fold. but i think also, you know, look at reagan's speeches, look at reagan's commentaries, look at reagan's q&a.

he didn't come to washington to declare war on the media. he had tackled the bureaucracy, that's for sure, but he realized he needed democrats to get his programs through, he realized he needed the media to at least be open to the idea that he had, you know, even -- i tease you about the washington post, but "the washington post" editorial, it was often very supportive. they said after he got the nomination they said reagan has brought a new intellectual revolution to american politics, and that's something to be thankful for. and reagan put that into practice. i think it was personal. i think it was philosophical, i think the parties have changed. we're at the end of jimmy carter, and jimmy carter i will defend, i will always say he was a good man who came to washington with the best of intentions. but jimmy carter failed as president because he doesn't, ultimately, understand washington. but we had the recession.

and so democrats knew they needed to do something, and so they were willing to take a chance on reaganomics. >> but get back to trump. [laughter] >> look, you know, the reason -- let me answer as diplomatically -- [laughter] is that there were a lot of people in the '80s who thought reagan was going to be a failure x he left office -- and he left office with very high approval be number bees. even so, american historians weren't rating him very high. now they're going back and looking at the reagan presidency, and he's now rated, hi, last poll of american historians had him 13th which i think is too low, but he's been steadily going up over the last 30, 40 years. i don't have the newspapers of eight years or four years from now to tell you about donald trump. i can tell you reagan approached the presidency differently, reagan was a different man,

reagan had a different style, reagan had -- he was -- there's no comparison except that both were outsiders and both were threats to the political systemx but that's the only thing i would say to compare the two hen. >> but when people inside the republican party -- >> right. >> -- say, oh, no, trump is the inheritor -- >> that's not true. >> no is the answer again. >> no, no -- [laughter] trump is not the inheritor to the extent that any republican is the inheritor of the previous republican's base of support inside the party. he's the inheritor, but he's also the inheritor of bushs too, of h.w. and w. as far as the coalition they put together to win the nomination. >> i don't think that trump would say that he was comfortable being described as an inheritor of george w.'s? >> sure, you know what? there's a lot of things trump's not comfortable with. [laughter]

>> but -- >> it's obvious, you know? there are a certain type of republican primary voter. the issues may change, they may change somewhat their philosophy but, essentially, the republican primary voter who voted for richard nixon in the republican primaries of 1960 is very similar to the republican primary voter who voted for donald trump this 2016. >> you mean the silent majority concept? >> yes, exactly. silent majority was coined by richard nixon. >> right. >> and reintroduced by donald trump. >> and you think then that when you look at people like paul ryan -- >> yeah. >> when you look at people, i don't know, mitch mcconnell, are they the true inheritors of the reagan legacy, or is it someone else? am i missing something? >> no, i don't know -- juan, i don't know if there's any one inheritor. i'll tell you one thing though, i saw mike pence give his speech

today at grove city college. he was terrific. it was a reagan-esque speech. it was a very, very good speech. and i think, you know, somebody's going to write a contrast between his speech, write a column or an op-ed or a piece contrasting his speech with trump's at the coast guard academy. [laughter] it begs to be written. it begs to be written because it was a terrific -- i mean, if you haven't seen it, i would urge you to go on youtube tonight and take a look at it, because it really was, it was a speech for all americans. >> so i get the impression you didn't think much of mr. trump's speech at the coast guard academy. [laughter] >> he uses first person pronouns like he's eating breakfast. [laughter] >> let's go to the audience here in gaithersburg. [laughter] we have a question right here. >> [inaudible] >> hang on. i think there's a microphone coming for you.

>> is it on? >> it's on. [inaudible conversations] >> so speaking ofen inheritance -- of inheritance, would you say that ted cruz and the freedom caucus are politicag legatees of reagan's? >> i think anybody who -- reagan was motivated by certain things; or freedom, individuality and future. he was a romantic. he believed, you know, in the philosophy of the enlightenment. he quoted emerson. he quoted payne. and so much of the enlightenment is about those elements. and reagan, by the time he's an adult, he's got a fully-formed philosophy that is centered ony the maximum freedom, as he said, maximum freedom consistent with law and order.ns privacy and dignity for the individual. so anybody who articulates that or understands that is the heir to the reagan philosophy whether it's ted cruz or mike pence or

mcconnell. anybody who tries to advance individual rights and freedom and previous.va >> we have a question in the back. >> republicans now join liberals in questioning the war on drugs and its aftermath, the human toll it's taken. the reagan was alive and mentally well today, do you think he would have some of the same reservations? >> yeah. that's a tough one, that really is. that's a good question. that's a tough one becauseio reagan was, in many ways, a libertarian. he did an interview with with the reason" magazine this 1975 in which he said libertarianism was the fundamental basis for conservativism. but he was also a traditionalist. i'm sure that he would have devised some -- maybe, yes. i think we should control the distribution and use of drugs,

of hallucinogenics, but it should be done by the states and localities, we can't do it in the federal government. i think that's the closest to his blending of libertarianism and -- >> i think this is a powerful question at the moment given what we're seeing from the attorney general, jeff sessions. >> right. >> and he, sessions wants to goe back to the war on drugs -- >> right. s >> -- but you see many republicans, including some republicans that might surprise you, hard-liners, who say we've got too many people incarcerated in the country, it's not economically rewarding, you know? it's cheaper to send them to college than to put them this jail. i mean., and i'm just wondering when you hear this question, again, this is a departure from ronald reagan's attitude, his willingness to work with others, to hear, to respond to the identification. >> yes. yeah, well, i think there's a lot of departures. reagan was -- he, i think, i mean, he was for a strong

border, and he said that strongo borders are important for national security and national identity. but he also, i think the issue came up, too, about walls, and he kind of pooh-poohed it in the republican primary in 1980. >> no, no, stay on this one because immigration is so big. he says build a wall but have a big door in the middle of it. [laughter] >> but, but everything reagan does, his presidency has to be judged in the shadow of the cold war. >> yes.. >> and when he proposed the north american free trade agreement, it was to build a more solid free market system in the west to repel soviet advances and violate the monroe doctrines. >> right. >> he wants a strong western hemisphere so that -- same with nicaragua, el salvador, he wanted them as free and prosperous democracies. sail thing finish well, you covered it.. >> i know. >> to build strong, prosperous

democracies in the caribbean tot fend off soviet advances to other countries. >> okay. so we have time for -- oh, we don't have time for another question, i'm told. craig shirley's book, "reagan rising: the decisive years, 1976-1980." as you can tell from this conversation, very lively, very topical and has powerful in this moment.er so, craig, thank you so much. >> thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> booktv is on twitter and facebook, and we want to hear from you. tweet us, twitter.com/booktv. or post a comment on our

facebook page, facebook.com/booktv. >> this holiday weekend on booktv on c-span2, tonight at 8:30 p.m. eastern former u.s. secretary of state donald please a saw rice -- condoleezza rice looks at democracy around the world in her book, "democracy: stories from the long road to freedom." >> americans in particular were blessed with founding fathers who understood an institutional design that would protect our liberties, our right to say what we think, to worship as we please, to be free from the knock of the secret police at night, to have the dignity that comes with having those who are going to govern you have to ask for your consent. but if we were blessed with that, and we believe that we were endowed by our creator with those rights, it can't be true for us and not for them. >> sunday at 2:20 p.m., columbia university professor john

mcwhorter on the controversies around and perceptions of sounding black in his book, "talking back, talking black." >> i think that we need to get comfortable saying black people have a slightly different sound because they often spend more time with one another just like white people sound more like one9 another because they tend to spend more time together, and that's true of all human groups. that's not racist, it's just true and harmless. >> and monday at 4:30 p.m. eastern, former president george w. bush on his book, "portraits of courage: a commander in chief's tribute to america's warriors." >> i was sitting next to chris turner at a dinner, and i said why are you here? he said, because i can't get out of my mind seeing a buddy of mine killed. and i paint from pictures or photos, and as i'm painting turner, i'm thinking about what that must be like in his mind. >> for more on this weekend's

schedule, go to booktv.org. >> so here's the story i want to tell you about. this is going to be a story that goes from 1935 to the present. that's going to be the timeline, 1935-1960. and be the first thing i want you to lock into your brain about this because i'm not doing a fancy power point is that -- i will act out the power point. [laughter] it'll be, like, interpretive dance. [laughter] i can do this. i can so do this, right? watch me do a -- [laughter] anyway, hearst the first be fact -- here's the first fact i want you to lock into your mind, basically with few exceptions, gdp, how rich we're getting, how much we're producing kind of goes up every year. it's just a nice steady line up. that's going to be the first part, 1935 to 2016.

and now what i'm going to do is divide this story into two time periods, and i'll break it in 1980. it'll give us an idea of how to work with it. okay, so 1935 to 1980 what happens in america? and the answer is what happens in america is we work on how to build opportunity, how to build opportunity. and you know how we do it? we do it with to tools. cover the children's ears because it's a nasty word, we regulate. [laughter] [applause] no, we really do. we do things like we enforce antitrust regulations so big guys don't get to roll over little businesses before they can get started. we put a cop on the beat on on e wall street with, -- on wall

street, right? to try to keep it level out there. [applause] we regulate the biggest financial institutions, right? you want to be a bank, there's going to be some regulation around that. made it safe to put money in banks, but banks became regulated businesses. okay. so part one is we regulate and part two, progressive taxation. we tax those at the top, and we use that money to invest in building opportunities, more opportunities. how do we do it? we invested in education bigtime, g.i. bill to thank returning soldiers from world war ii. we invested in public education, k-12. we invested in state universities. why do we make all these investments in education? because we believe that if you got an education, you could do anything. that was our -- god, we believed that.

we invested this infrastructure. roads, national highway transportation system, bridges, power, power to rural america. why? because we with didn't know what the next great business would be, but we were pretty darn sure you'd neat electricity, right? [laughter] and pretty darn sure you'd need roads so that your workers could get to you. so we made those investments together so those good businesses could grow here in america and those good jobs could grow here in america. and the third thing we did, this is what made us such a remarkable people, we invested in research. we put money into medical research and scientific research and engineering research and behavioral sciences research, all kinds of research. why? because we believed in the future. we didn't even kno what that research was -- know what that research was going to produce.

we didn't know, but we believed that if we built this giant pipeline of ideas, ideas that things would come from that that would permit our children and grandchildren to live lives that we had never even dreamed of. so we made those investments, and here's the deal. it worked. i mean, it worked. it still gives me goose bumps, how much it worked. i'll tell you how much it worked. it worked so much that the 90% of -- everybody outside of the top 10%, the upper middle class, the middle class, the working class, the working poor or and the poor poor together got 70% of all the income growth in that time period. okay. the rich did better, i get it. but 70% -- and here's the thing. when you really scratch through the data, it's all the way.

it's all the way, everybody did better. the pie got bigger and everybody got more to eat. now look, we weren't perfect, not by any stretch. the black/white wealth gap was there from the first time we measured with african-americans held firmly at the bottom. but here was the deal. america was so committed just to the basic notion of opportunity that we made changes. and in the civil rights era in the 1960s and 1970s, the black/white wealth gap shrank by 30% in about a 15-year period. so we weren't there, not by think stretch, but we were on a road. and then we hit 1980s. ronald reagan, trickle down

economics, deregulate, turn banks loose to do whatever they want to do, stop enforcing or slow down on enforcing the antitrust laws. oh, and that stuff about taxes. cut taxes for those at the top. and when you cut taxes for those at the top, all those investments in education, in infrastructure, in basic research start shrinking up. and that is exactly what we did. and here's the deal, gdp keeps going right on up. it goes up across both time periods. g,dp keeps going up, so how did the 90% do from 1980-2016? the answer is the 90%, everybody outside the top 10%, got nothing. none of the new income growth, zip.

nearly 100% of the new this many growth in america -- income growth in america from 1980 to 2016 has gone to the top 10%. in this country. think about that. and the black/white wealth gap in that period of time has tripled. yeah. that's what trickle down has done for african-american families. and look, there are people who will readily point out, whoa, but there's a whole lot more food stamps than there used to be. yeah. and more rent subsidies. true. finish but this is about people who want a chance to earn a liv, people who want to be able to build something for themselves, people who want to be able to get out there and work and have some security and be able to build for themselves and for their kids. and that, that part is just

gone. and now here comes the real twist of the knife. it didn't have to happen. it didn't happen that the middle class started doing really, really badly and working families across the spectrum started doing really badly, you know, because of gravity, you know? you know, that damn gravity will get you every time, you know? laugh it's like you go up, but then you've got to come back down, you know? no, no, no. and it didn't happen because of technology, and it didn't happen because of constitution -- you've got to keep your eye on that very first step. we're getting richer, richer, richer. the difference is what's happening, who's getting to participate in the richness. no, the story i tell in this book about what happened, why it changes between time one and time two is basically that a bunch of billionaires and

corporate ceos decided to invest millions -- not, not -- billions of dollars in making sure that washington worked well for them. they made that investment, and it paid off. [inaudible conversations] >> good evening. i'm the president and ceo of the atlanta history center. welcome to on the's lecture. before we get started, you may have noticed a few cameras in the room. please turn off all of your devices. and also, if you're to ask a qu